Opinion: Finding the True Value of Season Passes

If any term is fast becoming cringe worthy these days, it should be “season pass.” Providing players with a discounted access to future DLC isn’t exactly new, but for many publishers, there’s still a lot of trial and error. While the rumors of Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare’s upcoming Zombies mode being locked behind the game’s $50 season pass ended up being false, I think Activision’s handling of the situation highlights a greater problem with how publishers utilize season passes. Publishers need to stop keeping the contents of their season passes a secret, especially when there are hefty price tags attached to them.

I myself have purchased season passes a handful of times. Two of those occasions left me feeling more than just a little dissatisfied, and they both taught me to be wary about the nature of how season passes are marketed. The first time was the season pass for Assassin’s Creed III. While the two multiplayer packs included in the pass did do a decent job of augmenting the already robust online multiplayer portion of the game, the Tyranny of King Washington story expansion was a disaster.

Ubisoft decided to split the expansion into three episodes and have them count as three of the five pieces of content included in the pass (neither of these facts were disclosed during the pass’s pre-release marketing). Even worse, roughly four months passed before the first episode was even released and there was another month in between the releases of the first and second episodes and the second and third episodes. While Tyranny did contain some cool new story and gameplay elements, having to pay an extra $30 for an experience, then waiting over six months for it to play out for was definitely not ideal.

The second time wasn’t quite so disastrous but it still left a bad taste in my mouth. Like many other Batman fans, I got swept up in all the pre-release hype for Batman: Arkham Origins and when I went to pick up my copy, I decided to go ahead and spring for the season pass as well. However, problems began to arise after the pass’s two separate DLC costume packs started coming out.

Whether intentionally or not, Warner Bros. had failed to mention that certain costumes included in the two packs (which could also be purchased separately) could also be earned in-game for free. What this meant was that Warner Bros. was essentially promising five different costumes for a set price but only actually giving players three or four since, by the time the costume packs were released, many players already had some of the costumes included in both packs. The strong showings of the pass’s other two offerings, the Initiation challenge maps and Cold, Cold Heart story expansion, fortunately ended Arkham Origins’ otherwise mediocre legacy on a high note but I doubt many season pass buyers ever completely shook the feeling that they had been slightly ripped-off. I know I didn’t.

So where exactly did Ubisoft and Warner Bros. go wrong? The answer is simple: neither developer made the effort to properly communicate with fans about what exactly was being offered in their respective games’ season pass. If Ubisoft had been more upfront about the Tyranny of King Washington expansion’s format and release schedule back when it was first announced, I doubt I would have ended up feeling quite so burned since I would have known for sure exactly what I was paying for and when to expect it. If Warner Bros. had bothered to disclose that certain costumes in Arkham Origins were obtainable both through in-game means and through DLC, it could have rebuilt some of the trust it had lost with fans instead of simply driving the wedge in deeper.

Fortunately, at least in Ubisoft’s case, past mistakes have led to promising subsequent attempts. Not only does the Assassin’s Creed Unity season pass contain a varied wealth of non-fragmented content, which includes both multiplayer and single-player additions, an entire story expansion, and a separate bonus game. But Ubisoft was upfront about the exact nature of the content well before the game’s launch. Bethesda’s recent survival/horror title The Evil Within also took this approach, detailing exactly what players would be getting with the game’s season pass and the format in which it would be released. Variety in a season pass’s content offerings is important, but proper communication on the publisher’s part is even more important.

Of course, the circumstances behind Advanced Warfare’s Zombie mode present an interesting situation. Since developer Sledgehammer Games didn’t even begin working on the game’s Zombies mode until after it had wrapped production on the main game, saying that Activision purposefully withheld information would be a little unfair. However, that doesn’t excuse the fact that there are still many other elements about Advanced Warfare’s season pass which still remain a mystery. I don’t imagine it would be too much to ask of Activision to give players at least a marginally better sense of what exactly they’re getting through the pass, especially considering its rather large asking price.

There’s nothing wrong with teasing fans with a little mystery but in Advanced Warfare’s case, the ratio of mystery vs. solid facts isn’t really doing Activision any favors, especially given how the whole zombie mode situation played out. When it comes to spending more money on a game I bought, I’d rather know for sure what my money is going towards instead of facing the risk of tossing even more money away on content that doesn’t justify the asking price.