Thargorichiban wrote...
Just in case it hasn't been posted in this thread yet:

I'm happy that it can keep game developers working for longer and actually be paid more.
Here's respnse to that:
This chart has been making the rounds and is being used by fanbois to lazily justify Bioware and EA's position. This is fairly typical, easily influenced people with weak positions tend to flock around things that look scientific. It doesn't mean it's right. To address some specific points.
The production team would lose their jobs! - Bull****, this is Bioware, the game has no risk of failure what-so-ever and will generate x-bajillion dollars. If Bioware-Mythic can dodge a ton of layoffs as a result of Old Republic (the most expensive game Bioware and EA have ever made and not a guaranteed hit), I'm pretty sure they can keep their jobs with Mass Effect 3, a much cheaper game guaranteed to be a success. Not only that but, IT IS NOT OUR PROBLEM. If EA is laying people off like that, shouldn't we be criticising EA for discarding it's employees so readily? Bioware is an incredibly successful studio, you are seriously suggesting they are only days away from losing their jobs if they don't monetise Mass Effect even more than it already is? (already one of the most monetised standard games EA has ever released, if not THE most). Big devs are not charity cases and we shouldn't be expected to pay $70 to get a feature complete game.
Multiplayer replaces Zaeed! - Bull****. Multiplayer has been feature complete for months. The demo build we saw a few weeks back is older code supposedly, Bioware claimed 2 months old. Multiplayer WAS NOT developed in the cycle the Prothean and presumably Zaeed content was supposedly developed in. Multiplayer is a case of a fairly major component of the game being sliced off and used to discourage used sales. It is not an incentive, it is not extra content developed just before launch, it is a dishonest comparison.
It may seem like price gouging, it isn't! - Then pray tell explain why the vast majority of companies don't actually do it. If this was a development reality, we'd be seeing every major publisher and developer doing just this, yet they don't. Day-1 DLC is a reality for only a small minority of these groups, not to mention that more often than not that DLC is mostly cosmetic or very easy to create (weapon packs etc). There are actually very few instances of Day 1 DLC and even less of this importance to the story and die-hard fans. Only Deus Ex has done this recently and there are rumours that Gamestop actually FUNDED that development as a pre-order exclusive, so at least you can semi-understand why it is there. It is incredibly dishonest to suggest that this is a development reality rather than price gouging. If this were true it would be common practice and it most certainly is not.
I say, hold the line. Do not be swayed by the arguments of fanbois and white-knights. Brands have encouraged zealous loyality bordering on fanaticism for years. What better way to get away with murder than have their own consumers whipped into a frenzy to defend their actions and undermine any effort for unified consumer action? Our basic rights as consumers are slowly being eroded by these actions and it has to stop. We as consumers will support and reward reasonable development and business practices, but we will not accept exploitation. The axium remains
"If it's done before release date, it should come with the game".
I don't agree w/ all of that, but it does convey why it is a bad representation of what is going on.