GAME not stocking Mass Effect 3 and other titles

[dave87]

I've noticed Gameplay.co.uk don't have it for pre-order either. Perhaps they'll decide to cancel it altogether for Uk.

Same company

[razer121]

well this is not good at all...i just recentl got £130 worth of game vouchers for my birthday just for mass effect 3 well tits!

[Knoxville]

Glad I haven't pre-ordered it anywhere now to be honest. Although I'm sure GAME/Gamestation will find a way to try to make up for the inconvenience I doubt this is the last we'll see of this kind of thing...

Thanks Pob!! I will not getting ME3 then until the DLC is part of the normal package or the ripoff edition is cheaper.

Bioware can go and screw themselves.

Edit!!

WTF:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012...comment-924815

£550 for ALL the downloadable content!!

None of that DLC serves any real purpose. For the most part it's promotional in nature. So that another company can put a sticker on their product that adds to its percieved value and EA get the Mass Effect name out there with a cheap advertising push.

The only reason I can see to pay for anything but the day one DLC is if you really are a huge Mass Effect completionist. I mean completionist to the point where you lost a foot to diabetes drinking Dr Pepper just for some pointless apparel in Mass Effect 2. If you still have your foot Mass Effect 3 isn't going to cost you any more than it's predecessor.

Also, I would bet my hat, shoes, and anyones choice of trouser leg that most of this DLC isn't Biowares call, it's EA's. They're pushing the franchise really hard this time round, it's the first multi-console release for Mass Effect and they just watched Skyrim give Bethesda some very, very mainstream sales numbers.

The game you take home from HMV instead of Gamestation will be exactly the same, be what the design team and writers envisioned and won't be compromised because it's lacking a customised pair of goggles

[Pob255]

None of that DLC serves any real purpose. For the most part it's promotional in nature. So that another company can put a sticker on their product that adds to its percieved value and EA get the Mass Effect name out there with a cheap advertising push.

The only reason I can see to pay for anything but the day one DLC is if you really are a huge Mass Effect completionist. I mean completionist to the point where you lost a foot to diabetes drinking Dr Pepper just for some pointless apparel in Mass Effect 2. If you still have your foot Mass Effect 3 isn't going to cost you any more than it's predecessor.

Also, I would bet my hat, shoes, and anyones choice of trouser leg that most of this DLC isn't Biowares call, it's EA's. They're pushing the franchise really hard this time round, it's the first multi-console release for Mass Effect and they just watched Skyrim give Bethesda some very, very mainstream sales numbers.

The game you take home from HMV instead of Gamestation will be exactly the same, be what the design team and writers envisioned and won't be compromised because it's lacking a customised pair of goggles

Unfortunately that's not quite what it's looking like.
As TB said in his rant and I fully agree cosmetic items are fine, personally I don't mind usable items as long a they are not grossly over powered.

The big issue is in 3 parts

1 - most of the free stuff isn't because you bought the game at one shop or another, but are instead tied into other products, yes they did it with ME2 and dr pepper but they've taken it to whole new level this time.
Anyone could buy a bottle of dr pepper and get a code, but having to buy a $140 razor keyboard is rather different, granted you get a good keyboard out of it. Like wise there's a separate iOS game that would give you extra content, a bottle of dr pepper is in no way the same as having to buy an iphone or ipad to buy a game to unlock something in a different game on a different platform.

2 - The big one is the DLC "from the Ashes" which is a new npc who happens to be a Prothean
http://www.technologytell.com/gaming...x-marketplace/
And there is simply no way you could drop in a Prothean companion NPC without a big chunk of story attached, so this isn't some cosmetic change or exclusive minor variant weapon.

3 - Development time, time and money goes into developing a game, a lot of these cosmetic unlocks are ok because toward the end of the development all the models and textures are done, so getting the art team to knock up a few cosmetic items for dlc isn't an issue, there will be some programming and testing requirements but they are fairly small.
Creating a new companion npc with attached story isn't going to be a small quick task so they are taking away sometime from bug testing and fixing for extra stuff you have to pay extra for.

As TB summed up so well, you can do that sort of DLC after launch and charge for it, that's fine, you could of given it to collector edition holders free while others have to pay, that's fine
But you shouldn't be taking time an development resources away from the main project to create separate paid for dlc.

