You're being a fanboy when you just want to throw your money at Bioware for making "fantastic games." Yes, I love the Mass Effect trilogy as well. It may be my favorite gaming franchise, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to throw money at them because I'm in love with their games. $60 is the standard price for games, lots of game companies make great games for that price (and they all deal with used sales as well, many without the benefit of a blockbuster franchise like Mass Effect). I feel no need to shower them with extra money. Make a good product, charge a reasonable price, and I'll buy it. Offering ridiculous multiplayer unlocks to milk more from your consumer base doesn't work for me.
Fanboy? Like I've said multiple times, this instance of monetization is fair and ethical business practice... and that the Prothean DLC and Razer tie-ins are *not*. How is that being a fanboy?
And like you say.... $60 is the fair price for you right? That's *your* utility curve, and that's entirely your right. But *your* utility curve isn't the same as the next person. What about for that player who wants to enjoy the unlocks but has no time? You still haven't addressed that yet. THAT is the demographic being targeted here. This is normal price differentiation and is a tried-and-true business application in every industry. It's the reason there are Android and Apple phones at different price points, why there are different SKU's for Xboxes and the same model car has different options on it. Price differentiation exists everywhere.
And your continued discussion of EA's stock performance is your worst argument. A basic understanding of business practices would tell you that you don't simply raise prices and charge people more money simply because your company is performing well.
And this shows how much you know about business. First off, EA is NOT doing well and is actually going counter to the industry and market in general. Second of all, this isn't an example of "raising prices." Yet again you're zeroing in on some specific aspect and not looking at the whole. The true price of ME3 multiplayer in this case is the price of the online code; you *cannot* access the product unless you have the code. For new game buyers this is packaged in the $60 cost; for used game buyers it's $10 or $15 or whatever it is for the code.
Remember, the Spectre packs are an *option*. You do not need to buy any packs with real money to enjoy ME3's multiplayer; because of this, it does not factor into the price. At that point, it becomes a unit of your personal utility curve... but people have different utility curves. Again, going back to the person that does not have as much Time to enjoy the game but still wishes to play it... why not let give him the same chance as the people with Time advantages? Honestly, I'm curious what your opinion is on this.
We live in a free market, it's all about what the free market sets it at. If people are irate about a business practice which attempts to elicit more profit, that's not going to help the company, it will hurt it.
Yes, this is entirely true... hence the Prothean DLC backlash, which I was also very vocal *against*. Note that there is no backlash against the Spectre pack purchases though? Think about it. The Prothean DLC locks people out of content that you can *only* access through Money... no matter what your Time resources are, if you don't invest Money, you CANNOT access this content. THAT is unfair. Hence the MASSIVE backlash.
Try this... try googling for any sort of Spectre pack monetization backlash from any reputable source (ie, not a forum). You won't find it, because the system makes sense and is fair. However, you'll find hundreds of articles on the Prothean backlash because that is *not* fair.
You seem to come at this with some kind of pre-conceived notion that companies merely need to charge more for their product in order to make a larger product. That's not how business economics works in a free market.
No, I don't; don't put words in my mouth. I believe in proper business using sound business ethics (hence why I'm for optional Spectre packs, but I'm *not* for the Prothean DLC). Bioware/EA is using tried-and-true price differentiation (used in pretty much any industry out there... targeting consumers willing to pay) to target those users that have more Money than Time. And doing it in a fair way, because they do not lock out content to those willing to invest more Time than Money.
An example of a way that this would be unfair? Imagine if there were "N7" packs that contained exclusive content, but you cannot buy this with credits. THAT is an unfair system that I would rail against.
Truly, your only solid argument is that paying to unlock content is optional.
Actually, not it's not.
However, my counter argument has always been that, even though I choose not to exercise that option, the game I'm played has been altered due to Bioware's inclusion of optional unlocks for the purpose of maximizing profit.
Actually, no it hasn't. Every time you open a Spectre pack through credits, you have the exact same chance to get XYZ item as the person who opened it through Money.