Earlier today the long suspected Omega DLC finally had some details released. But now another bit of controversy is yet again threatening to further harm BioWare's reputation—depending on how one views it, of course. Site DSOGaming reminded the community that fans had previously found data for the Omega DLC in Mass Effect 3's game files months ago. The data indicated that at one time the DLC was going to be in the main game, but was taken out for whatever reason. The description for the DLC is as follows:
“A notorious Cerberus tactician orchestrating the Omega blockade crashes on a planet after being attacked by Aria’s raiders. Aria wants to grill the tactician and asks you to retrieve her before Cerberus does. Your shuttle down to the planet is rocked by a missile: Cerberus has had time to establish a defensive perimeter.
You are forced to make an emergency landing and must fight through patrols, traps and a deadly environment to get to the Cerberus ship. Once there, you are confronted by Zaeed: He’s signed on again with Cerberus as the tactician’s bodyguard, and is determined to fulfill his contract. After a fight you have a chance to either persuade the merc that he’s on the wrong side or finish off Zaeed. Either way, you take the tactician back to Omega.”
It was practically all but said by Aria in the main game if you talk to her and assist her with her quests in Purgatory, but since those abruptly end, many players hoped it would be DLC. Lead designer Mike Gamble boasts of the Omega DLC being the biggest DLC they've ever created, but DSOGaming thinks this is only possible because of the amount of content they may had for it previously.
While the site acknowledges that the content may have been removed to hit deadlines, it's still important to remember that they are selling the DLC for $15 (1/3 of the game's retail price) and that some content was already there. Gamers who are still interested in playing Mass Effect 3 would probably prefer to spend $15 for all new content, but it does raise an issue that keeps coming up over and over again in the games industry: how much should we have to pay for content? And perhaps more importantly, how do we put a price on content?
What do you think? It's not a surprise perhaps, but do you think it’s morally wrong or that BioWare and EA are perfectly within their rights?
