About a month or two ago, I decided to start catching up on all my gaming. Being out of it for a while, I had not been paying attention to some of the great storylines and games I had been missing out on. I had an old copy of Mass Effect collecting dust, decided to give it a whirl. It took me about a month to beat it, but I was hooked on the epic of Commander Shepard. The game was incredible, and the downloadable content was reasonably priced and a lot of fun.
I waltzed into my local GameStop and asked for the newly released Mass Effect 2. As per the usual long list of questions that every GameStop consultant must ask you (seriously, you can’t even cut them off—say “no” before they’re done, and they talk right over you until they’re done asking you to reserve a game), I was asked if I wanted to save five bucks on a used copy of the game. Throw in my discount membership, and that’s another five bucks off the used copy. A sixty dollar game for fifty bucks? Duh!
I returned home, viciously removed all of the packaging, and popped the game into the 
system.
Hmm. Says there’s a code in the packaging to unlock the downloadable content.
However, upon reviewing the packaging, there was no such code to be found. Did the previous owner not leave it in the case? Then, I came to a mind-shattering, earth-moving, playing-field-changing conclusion.
Whoever had this game before me used the code already!
Why is that such a big deal? Because without the code that comes with new copies of the game, it costs fifteen dollars to access the channel through which all the downloadable content is available. You read that right: paying $15 dollars gains you access in Mass Effect 2 to their IN-GAME store, the “Cerberus Network.” Continuing the formula, Dragon Age: Origins did exactly the same thing, providing $15 of DLC for free with a purchase of a new game. It is safe to say that this is a business model that will likely continue.
Ignoring the “releasing DLC alongside a newly-released game makes you wonder just how much they kept out of the core game to milk you for more” argument for just a moment, that golden ten-dollar discount was just eaten up by this additional fee, plus another five bucks on top of it. It is a sinister plot worthy of [insert your favorite scheming villain here].
…or is it?
You see, ladies and gentlemen, at that moment, I had a crisis of thought. I had a very important decision to make. And only then did I realize just how game-changing that decision really was. Do I keep the game as is and pay the $15 fee? Or do I return the game for a new one to save myself five dollars? In 
the first situation, GameStop is who earns pure profit on the sale of that game; the game publisher gets nothing for the resale of the used item. In the second situation, GameStop earns just whatever profits selling a new game nets them (not a whole lot, admittedly, licensing and development costs take a huge chunk of that sixty bucks), and the company gets reimbursed for its hard work. Which, in Mass Effect’s case, I wholeheartedly wanted to do.
The Bottom Line: EA and Bioware are charging an additional fee for anyone who does not have a code to access the downloadable content. Strictly translated, this is aimed at used game purchases, as it affects no one else.
Opinion A: By basically giving away (some) free content with the purchase of a new game, the game companies reward those who incur revenue for the company by buying new while still getting some reimbursement from gamers who deny them said revenue buying used but still appreciate the DLC.
Opinion B: Buying used is its own industry, where individual people have the right to resell their own licenses for the games they themselves purchased. By taking a reduced cost on the game when selling it or trading back, they take a financial loss, but come off with the experience of having played the game. It is unfair to force someone to sell only a portion of the software paid for, requiring a new copy or license to be purchased by the next person in the chain.
Opinion C: This is all a moot point because DLC content itself is a rip-off and encourages programmers to release incomplete products. It should be a part of the game, or at least provided for free afterwards.
What’s Your Opinion?
Author’s Slightly Biased Side Note: While I wrote this up, PartTimeDruid of The Invisible Eyeball wrote up a report on gaming system Goozex, a point-based system that allows gamers to trade games back and forth without money actually swapping hands. Imagine using this system to obtain a copy of Mass Effect 2, and then still need to pay EA for the DLC on top of that, even though the last three people who handled the disc already paid for it over and over. Just sayin’.
Dan Hughes is the author of SPHERIC: Landing, an on-going online science fiction novel, and an avid game enthusiast.
Any opinions expressed in posts on Polygamerous are not necessarily the opinions of Polygamerous or the other Authors/Editors/Podcasters of Polygamerous.
Follow Us on Twitter!
Welcome aboard Poly-G, Dan. A very well-written article and a good read, even if I disagree on most parts.
It’s a little unfair to call out Mass Effect for charging $15 for access to their “In-Game Store” without mentioning that all the content delivered through the Cerberus Network is completely free of charge. It’s a great reward for those who bought the game new and, long-term, a good deal for those that purchase the additional code.
You got ripped off by GameStop, not BioWare. Though whether the lack of information from the sales rep was intentional or the usual GameStop cluelessness is up for debate.
A note on launch-day DLC. At a point in every game’s development process, the developer has to draw the line and say “that’s enough.” If they keep trying to add more content, it turns into Duke Nukem Forever. The designers of the game, the artists, level editors and such, are complete with their work months before a game launches. There is a long testing and console-certification process where these employees are free to work on what they please. Launch-Day DLC, for the most part, is the content these designers have created in the time between “completing” the game and the retail release. So, yes, it’s added content, perfectly reasonable for an extra charge. There are some games, like Resident Evil 5 and Bioshock 2, which charge for “DLC” that’s ALREADY ON THE DISK, which is total BS and worthy of outrage.
In the end, if I were a game designer, I would be upset at another company making a profit off my product. I have no issue with them wanting to get at least a small amount of return for their work.
Speaking as someone who bought both Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2 new I support EA/BioWares model of free Day 1 DLC, despite buying most of my games used. Nether of the games DLC (an extra party character and related side quest for Dragon Age, an extra character and related side quest plus the Cerberus network for Mass Effect which adds a couple pieces of armor, some new weapons and a handful of side missions) are vital to the gaming experiance. One can play ether game sans DLC without any problem, nor do they effect the story in any huge way. If you buy the game used, like it and want more then by all means purchase the DLC. Remeber EA is a business and answers not only to consumers but investors as well, every used game sale is money EA and BioWare lose, they are well within there rights to try and recoup some of that money from used game sales and make purchasing there product new more appealing.
I’m not a fan of DLC in any case, but if you traded for the game on Goozex, it would also only have cost you a few bucks for postage and a game or two you were done with anyhow. Then that 15 bucks doesn’t seem like such a big deal.
But I honestly don’t care for “paid” DLC of any kind. I’d prefer if they just got everything in the game they intended in the first place. If I want DLC, I’ll go back to an MMO. One of the great things about console games, for me, is how they actually END at some point!
Seeing as how a company’s main goal is profit, it makes perfect sense that they have an extra charge for downloadable content for consumers who buy used games. The original consumer already paid $60 for it, and subsequent players will pay the company an additional $15. Gamers collectively could potentially spend twice as much as the original price on the game! Besides, the game was already complete without the DLC, and most people probably wouldn’t bother with it if it wasn’t.
The real issue seems to be that GameStop only pays a small amount for used games but sells them for a much higher price. They would be making a lot more profit on the resale of a used game than EA and Bioware without doing any of the work. I think it’s completely logical and fair for them to get some profit off of used games; if we couldn’t trade in games, they would be selling a lot more and be rewarded for their own work instead of giving up so much to the distributors who resell.