[Knoxville]

What does the code on a $140 keyboard actually get you though? Is EVERYONE going to want it? Is it going to truly affect your ME experience? Would anyone even want it as much if there wasn't a percieved barrier to entry?

See what I'm getting at?

You don't need it to play the game, the piece of exclusive DLC in question is an assault rifle, one that's probably exactly the same as the ones you pick up in game just with a different skin. Not even a skin you can use to flex your e-peen online because it's something for the single player game. It's a nice bonus for someone already looking at a piece of hardware/peripheral and a huge pain for anyone that's into being a completionist but for the rest of us in the middle I don't see as it makes a huge difference. It's just something for the internet to be angry about in the grand scheme of things...

Day one DLC is something people have been complaining about for quite literally years now. In the case of something like Batman Arkham City where the Catwoman DLC was a MAJOR part of the story and the game Rocksteady wanted to make I can see the point (although I had no problem with that DLC either if I'm honest) but over this Prothean character? I don't know. It isn't a minor character variant or weapon skin but who are we to say it's a huge part of the overall story arc? Other ME DLC has introduced new characters very quickly, simply and smoothly.

It hasn't taken anything away from the main game to develop that DLC along side it, the concept artists and writers that would have moved on to another project after ME3 instead stuck around and started the DLC..

They wouldn't have been doing anything for ME3 once their job was done. Having them stick around and work on DLC may have even been advantageous. Imagine how long it could take to find someone to quickly knock up some artwork or retcon part of the story with the team disbanded as opposed to the time it takes to go downstairs to another floor and poke your head around the office door and have the whole team not only there but still in that headspace.

With certification times being what they are at Sony I'd be suprised if the DLC wasn't done and sent off to Sony and MS before the QA process on the main game was even nearing it's deadline. Not to mention the fact that the creative work involved in creating, writing and realising new characters would be carried out by a completely different team of different people, not the ones that gamers assume should automatically be working on bug fixes and speed runs from the second the main game is complete.

[BlackDwarf]

This is nothing new.
I used to work for them for a few years and even 5 years ago they were having barneys with EA being dicks, which is fair enough. Typical EA to demand the moon on a stick.
I do see the highstreet game stores in decline though. With everything coming digitally now, what's the need to have to leave your house to pay extra for a box, or at worst, order it online?

[Pob255]

What does the code on a $140 keyboard actually get you though? Is EVERYONE going to want it? Is it going to truly affect your ME experience? Would anyone even want it as much if there wasn't a percieved barrier to entry?

I never said that in the slightest, the issue is nothing to do with giving away small added extras, it's the TOTAL AMOUNT of added extras and the PRODUCTS they are attached to, this is being done to a LEVEL which HAS NOT been done before.

See what I'm getting at?

Day one DLC is something people have been complaining about for quite literally years now. In the case of something like Batman Arkham City where the Catwoman DLC was a MAJOR part of the story and the game Rocksteady wanted to make I can see the point (although I had no problem with that DLC either if I'm honest) but over this Prothean character? I don't know. It isn't a minor character variant or weapon skin but who are we to say it's a huge part of the overall story arc? Other ME DLC has introduced new characters very quickly, simply and smoothly.

It hasn't taken anything away from the main game to develop that DLC along side it, the concept artists and writers that would have moved on to another project after ME3 instead stuck around and started the DLC..

They wouldn't have been doing anything for ME3 once their job was done. Having them stick around and work on DLC may have even been advantageous. Imagine how long it could take to find someone to quickly knock up some artwork or retcon part of the story with the team disbanded as opposed to the time it takes to go downstairs to another floor and poke your head around the office door and have the whole team not only there but still in that headspace.

With certification times being what they are at Sony I'd be suprised if the DLC wasn't done and sent off to Sony and MS before the QA process on the main game was even nearing it's deadline. Not to mention the fact that the creative work involved in creating, writing and realising new characters would be carried out by a completely different team of different people, not the ones that gamers assume should automatically be working on bug fixes and speed runs from the second the main game is complete.

