ME3 Prothean DLC on disc after all

[DeadYorick]

Keeping finished datae on the disk is helpful for two reasons
1. It allows for easier integration for the other DLc parts. Exactly the reason why Bioware had placeholder files for Kasumi, and Lair of the Shadow broker on the disk day 1.

Also why New vegas had DLC placeholder files for DLC 1 and 2, and DLC2 had a placeholder ifles for DLC 3 and 4.

2. It means less for the player to have to download easier.


They said the game was done was made post game completion, which meas testing/certification phase, and it was.

Also you are aware bioware has multiple teams on multiple projects and that putting a different team on the DLC character doesn't mean they had to take ANY of the staff from the base game away so that "fact" is wrong.

Except that the placeholder files were incomplete. New Vegas's DLC placeholders only contained vague references to code that didn't yet exist, same with ME2's. They didn't actually let you do anything with them. If the player added Kasumi into their game all that showed up was a placeholder model (that looked like a generic NPC) for a character and no voice acting. Indicating the character was cut from development or development was made but they decided not to allocate budget to it. Kasumi was also not Day 1 DLC but was released later. Same with Shadow Broker and all of New Vegas's DLC.

This however is different, the character is fully functioning, complete with animations (along with facial ones), hud images, voice acting and the like. The character on the disk is virtually identical to the DLC save for the missions and conversations.

As for 2. that doesn't make any sense and I am going to explain right now.

First off, if that was their original intent why not keep the entire DLC still on the disk? I mean logically, if we're assuming they were testing the character they would also want to test everything that relates to it. In a code by code method. No, then they couldn't charge it and everyone would ***** about it even more then they are doing right now.

Secondly, keeping something on the disk, unless it is something that would cost development time (which it wouldn't since it would be in the testing phase) wouldn't be cost effective. That could potentially require them to cut other content for that 64 megabytes or so

Thirdly, there's no reason why they would keep a character on a disk and not cut it during the testing phase since they have development consoles and wouldn't keep a character on the disk past certification.

I'm going to give you a timeline

Development -> Testing -> Certification -> Mass Production -> Release date

Testing is technically apart of development, since things can get cut during testing (and they often do) which requires further development to block them out. Why would they test a character they did not intend to keep on the disk (because it's DLC after all) and then decide "well. Lets let the player's internet connection breathe easy and not download an extra 4 megabytes".

There's no logical reason why they would keep DLC content on their disk, unless it was originally designed to be on there in the first place. Unless Bioware is incompetent and just decided as a spur of the moment thing "Well. There's 4 megabytes left on the disk, lets just let part of our DLC on it".

Which is essentially your argument after everything else is refuted.

As for your last statement while thats technically true I was more referring to budget. EA allocates a specific budget to Mass Effect 3, and spending budget on something else means that the core game isn't being spent on.

Gosh, what an awful little video. So, you can edit some .bin file or what not to access the placeholder for a downloadable character? This is meaningless until someone can actually access the full content of the 'From Ashes' dlc (mission, all dialogue options etc) as placeholders for future dlc is standard practice for many modern day titles. Without any actual evidence it's all a little bit alarmist at the moment.

I'm not a huge fan of EA and I'm not the greatest fan of Bioware after the less than perfect Dragon Age sequel, but all this attacking of Bioware/EA for Mass Effect 3 is just getting tiresome and really quite embarrassing now.

Placeholder refers to something that is there but lacks the art department's touches in it. Essentially something that is there only temporarily to attach code to while your coworkers are working on replacing it.

An example would be Kasumi was available to be recruited in ME2 without DLC, but she looked like a generic NPC with no voice acting. Indicating that her code was in the game but not implemented, and she was later added months later as DLC.

This is significantly different, the character's model, animations, and sounds, are virtually identical to the DLC's. Save for the missions and conversations. That is not referred to as a Placeholder, its a character that is cut from the core game that they added as DLC.

As for the fans outrage over Bioware it was only natural when your staff deliberately insults it's consumer base. You only have to see videos on youtube of the unprofessional stance Bioware's staff has taken with it's fanbase over only asking simple questions.(Like simply making a forum thread requesting a complaints section to reduce the amount of complaint topics in other categories, and being banned for it) Alongside banning people for just being critical of their games. (Meaning creating topics saying "I didnt think Mass Effect 3 wasnt that good because...")

