Don’t worry, that headline is not as bad as it sounds. We all give EA a lot of flak for making some truly terrible decisions with their games, but the decision to not take action on a certain exploit in Dead Space 3 might be its best decision in a while.
In Dead Space 3, certain weapons are only unlocked after gathering a certain amount of resources. EA, a supporter of controversial ideas such as first day DLC, decided to put these resources up for sale in DLC packs. They were basically introducing microtransactions into a game that you pay full price for already. While microtransactions have a place in free-to-play games, introducing microtransactions in a single player, full price game could be considered a bit… greedy.
However, when Dead Space 3 was released, a glitch was discovered that enabled players to farm the same resources that EA put up for sale. This practice seemingly defeated the purpose of having microtransations. When asked about this exploit, EA said they would not be patching the game because it was a deliberate move to enable players to harvest the same resources for free in game.
For once EA, you make sense. It’s the old free-to-play exchange. You can either choose to spend your time unlocking items in a game, or you can choose to spend your money to save time. It’s a win-win on both sides. The game company has players logging more time on Dead Space 3, and players can save their money.
Only question I have is if that was what they were planning to do all along in Dead Space 3, then why not mention it in the first place? I remember when the news first hit, there wasn’t any mention of being able to harvest resources through farming. Wouldn’t be easier to avoid the initial flak and say that the micro transactions were optional? It would have made gamers feel a lot better about buying the game and wouldn’t have left people wondering if this “feature” was a “glitch.”