Gamers should pass on the season pass

As soon as I started playing “Battlefield 1,” I couldn’t stop.

The World War I shooter that I and hundreds of others had been anticipating finally came out in late October and has quickly become one of the most immersive and exciting multiplayer games of the year.

Still, “Battlefield 1” is not a perfect game. As if the $60 price tag wasn’t enough, Electronic Arts, the game’s publisher, also wants us to pay for the game’s obnoxious season pass, which is a terrible deal for consumers and an alarming trend in the gaming industry.

A season pass allows players to purchase an all-access pass to optional, downloadable content for a game. Despite the fact that all of the downloadable content isn’t immediately available, season passes are available for purchase on release day.

Any extra content — such as multiplayer maps or additional campaign missions — that isn’t part of the initial video game package is downloadable content, and these typically comes out in increments within months after the game releases. Although downloadable content is technically optional, that doesn’t stop companies like EA from trying to force gamers into buying it — and season passes make gaining access to that content look easy and affordable.

The benefit is that paying one price as soon as you buy the game saves money overall because players don’t have to buy each newly released map or mission individually. The season pass trend began in 2011 with Rockstar Games’ “L.A Noire,” and five years later, it has only intensified.

The problem is that when you purchase a season pass, the content hasn’t been identified or clearly outlined yet — and in some instances hasn’t even been made yet.

In essence, season passes are one of the most outlandish and greedy concepts that video game companies have developed. It’s comparable to paying for a season pass to a concert venue without knowing what shows — if any — are going to come to town. The season pass tactic allows multi-million dollar gaming companies like EA to squeeze out as much money as possible from consumers, causing video games to become less fully packaged experiences and more like prolonged, rationed money-making scams.

According to the Entertainment Software Association’s most recent data, the video game industry rakes in more than $4 billion yearly, profiting from more than 155 million Americans. Out of all video game purchases — including computer and smartphone games — downloadable content accounts for more than $15.4 billion in extra purchases. Downloadable content has created immense profits for EA specifically, generating $1.3 billion last year, according to Chief Financial Officer Blake Jorgensen.

Season passes are adding to that profit. “Battlefield 1” players can pay $50 now and gain full access to the game’s downloadable content when it is eventually released instead of paying for the four individual content packs at a later date for $15 each — or $60 in total.

So, it’s a deal, but what exactly are we getting a deal on?
The reality is that those who purchase a season pass are often blindly paying for content that was going to be a part of the initial game but was charged as downloadable content instead, as Capcom did with “Street Fighter X Tekken” add-ons. In this way, companies take away  consumers’ purchasing power. Once we’ve forked our money over, the gaming company is under no obligation to make quality content.

2K Games released “BioShock Infinite,” another popular first-person shooter, in March 2013 and offered players a season pass for $20. The first pack of downloadable content came out in July 2013 for $5, and second pack was released that November for $15. The third pack came out in March 2014 — over a year after the game’s release date — for $15.

Many fans were upset over the long delays for the downloadable content they had paid for all the way back in March 2013 when the game was released. The reason for the delay: the developers didn’t start development on the packs until after the standard game was released. It isn’t acceptable for companies to charge consumers for content when neither the developers nor the consumers know what that content is going to be.

The solution is simple: Either companies give clear information about the content within a season pass, or companies can eliminate season passes from the equation. I’m in favor of the latter.

If companies were upfront about what gamers are getting with their season passes, I might be tempted to purchase one. But right now, video game producers are misleading millions of consumers who are tricked into thinking they’re getting a good deal.