I'm not the biggest Bioware hater either but I dont like it when the staff treats you badly and expects you to like it.

EDIT: Also keeping an ENTIRE playable character that is virtually identical to it's DLC counterpart is not common practice in today's games. Placeholders are but they arent playable and arent properly coded, which is natural to assume to say the least. The only example I can possibly think of a similar thing occurring was when Megaman 9's Hard mode was released as DLC and people discovered its code was on the disk. That was not nearly as bad as an entire playable character deliberately cut from development and sold as DLC simply because they knew exploiting the fans was more profitable.

So you are proven wrong and your response is that you try to make fun of the one who proved you wrong? How mature of you.

He was referring to the assumed illegality of "modifying" the license that was described in the Eula, and how it wasn't put in context. The concept of owning a "license" to play a game itself is a very large legal grey area and saying it is the same as piracy, which by definition is sharing a game over the internet, which is not a legal grey area. Is not the same.

 

[Chicago Ted]

Stop it already, you lost, at least keep your dignity, you know your picture has been debunked and you're grasping at straws, also this whole thing is getting more and more ridiculous.

Uh... debunked by who? Everyone who's worked at a game studio that I've talked to has verified that picture, not to mention my own personal experience. The only people that claim it is false are not dev types and refuse to believe evidence and fact to the contrary, and have yet to offer any collaborating evidence other than "I SAID SO!"

While I don't admit to having any experience within the field, I do have some with business, and from where I sit that graphic makes perfect sense. I mean, games have to start off with artists and such creating all the concept work before any development is done. Once development starts though, the direction has been set, and continuing to work on concepts for the game would be more impractical to implement and more last minute.

That leaves you with 3 choices really.

1) Lay off your art teams and such as they are not going to be contributing as much

2) Have them begin work on another project

3) Have them start work on DLC and extra additional content for the current project

The Production time for DLC's will be far shorter than that of the actual game, which means it can be done by the Production team during the Testing period. And when I look at From Ashes I realize how quick it would have been to make. All the content that is really added is one new squad mate that shares most of the same behaviours and patterns as the rest but is slightly modified, and a new weapon to the game that is again only slightly different from the rest. The rest is just one new location, with most of the models just being pulled from elsewhere in the game.

Again though, this is from an outside view with nothing that I can really use to confirm it other than what I think would be practical and logical, and what I have learned from Extra Credits. So please tell me if I'm close to the mark on this or far off, but from where I sit, it seems pretty self-explanatory.

 

[ThriKreen]

Except that the placeholder files were incomplete.
[snip]
This however is different, the character is fully functioning, complete with animations (along with facial ones), hud images, voice acting and the like. The character on the disk is virtually identical to the DLC save for the missions and conversations.

But it's not any different and you just clarified why yourself. The DLC package as a whole is to include both the character and the mission. You only have part of the package on disc, so it fits into the same category as FO:NV's DLC, aka "incomplete".

There's no logical reason why they would keep DLC content on their disk, unless it was originally designed to be on there in the first place. Unless Bioware is incompetent and just decided as a spur of the moment thing "Well. There's 4 megabytes left on the disk, lets just let part of our DLC on it".

Many a game, past and present, has a lot of locked out content left in because the developers simply did not have the time to safely rip it out, or were unaware it was there due to sloppy resource juggling.

Or in the case of DLC nowadays, easier to keep it in the (almost) always loaded resource packages due to shared stuff (like, oh I dunno, squadmate resources since you always have two with you), and just remove the references unless enabled by the DLC authorization.

 

[Smiley Face]

Also it is piracy because you are gaining access to content you didn't pay for.

When you bought the game you paied for a lsience, and that lisence only covers what Bioware says it doesn, the fact that those limited animation and voice files are on the disk is irellevent to the fact the liscence you bought only covers the base game.

-You dont own the disk
-You dont own the box
-You dont own the information on the disk

Stop acting like you do.

I understand the nuance you're trying to throw into this, but you do own the disk and the box as they are sold to you, and thus you, in a sense, own the information on the disk. You see, when you buy the disk, in its box, you're not agreeing to any insane EULA. You're buying a physical object. You're not signing anything that says this physical object is being licensed to you, you are BUYING it. Now, as to what you can legally do with the information on that disk, that's a different question subject to intellectual property legislation and the relevant EULA. But you very much own the disk and the box, in the same way that you own any of your other possessions. Video games are not subject to any unique circumstances with regards to how they're purchased from retailers than are any other product.