I can tell you now that testers and programmers work up to the last hours of the deadline, through the night if needed (I've worked as a QA game tester) but it doesn't stop then, in the past a console game once it was out the door and in production ready to hit the streets half the company would be on holiday before starting on the next project.
Infact many members of art department would of had a break before then and already be working on a new title (normally a concept idea for a new game)
For pc games testers and programmers keep going for a good month or so past the release date working on the first patch, before being moved onto the next project.
Now with consoles having network connections and storage, they have shifted towards the pc development model, where smaller minor issues can be let through and fixed later.

Now it's fine to have designers/story people, artists and such who have pretty much finished there role in development start work on DLC that's not an issue, it will also require codeing and testing.
To say they are a separate team, is meaningless because that means ether A - we took someone off the main team and put them on this or B - instead of spending the money to hire an extra person for the main team we spent it on this instead.
For it to come out on release day it has to of had testing and coding before that day, which in turn must of come out of the main development cycle.

Now it could be that this has been the idea from the start and EA provided separate funds for this separate from the main budget which therefore goes back to the first point that EA is monetising this to a whole new level.

Yes this Prothean character could be minor which would be a whole new issue, taking a major plot point from the past games and basically wasting it.
If they had just held off it, announce a new DLC that would be free to collect edition customers or cost a small amount for normal edition holders which would be released within the first two weeks after launch then it would of been fine.

Again it's this constant creep and eroding, shifting what was payed for added extras into extra paid for content on launch.
Funny the way so many online games have been shifting from one off monthly payments to a free with micro transaction model, yet single player games are shifting from a single payment to a single payment with additional micro transactions.

EDIT: Let's not forget that many people in the games development industry are often on short term contracts, quite often the contracts of individual members of the development team end ether with the release of a game or shortly before or after it.
This is one area where all these extra, small DLC bits are actually good, it often keeps people employed that bit longer.

[Knoxville]

I never said that in the slightest, the issue is nothing to do with giving away small added extras, it's the TOTAL AMOUNT of added extras and the PRODUCTS they are attached to, this is being done to a LEVEL which HAS NOT been done before.

See what I'm getting at?

I do mate, I didn't get where you were coming from at first and perhaps I should have worded my response a little better. You're right in that it hasn't been pushed to quite this level before but I'd argue the ground work for this kind of cross promotion was laid long ago. EA just seem to be the first people pushing quite this hard.

If your argument is against the sheer number of attatched products and comercial elements at work I really can't argue with you because I think it's much bigger than it need be as well.

My argument is simply that it doesn't matter whether the code comes attatched to an iPad or a Coke can because it's not essential, they aren't making you pay $140 for something that should come as part of the game or that will even influence your progress in the game in any major way.

That's what I (obviously wrongly) thought you were bent out of shape over and it's something I don't understand.

They aren't making anyone pay $800 or whatever it is for the game, there are just $800's worth of products out there in the world that are related to it. That in itself is nothing new, certainly in the movie industry to which people keep making bad comparisons. Any major motion picture release (especially if it's aimed at kids) has hundreds of pounds worth of accessories and goods attatched to it or advertised in assosciation with it.

I can tell you now that testers and programmers work up to the last hours of the deadline, through the night if needed (I've worked as a QA game tester) but it doesn't stop then, in the past a console game once it was out the door and in production ready to hit the streets half the company would be on holiday before starting on the next project.
Infact many members of art department would of had a break before then and already be working on a new title (normally a concept idea for a new game)
For pc games testers and programmers keep going for a good month or so past the release date working on the first patch, before being moved onto the next project.
Now with consoles having network connections and storage, they have shifted towards the pc development model, where smaller minor issues can be let through and fixed later.

Now it's fine to have designers/story people, artists and such who have pretty much finished there role in development start work on DLC that's not an issue, it will also require codeing and testing.
To say they are a separate team, is meaningless because that means ether A - we took someone off the main team and put them on this or B - instead of spending the money to hire an extra person for the main team we spent it on this instead.
For it to come out on release day it has to of had testing and coding before that day, which in turn must of come out of the main development cycle.

Now it could be that this has been the idea from the start and EA provided separate funds for this separate from the main budget which therefore goes back to the first point that EA is monetising this to a whole new level.

True, unless as you say the budget and development for the DLC were entirely seperate. But I don't think EA would be the first to do that with DLC either...

