Mass Effect 3

[Mosesandstick]

From having read the script leak I'm surprised this character is going to be DLC. It seemed like he/she was meant to be fully integral to or one of the more important characters in the game.

[eldaec]

Of course he will be integral to the plot, does Shale or Sebastian Vael mean anything to you, because seriously...

ME2 is the outlier here.

Just add $10 to the advertised price of the game and you only need to worry if that number offends you.

[rk47]

So does this purchase include the DLC?

[koro]

Yes. Apparently that's the only CE (out of multiple CE SKUs) that actually has it, from what I understand.

[Sjofn]

While Shale and Sebastian are definitely involved, I wouldn't say either is "integral" to the plots of their respective games. Shale gives more insight into the golem thing and stuff, but it's basically just more lore pellets (and delicious one-liners, of course), not anything that's needed for the plot of DA:O. Sebastian is similar, in that he bolts on very well and gives you more insight into the less dickish aspects of the Chantry and adds some nice flavor (and a delicious accent, of course), but the plot doesn't NEED him.

[Ingmar]

Yes. Apparently that's the only CE (out of multiple CE SKUs) that actually has it, from what I understand.

There's a non-digital N7 one apparently that also has it. So, as long as it has N7 in the name, you get it, I guess.

Unless of course new information has come out since last I checked which is certainly possible.

[Velorath]

So does this purchase include the DLC?

Yes.  Preordering any version of the game on Origin also gets you the PC version of Battlefield 3 for free.  Those evil money grubbing people at EA...

Edit: actually it looks like that deal expired.  Glad I got in on it when I did.

[Raguel]

While Shale and Sebastian are definitely involved, I wouldn't say either is "integral" to the plots of their respective games. Shale gives more insight into the golem thing and stuff, but it's basically just more lore pellets (and delicious one-liners, of course), not anything that's needed for the plot of DA:O. Sebastian is similar, in that he bolts on very well and gives you more insight into the less dickish aspects of the Chantry and adds some nice flavor (and a delicious accent, of course), but the plot doesn't NEED him.

I agree with this. I got Sebastian after a couple of playthroughs. I can't say I found him to be anything other than extraneous and I'd only get him just to do every quest possible. There's something about him that rubs me the wrong way.

[Sjofn]

He is relentlessly pious and that really gets tiresome, I imagine, for a lot of people. He's also a big waffle-y wafflepants about if he wants to go fucking rule Starkhaven or not. JUST MAKE UP YOUR MIND DUDE, STOP WHINING ABOUT IT TO ME, I HAVE MY OWN PROBLEMS.

[jakonovski]

Looks like the demo had some voiceovers for the DLC companion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK99_T61alc

[jakonovski]

Bioware's statement regarding the DLC (contains additional details about the dlc, so don't read if you have spoiler-itis):

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/323/index/9403705

They're trying to claim it has nothing to do with the main game and did not take away any resources, which is a total lie of course.

[Velorath]

They're trying to claim it has nothing to do with the main game and did not take away any resources, which is a total lie of course.

From Casey Hudson's twitter:

It takes about 3 months from "content complete" to bug-fix, certify, manufacture, and ship game discs. In that time we work on DLC.

DLC has fast cert and no mfg., so if a team works very hard, they can get a DLC done in time to enjoy it with your 1st playthrough on day 1.

On ME3, content creators completed the game in January & moved onto the "From Ashes" DLC, free w/ the CE or you can buy seperately.

Plenty of people are accusing them of lying, but I haven't really seen anybody back up those accusations with anything.

[jakonovski]

The DLC dude was part of the script from the beginning and was mentioned way back when the whole thing first leaked. So in that respect it's not a recent thing at all. Also, I find it kind of questionable that you can create a "separate" team by just sitting some dudes in a different cubicle and say "you're the dlc team, separate from the main development!"

[Reg]

Is there anything different about the day 1 DLC scandal for this game versus that of their last several?  As far as I can tell it's just hysteria from people whose opinions I wouldn't normally care about being gleefully pointed out by the usual bioware trolls.

edit: typo

[jakonovski]

This has potential to shit on the main plot, at least that's what I was worried about. However now I'm fairly certain it'll just be some cardboard cutout fanservice, and I'm only in it for the spectacle.