 

[Coldie]

This however is different, the character is fully functioning, complete with animations (along with facial ones), hud images, voice acting and the like. The character on the disk is virtually identical to the DLC save for the missions and conversations.

But it's not any different and you just clarified why yourself. The DLC package as a whole is to include both the character and the mission. You only have part of the package on disc, so it fits into the same category as FO:NV's DLC, aka "incomplete".

The entirety of the DLC package is on the disc. Once you purchase access to the DLC, you can play it without any additional downloads. The character, the mission, the dialogue, everything is on the retail PC disc, and that's exactly where this alleged "controversy" comes from.

PC does not have any reason to print the disc early, so they finished the DLC and included it with all copies. Consoles have a complex licensing process, so they need to finalize the discs early and the DLC on consoles is a 600-700 MB download.

 

[Simonoly]

Keeping finished datae on the disk is helpful for two reasons
1. It allows for easier integration for the other DLc parts. Exactly the reason why Bioware had placeholder files for Kasumi, and Lair of the Shadow broker on the disk day 1.

Also why New vegas had DLC placeholder files for DLC 1 and 2, and DLC2 had a placeholder ifles for DLC 3 and 4.

2. It means less for the player to have to download easier.


They said the game was done was made post game completion, which meas testing/certification phase, and it was.

Also you are aware bioware has multiple teams on multiple projects and that putting a different team on the DLC character doesn't mean they had to take ANY of the staff from the base game away so that "fact" is wrong.

Except that the placeholder files were incomplete. New Vegas's DLC placeholders only contained vague references to code that didn't yet exist, same with ME2's. They didn't actually let you do anything with them. If the player added Kasumi into their game all that showed up was a placeholder model (that looked like a generic NPC) for a character and no voice acting. Indicating the character was cut from development or development was made but they decided not to allocate budget to it. Kasumi was also not Day 1 DLC but was released later. Same with Shadow Broker and all of New Vegas's DLC.

This however is different, the character is fully functioning, complete with animations (along with facial ones), hud images, voice acting and the like. The character on the disk is virtually identical to the DLC save for the missions and conversations.

As for 2. that doesn't make any sense and I am going to explain right now.

First off, if that was their original intent why not keep the entire DLC still on the disk? I mean logically, if we're assuming they were testing the character they would also want to test everything that relates to it. In a code by code method. No, then they couldn't charge it and everyone would ***** about it even more then they are doing right now.

Secondly, keeping something on the disk, unless it is something that would cost development time (which it wouldn't since it would be in the testing phase) wouldn't be cost effective. That could potentially require them to cut other content for that 64 megabytes or so

Thirdly, there's no reason why they would keep a character on a disk and not cut it during the testing phase since they have development consoles and wouldn't keep a character on the disk past certification.

I'm going to give you a timeline

Development -> Testing -> Certification -> Mass Production -> Release date

Testing is technically apart of development, since things can get cut during testing (and they often do) which requires further development to block them out. Why would they test a character they did not intend to keep on the disk (because it's DLC after all) and then decide "well. Lets let the player's internet connection breathe easy and not download an extra 4 megabytes".

There's no logical reason why they would keep DLC content on their disk, unless it was originally designed to be on there in the first place. Unless Bioware is incompetent and just decided as a spur of the moment thing "Well. There's 4 megabytes left on the disk, lets just let part of our DLC on it".

Which is essentially your argument after everything else is refuted.

As for your last statement while thats technically true I was more referring to budget. EA allocates a specific budget to Mass Effect 3, and spending budget on something else means that the core game isn't being spent on.

Gosh, what an awful little video. So, you can edit some .bin file or what not to access the placeholder for a downloadable character? This is meaningless until someone can actually access the full content of the 'From Ashes' dlc (mission, all dialogue options etc) as placeholders for future dlc is standard practice for many modern day titles. Without any actual evidence it's all a little bit alarmist at the moment.

I'm not a huge fan of EA and I'm not the greatest fan of Bioware after the less than perfect Dragon Age sequel, but all this attacking of Bioware/EA for Mass Effect 3 is just getting tiresome and really quite embarrassing now.