Even taking into account the time taken from the main games development cycle if that were not the case, is it such a huge chunk of time that they couldn't afford to lose? If the game comes out riddled with bugs then I think we'd be justified in assuming that but otherwise I'm not so sure we've got a leg to stand on, yet. How EA choose to spend their money and how a developer/QA tester/artist spends their time isn't our concern as gamers imo unless it negatively influences the finished product and none of us have played it yet.

Yes this Prothean character could be minor which would be a whole new issue, taking a major plot point from the past games and basically wasting it.
If they had just held off it, announce a new DLC that would be free to collect edition customers or cost a small amount for normal edition holders which would be released within the first two weeks after launch then it would of been fine.

Again it's this constant creep and eroding, shifting what was payed for added extras into extra paid for content on launch.
Funny the way so many online games have been shifting from one off monthly payments to a free with micro transaction model, yet single player games are shifting from a single payment to a single payment with additional micro transactions.

EDIT: Let's not forget that many people in the games development industry are often on short term contracts, quite often the contracts of individual members of the development team end ether with the release of a game or shortly before or after it.
This is one area where all these extra, small DLC bits are actually good, it often keeps people employed that bit longer.

How Bioware choose to tell their story or misuse their assets in that sense is entirely up to them to be honest, I might no agree with it once I've played it through but it's their art, their choice and their reputation on the line, not mine. They could have held off a couple of weeks and I think there'd still have been backlash, not quite to the extent they're experiencing now but it still would have been there, probably just as much if it was discovered that they'd held it back deliberately and had been ready for launch. They obviously think the negative press is going to be outweighed by their profit margins and there is something to be said for cashing in on the brand awareness and advertising campaigns to push DLC that may have fallen by the wayside a little easier a month later when Mass Effect 3 is no longer the big news item and a few other big games have pulled peoples attentions elsewhere.

I'm not saying I agree with it but from a business point of view it at least makes some sense. To be honest I think a lot of publishers and developers are still working out how best to utilise DLC and micro-transactions. They've found a way to make money off them but it's still a new marketplace and one that will probably change again when everything goes digital instead of just the extra content.

[Pob255]

I do find the comparison between the movie and games industry interesting, again as TB pointed out in that podcast/video/rant, the movie industry has long cultivated a multiple stage revenue stream, cinema release followed by broadcasting rights, rental rights, dvd sales in both standard and special editions, heck it was the games industry that copied the standard and collectors edition format from the movie industry.

The whole games industry is in a bit of an odd place atm in the area of revenue, development costs are going up and while sales have generally also been going up (cross platform releases and ports help greatly here) they are still using the same revenue structure overall.
It has started to change and in many ways it's still trying to find a new path.

On thing you do have to remember about DLC is that it's in two forms, one has been small added extras which have been given out as incentives for pre-order or buy from one source over another or as a sort of cross branding with hardware.
The other main form of DLC is basically expansion packs which has always been additional content that's been added after, often it comes from ideas or designs that where originally cut from the main game (often early on) which can be realised later it's a relatively cheap and quick way to generate additional content, will generate good returns and keep the game in the media's eye for longer, helping to boost later sales and player base.

On the bug side of things, I probably should of been clearer, I don't mean major game breaking bugs, yes there are games that come out with some really bad bugs in them, testers don't just look for the game breaking issues but every last little niggly thing that could be improved, big ass lists of issues will be made and as the deadline gets closer the focus is on the biggest issues and smaller issues will just get quietly dropped.

Granted it's probably more of extra content vs very minor fixes at this late a stage, but again it's extra content you have to pay extra for.

It's actually a complaint developers have about public demo's, releasing a public demo requires a heck of a lot of additional work at the stage of the development when time is getting ever more critical.
So the Demo's they released probably took more resources than this extra content did, but there's no outcry over that.

Overall I think it's being seen as the straw that breaks the camels back by some and less monetisation creep and a monetisation leap, that will not only effect this game but have consequences down the line for later for games in general.

I'll also admit that on the face of it we cannot say "OMG! HOW COULD THEY! THEY'VE RUINED THE GAME!!!11!one!" because we've not seen it, we don't know exactly what the extra content is and how it mixes with the main story line.
I think it's been raising so many hackles because it's such a well loved series for it's stories, for the way BioWare give npc companions good stories within the main story and they way the Prothean have been a major unknown and key part of the main plot in the past, while still remaining unknown.
To have a race, that's now basically extinct, to find out that they where not who you thought they where at the start, to discover roughly what happened to them and to use what they left behind to fight the true enemy.
Then to shove a living one into the game . . .
That's ether going to be a major chunk of world law or left as a mystery (which will frustrate many fans)
eg they could go down the jurassic park route (cloned from fossil DNA) so he know even less about his race than you do.

