Former BioWare Designer Defends Day 1 DLC: My Response

Unless you haven’t been on the internet within the last couple of weeks, you’ll probably know that there’s been a storm of controversy over day 1 DLC for our favorite video games, more specifically for Mass Effect 3. A large amount of gamers have been in an uproar over the idea that unless you were lucky enough to grab a copy of the collector’s edition or are willing to pay an extra $10 on top of the $60 charged for the game itself, you’ll be missing a quest line and party member that adds much to the story for long time Mass Effect followers. One side says it’s a shady practice to release content that’s ready on day one seperately from the main game, especially because many of the files for the content were discovered on the disc. BioWare and its defenders have said that the DLC is created on a separate budget after the main content is finished, and developing it in this way helps keep the team working rather than laying them off.

But how did former BioWare designer Christina Norman respond to the criticism at a recent GDC panel?

“There’s no point in releasing DLC a year after your game has come out when most people have already sold your game back to GameStop three times,” she told the audience. “That means getting it out early; that means even day-one DLC. That is a terrible thing to some players. Players rant–they know nothing about this DLC that’s coming out except its name. But then it’s ‘oh this game must be incomplete, the game must be ruined.’ Game developers are not evil. (Some are evil.) But most are not evil.”

“We just want to release awesome stuff. Players please, give us a chance. Judge our games based on what they are. Judge the DLC based on what it is. Stop thinking you’re a producer and telling us when and where we should be building our content.”

I’ve never been a fan of DLC for the sake of it, especially when it’s already on the disc or released on the first day, but I can respect the idea that it’s usually not the developer’s call. However, when one such developer decides to go on a rant like the one above, I can’t help but become completely floored over how out of touch some people in the industry can be. Because of that, I can’t help but break down the above quote in response.

“There’s no point in releasing DLC a year after your game has come out when most people have already sold your game back to GameStop three times,”

Oh, the GameStop argument. This comes up so often as an excuse to make publishers look like the victims. But aside from the hypocrisy of how publishers give gamers tons of incentives to shop at GameStop over other retailers, why not get down to WHY people trade in their games? I personally detest Gamestop and their business practices, so it’s rare that I’ll defend them, but maybe if developers realized that the problem lies with their games and not the “evils” of the used market, there would be fewer people handing off their games for a quarter of what they paid for it.

Games are becoming more and more expensive. The last time games were in the $60 range were in the SNES and Genesis days where cartridges were far more expensive to produce than discs. Since DVD and even Blu Ray discs are much cheaper to manufacture, there’s really no reason to charge more as far as I can see. But wait, I forgot that games cost so much more to make these days. With multimillion dollar budgets that go mostly towards graphics, voice acting and commercials, the biggest part of the game often gets overlooked… and that’s the game itself.

Ironically, BioWare didn’t seem to have this fear that people will have traded their games in “three times over,” within a year back when games like Neverwinter Nights released expansions long after release. And by expansions, I mean big, meaningful expansions that gave us hours of extra game play, unlike the laughably short Zaeed and Kasumi missions from ME2. I understand that PC games usually can’t be sold used, but even ME1 released DLC long after it first hit store shelves. So what’s the difference between these games compared to ME2 and 3? I played the first game for about 70 hours. It had so many areas to explore, side missions to find and squadmate interactions to delve into. I never even thought about trading it in. But part 2? I finished it once about five hours faster than I did the first one, which by the way, INCLUDED all of the side missions.

The fact of the matter is that games today are getting shorter and shorter. If we were sold games that would either give us tons of content or were so memorable that we would always want to keep it on our shelves, we wouldn’t trade them in. I mean used games, rentals and borrowing aren’t some amazing new invention… I’ve been doing some form of the three for over 20 years now. And you know what? The gaming industry is still alive and well. Myself, as well as many gamers that grew up with the games I grew up with would rarely think of selling their copies of Mario World, Sonic 2 or Final Fantasy III. You know why? Because they were worth keeping.

“Players rant–they know nothing about this DLC that’s coming out except its name. But then it’s ‘oh this game must be incomplete, the game must be ruined.’ Game developers are not evil. (Some are evil.) But most are not evil.”

Now Ms. Norman, I wouldn’t say players know “nothing” about the DLC. They knew that the character’s dialogue was in the script as early as last year when it leaked on the internet. They knew he was coming when the contents of the collector’s edition were released almost nine months ago. They also knew that many of his files were already on the disc despite being promised that the DLC went into development after the main game was finished and sent for certification. I wouldn’t say the game is ruined. I wouldn’t be as rash as to label the hardworking game makers as “evil.” But to say we know nothing about it when we clearly have an idea that including this character on day one in one way or another was always the plan, how could you not expect people to react negatively? If anything, it’s the players that shouldn’t be labeled as evil because being angry over the idea of having to dish out more money on day one for content that’s already finished is more than justifiable.

“Judge our games based on what they are. Judge the DLC based on what it is.”

Yes, lets. Let’s judge it on the fact that PS3 versions are running significantly slower at 30 FPS, giving those gamers an inferior experience. Let’s judge it on the fact that some 360 gamers are finding that they can’t access the game at all with their gamer tags. Let’s judge it on the fact that some players are being greeted with a level 1 Shepard mid game. Maybe if the game was properly tested instead of throwing a ton of resources into day one DLC, we wouldn’t be where we are now.

And lastly, the real kicker.

“Stop thinking you’re a producer and telling us when and where we should be building our content.”

Wow, excuse me. I didn’t realize that calling out a company on something the consumer feels is unfair means that they think they’re producers. Last I checked, the manufacturer is supposed to answer to the consumer, not the other way around. True, there will always be those that don’t know or don’t care about business practices and just want to be entertained, and thanks to them, a huge game like Mass Effect will always be profitable. But that doesn’t mean that the paying customers that voice their opinions are any less important, or should be dismissed as someone who’s “thinking they’re a producer.” This elitist attitude is turning off many loyal gamers, and while you’ll always have the average joe who will pick up any high profile game with guns and explosions, those fans that have supported the company from Neverwinter to KOTOR to Jade Empire until now are going to start disappearing.

It’s not like the blame lies with the developer exclusively. After all, ME1 was the last game released by BioWare on consoles before EA purchased them. As I mentioned, ME1 didn’t have day one DLC or this ridiculous fear that everyone will have traded the game in after six months. I know they have little choice but to trumpet the company line. We know what happened when Infinity Ward got tired of Activision’s crap. Or when Tomonobu Itagaki got fed up with Tecmo. But it doesn’t make it any easier to feel that a once respected developer is answering more to their employers than the people who give them a reason to be employed.

So Ms. Norman, you have your perspective and the gamers who disagree have theirs. But please, don’t dismiss us with this combative tone. It’s easy to treat the complaints as unwarranted after you’ve already achieved success through the ones issuing them. But don’t forget, without gamers, there would be no game developers. With the growing mistrust between gamers and game makers, it’s getting harder and harder to feel good about a $60 purchase. I know it would be easier if we all just shut up and gulped down whatever you feed us like good little shoppers, but since that’s not going to happen, try treating your fans like people and not dollar signs next time.