Placeholder refers to something that is there but lacks the art department's touches in it. Essentially something that is there only temporarily to attach code to while your coworkers are working on replacing it.

An example would be Kasumi was available to be recruited in ME2 without DLC, but she looked like a generic NPC with no voice acting. Indicating that her code was in the game but not implemented, and she was later added months later as DLC.

This is significantly different, the character's model, animations, and sounds, are virtually identical to the DLC's. Save for the missions and conversations. That is not referred to as a Placeholder, its a character that is cut from the core game that they added as DLC.

As for the fans outrage over Bioware it was only natural when your staff deliberately insults it's consumer base. You only have to see videos on youtube of the unprofessional stance Bioware's staff has taken with it's fanbase over only asking simple questions. Alongside banning people for just being critical of their games.

I'm not the biggest Bioware hater either but I dont like it when the staff treats you badly and expects you to like it.

Ah I see. I am aware of what a placeholder is, but from the video I really couldn't tell either way. I noticed that it was fully textured but nothing else. But if indeed the character has a lot more, with full facial animations, sounds etc than yes that's totalling quite a bit more than a placeholder. I will be interested to see if the actual mission is accessible without downloading the dlc though.

Well the fan outrage is spread across a vast spectrum ranging from the justifiably concerned to the down-right petty. Some people are genuinely concerned of the state of the game and what this dlc issue means (which is good!), but it's all watered down by some quite vile feedback and responses from the less thoughtful ME gamers. To be honest, the only videos I've come across on Youtube in regards to this issue are more confused videos on Jennifer Hepler and other misinformed speculative user commentaries. I haven't seen anything from Bioware staff, but if there our videos out there I'd be happy to watch. The only times I witnessed someone being banned from the BSN forums (if that's what you're referring to) is when they've gone completely crazy and insulted pretty much everyone else in the forum. But again, if people are being banned for simply being critical then I'd be happy to see where this is happening.

Oh what a mess this whole thing is! Still, at least the game is actually quite good. I suppose this is all a testament to the relative success of the Mass Effect series. There wouldn't be any sort of public backlash if nobody cared about the game.

 

[viranimus]

Baffles me people get pissed over D1 DLC. If your gonna get tweaked over that, dont half ass it, get pissed the game is released a year early because it takes that long for all the DLC to shake loose.

 

[PhantomEcho]

What kills me in all of this is the ignorant idea that somehow we must create abstract things to represent our physical things whenever our technology advances up a peg.

Money, an abstraction of ACTUALLY POSSESSING VALUABLE ITEMS FOR TRADE came along and revolutionized the world as we know it. Fine and good, but Barter has never been the same since. The ability to connect not only with what you are 'giving' but 'receiving' in any given exchange is penultimate to the successfulness of your economy.

Look at our global debt crisis. This isn't created SIMPLY because of sheer human greed. It's been created because people who already HAVE their fortunes believe they aren't going to be affected by the consequences of their actions.

Billions and Trillions of dollars are such massive things, that our brain quite simply cannot fathom their true extent.

Similarly, when the concept of trade becomes too complex, as it has with the advent of the License... the end result is a schism between the buyer and the seller. This schism can be largely overlooked by the seller for quite some time, so long as the majority remain content with the current model.

But the model is far from elegant, and even FURTHER from being necessary.

I rate the 'IP License', in terms of their valued contribution to civilization, right up there amongst the development of the atomic bomb. It has permeated virtually every technological market in the world, and completely destroyed the concept of customer-driven experiences in all but the slightest handful of video-game development houses.

DRM? The assault on Retail? Arguments over DLC, and the validity of pre-orders and pre-order bonuses?

This growing wave of hostility towards publishers and developers is continuously intensifying. It's no longer relegated to a few loud, noisy critics. It has expanded to encompass the majority of the video games marketplace. Unless the flaws of this system are addressed, in a way that best serves the CUSTOMER rather than the COMPANY, the market itself will slowly wither.

Either a new system for managing the exchange of Intellectual Property needs to be developed, and quickly... or we need to put the kebash on the concept of Intellectual Property altogether and develop a less unwieldy definition of our extant laws in order to cover for things such as digital content.

As it stands, the system is horribly flawed.