[Pob255]

I've looked at a few other places where this is being debated/ranted about and they all seem to have a bad car analogy, so here's mine

The small minor DLC/freebies are like you can only buy a new car in certain paint colours from certain dealerships.
Later more major paid for DLC's are is a bit like being able to take the car back and pay to have a sat nav fitted or a turbo charger or air con.
A GOTY or gold edition is like getting the new car with all the added extras already on it.
Day of release DLC or locked out content, is like getting your brand new car only to find you cannot use the stereo untill you enter a code into it and that will cost you extra.

ME3 specifically, what is yet to be seen is if it's just the radio that's locked out and you can still use the cd player or is the whole stereo that's locked?

There is still the issue that it's not a case of buying a cheaper model that doesn't have a stereo or the more expensive model that does, its the issue that the stereo is there and working you just cannot use it unless you pay the extra to get the code to unlock it.

[Chanfron]

I first saw this on IGN, and reordered the N7 Collectors version via Amazon(where I wanted to buy it from in the first place), only ordered it from Game as they were the only Place that had it.

I am a PC gamer only and Games pc sections are abysmal and mostly overpriced from what stores I go into, and I guess its Karma from the crap they pulled with Spacemarine is now biting them in the butt via EA.

Do feel for the employees who's future is not looking so good.

[Saracen]

I know nothing about Game's business beyond what I read on that initial link, but I know how I'd interpret this ....

"Dear all,

"Last week we held an event for our publishers in the industry and explained the challenges we are facing in the short term - and we asked for their support.

"We asked them to trade with us using manageable credit terms, and for them to continue to do that whilst we work through the strategic review and refinancing of our business.

"We gave the industry commitments - we committed to integrity and openness in our dealings, and working with everyone equally.

"We committed to only stocking products on which we could get the right credit terms, regardless of the title or the supplier. We will not stock products if the terms are not right for our business - a position we believe is critical to our long term health as a business

.... if I were a supplier, and it'd be "cash flow limits, credit problems, risk increased, cut my exposure". On that basis and that basis alone, I'd have doubts about medium-term exposure, and probably short-term exposure too. Of course, I may be quite wrong, but if I was supplying them with anything on credit (which I'm not) that would make me nervous as hell.

[DrATty]

I've only paid more than £5 for a game once in the last 2 years. Most are just rentals now anyway and worth less than a retail copy with printed manuals in my opinion. My guess is that ME will be sold with all DLC for considerably less money next year. The game will still be new to me then. Launch day games are overpriced, buggy, and, as here, lacking completeness.
There's obviously a market but I don't see the appeal.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I don't know if this is true:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post5061439

I didn't realise Game had operations all over the world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_%28retailer%29

[Grey M@a]

I don't know if this is true:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post5061439

I didn't realise Game had operations all over the world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_%28retailer%29

From what I've read, it seems its the UK side of Game and Gamestation that are struggling. Their over seas stores are doing quite well, especially in main land Europe and state side with their GameStop stores. Analysts are saying it would also ne in Game's best interest to close the under performing Game branches and leave the Gamestation branches as they are, due to them having a better high street presence and view in shoppers eyes.

Personally they just need to check their prices, or do as HMV did as offer a cut of the second hand sales if that is the case for Ubi and EA pulling out of supplying Game/Gamestation. Was in a local store recently and the second hand games of new releases were only a few quid less than the new stock. Plus £32.99 for Super Mario 3D Land on the 3DS, second hand was £28.99 went along to ASDA and got it for £18.95. Only time I really use Game these days are if people get me vouchers for birthday's etc. Other than that I will head online or scan all local shops for the cheapest on offer.

[aidanjt]

I don't know if this is true:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post5061439

I have little reason to doubt it. EA has been trying to push Origin everywhere and bullying whoever stands in their way. Even non-Origin-purchased EA games are being sucked in by Origin just by having them installed, in what's looking to be a migration as an exit strategy for steam.