The only reason for the continued success of the Video Games market overall, is largely owed to the fact that 'people, no matter how desperate and short of cash, want to play.' It's the sole saving grace which serves to keep the balance as best it can.

Rest assured: it is unsustainable.


It took 2000 years to get our entire WORLD to the point where it's system of exchange began to fall apart and collapse in on its own unwieldy weight.

The industries within that system are NOT going to get that long.

 

[JediMB]

I can excuse and/or rationalize many things. Like the Day 1 DLC in itself.

But banning people for editing (or informing people about how to edit) a value in an .ini file, and calling it (software) piracy, is just idiotic. There's no copyright infringement going on. It's their own god-damn fault for including the squad mate's files in the core game, rather than putting it in the DLC.

They said the DLC was fair to sell because the content was developed after the core game was finished. Hence, unlocking the content already present in the core game is also fair.

 

[DeadYorick]

Well the fan outrage is spread across a vast spectrum ranging from the justifiably concerned to the down-right petty. Some people are genuinely concerned of the state of the game and what this dlc issue means (which is good!), but it's all watered down by some quite vile feedback and responses from the less thoughtful ME gamers. To be honest, the only videos I've come across on Youtube in regards to this issue are more confused videos on Jennifer Hepler and other misinformed speculative user commentaries. I haven't seen anything from Bioware staff, but if there our videos out there I'd be happy to watch. The only times I witnessed someone being banned from the BSN forums (if that's what you're referring to) is when they've gone completely crazy and insulted pretty much everyone else in the forum. But again, if people are being banned for simply being critical then I'd be happy to see where this is happening.

Oh what a mess this whole thing is! Still, at least the game is actually quite good. I suppose this is all a testament to the relative success of the Mass Effect series. There wouldn't be any sort of public backlash if nobody cared about the game.

http://youtu.be/XT9UDRbjm94

 

[Funkysandwich]

They could've avoided all this shit by holding the DLC back for a couple of weeks.

 

[DeadYorick]

They could've avoided all this shit by holding the DLC back for a couple of weeks.

Except they make more money if they sell it on day one, and theres less chance of players selling the game without buying the DLC.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Except it hasn't.

Your sycophantic hatred of bioware =/= debunking the picture

Also it is piracy because you are gaining access to content you didn't pay for.

When you bought the game you paied for a lsience, and that lisence only covers what Bioware says it doesn, the fact that those limited animation and voice files are on the disk is irellevent to the fact the liscence you bought only covers the base game.

-You dont own the disk
-You dont own the box
-You dont own the information on the disk

Stop acting like you do.

And because of people like you who don't have a problem accepting that, we're all fucked. Just because publishers can do something doesn't make it right. You're a part of the problem. I don't understand these "gamers" that take sides with developers and publishers and their so obviously shady business practices. What the fuck is wrong with you?

Besides, the EULA isn't actually LEGALLY BINDING. You have to buy the game and then accept the EULA which is kinda of against the law. The only reason they get away with this shit is because no one bothered taking it to the court. But if something like that happens, there's no way any developer or publisher could win that case.

I don't even know why I bother with you anymore. You still think the ending makes perfect sense.

They could've avoided all this shit by holding the DLC back for a couple of weeks.

No one would buy it after that shitty ending. People are pissed. The only kind of DLC they'll be able to sell is the one that fixes the ending.

 

[Appleshampoo]

How is the DLC, anyway?

I've heard all the day-one DLC commotion, but is it actually any good?

It's not that good in my humble opinion

Spoiler

Basically, you learn that the Protheans were imperialist, social darwinian asshole. The Prothean squadmate is a dick and I want to shove him out the airlock BSG style so badly it hurts. Also, despite what people are saying, it's not "intergral" at all to the experience of the game. In fact, I think it makes it worse.

I couldn't agree with you more

Spoiler

The Prothean is an asshole who just complains how people sucked in his day and they suck now. Everyone is a slave, blah blah blah. I stopped using him after having a few conversations with him simply because of his attitude.

 

[Syzygy23]

Except it hasn't.

Your sycophantic hatred of bioware =/= debunking the picture

Also it is piracy because you are gaining access to content you didn't pay for.

When you bought the game you paied for a lsience, and that lisence only covers what Bioware says it doesn, the fact that those limited animation and voice files are on the disk is irellevent to the fact the liscence you bought only covers the base game.

-You dont own the disk
-You dont own the box
-You dont own the information on the disk

Stop acting like you do.

And because of people like you who don't have a problem accepting that, we're all fucked. Just because publishers can do something doesn't make it right. You're a part of the problem. I don't understand these "gamers" that take sides with developers and publishers and their so obviously shady business practices. What the fuck is wrong with you?

Besides, the EULA isn't actually LEGALLY BINDING. You have to buy the game and then accept the EULA which is kinda of against the law. The only reason they get away with this shit is because no one bothered taking it to the court. But if something like that happens, there's no way any developer or publisher could win that case.

I don't even know why I bother with you anymore. You still think the ending makes perfect sense.

They could've avoided all this shit by holding the DLC back for a couple of weeks.

No one would buy it after that shitty ending. People are pissed. The only kind of DLC they'll be able to sell is the one that fixes the ending.

Yes, finally, another person who can see through the bullshit. I swear, having X-ray vision that only works on bullshit must be some rare mutation, otherwise why are EA/Bioware still making money?

 

[Elementlmage]

I did read. It didn't make any sense to me. Not the picture showing the development cycle. That's pretty simple, and it's only a mistake on EA BioWare's part to make it Day 1 DLC, rather than content they can sell a month later... and a bigger mistake to include the data on the disc if they don't want people to access it. It only makes people suspicious.

What I found to be nonsensical was the assumption that you've bought a license, rather than a physical product, when it's marketed and sold as a physical product.

It isn't marked and sold as a physical product.

Games state on the back of their boxes that "this product is subject to a licensing agreement"
.
.

Also why should bioware have to sit on finished content because of schizophrenic paranoia on the consumers side?

that is just silly.

In United States Law, there is a section of Common Law referred to as Uniform Commerce Code, and for the purposes of my argument it will cover two areas, the Sales Contract, and what my be legally included/assumed in said contract.

Now, a sales contract is pretty straight forward. I advertise and agree to sell you a product, and you agree to pay X amount of money. The terms of this sale form the basis of the contract. As it is made known that the software is subject to a licence agreement, that stipulation would be included in the terms of the sale, and the "Sales Contract."

Now, here is the important bit, the TERMS of that EULA are NOT made known at the time of the agreement, i.e. the sale, and UCC has a specific section governing the sort of "behavior."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/article1.htm

Skip to section 1-308 please:

"(a) A party that with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as "without prejudice," "under protest," or the like are sufficient.

(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to an accord and satisfaction."

I know, legaleez.... translated into English, this section establishes that all terms of a contract/agreement, MUST be made known at the time of the agreement, and terms not made known, or withheld until after the agreement may be made null and void...


By including the phrase "subject to license agreement", EA IS making it known that the sales and use of the product are subject to specific terms, and when you purchase this product you agree to those terms, at the time of sale. (The sales contract being legally binding and all), but what those terms are, are NOT made known. It can be assumed by the purchasing party (and rightfully so I might add), that EA is simply taking it upon themselves to remind to abide by the terms of that standard sales contract and pay for your goods before leaving the store.

However, by the LACK of terms, it can be assumed by the purchasing party that THERE ARE NO TERMS, except for that of the base sales contract. ("I have paid you, and therefore accept your terms that I must pay you to use this software") In order for the terms of EAs supposed contract to apply they MUST be made known at the time of agreement. Under US law, if they are not made known, they do not exist!

Therefore, I have the right to do what ever I damn well please with my software and piece of pressed acrylic.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

The answer is EVERYONE was wrong/lying.

Javiks character model and dialogue are already in game. His quest, cinematics, and weapon must be downloaded (628 mb). This is similar to how Kasumi Goto was DLC'd into ME2, her dialogue and model were already in the game.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Therefore, I have the right to do what ever I damn well please with my software and piece of pressed acrylic.

This is kind of the point I was making, only articulated a lot better.

If you can only agree to EULA after the purchase, it doesn't produce any legal consequences. It is as if the EULA never even existed. Which means you're free to do what you please.

I swear, having X-ray vision that only works on bullshit must be some rare mutation, otherwise why are EA/Bioware still making money?

It's not a mutation. It's augmentation in my case.