[Velorath]

The DLC dude was part of the script from the beginning and was mentioned way back when the whole thing first leaked. So in that respect it's not a recent thing at all. Also, I find it kind of questionable that you can create a "separate" team by just sitting some dudes in a different cubicle and say "you're the dlc team, separate from the main development!"

Does it surprise you for some reason that they had their DLC mapped out in advance, or do you think that the Bioware people are suggesting that the entirety of the work on the DLC from early planning to being completed took place in a one month window?  ME2 had some art assets and sound files for Kasumi on the disc as well and that DLC wasn't done until well after launch.  Also, where do you want to draw the line between what is considered a separate team working on a separate budget?  Is geographical location the issue for you?  If the ME and DA teams are both working in the same building, do you consider them to be working on the same project just because they might be one cubicle away from each other?  If the ME3 DLC was developed by Bioware Montreal (like the Arrival DLC was) would that make it a sufficiently different team to you rather than if it was some people picked from the ME3 team to work as a DLC team?

At the end of the day, instead of making this into some kind of moral cause about what gamers are and aren't entitled to, isn't the only real question asking yourself if the game is worth $60 to you, and if the DLC is worth $10?

[Velorath]

This has potential to shit on the main plot, at least that's what I was worried about. However now I'm fairly certain it'll just be some cardboard cutout fanservice, and I'm only in it for the spectacle.

Some have suggested that the character might appear in the game regardless of whether or not you have the DLC, and that the only difference will be will be that if you have the DLC he'll join you as a squadmate.

[eldaec]

While Shale and Sebastian are definitely involved, I wouldn't say either is "integral" to the plots of their respective games. Shale gives more insight into the golem thing and stuff, but it's basically just more lore pellets (and delicious one-liners, of course), not anything that's needed for the plot of DA:O. Sebastian is similar, in that he bolts on very well and gives you more insight into the less dickish aspects of the Chantry and adds some nice flavor (and a delicious accent, of course), but the plot doesn't NEED him.

I agree with this. I got Sebastian after a couple of playthroughs. I can't say I found him to be anything other than extraneous and I'd only get him just to do every quest possible. There's something about him that rubs me the wrong way.

However integral you consider DA's nickel and dime companions to be, it would straightforward to write a prothean companion who is 'only' as significant as they were.

Removing companions for DLC was a cheap stunt in the prior EA titles, its a cheap stunt here. But hardly new, surprising, or difficult to imagine how it will work.

[jakonovski]

Does it surprise you for some reason that they had their DLC mapped out in advance, or do you think that the Bioware people are suggesting that the entirety of the work on the DLC from early planning to being completed took place in a one month window?  ME2 had some art assets and sound files for Kasumi on the disc as well and that DLC wasn't done until well after launch.  Also, where do you want to draw the line between what is considered a separate team working on a separate budget?  Is geographical location the issue for you?  If the ME and DA teams are both working in the same building, do you consider them to be working on the same project just because they might be one cubicle away from each other?  If the ME3 DLC was developed by Bioware Montreal (like the Arrival DLC was) would that make it a sufficiently different team to you rather than if it was some people picked from the ME3 team to work as a DLC team?

At the end of the day, instead of making this into some kind of moral cause about what gamers are and aren't entitled to, isn't the only real question asking yourself if the game is worth $60 to you, and if the DLC is worth $10?

The larger point is that dlc is so tightly intergrated to games development that you can't say that it's somehow separate without good reason. As for which questions are real, this is the latest and biggest news on ME3 at this moment. It feels quite natural to post things about it in this thread. Concentrated nerd is one of the things that makes this forum great.

[Margalis]

Also, where do you want to draw the line between what is considered a separate team working on a separate budget?  Is geographical location the issue for you?  If the ME and DA teams are both working in the same building, do you consider them to be working on the same project just because they might be one cubicle away from each other?  If the ME3 DLC was developed by Bioware Montreal (like the Arrival DLC was) would that make it a sufficiently different team to you rather than if it was some people picked from the ME3 team to work as a DLC team?

That's just all org-chart nonsense that has nothing to do with the end user. Deus Ex had a separate team working on bosses from a contracting budget...and? Make those bosses DLC!

At the end of the day, instead of making this into some kind of moral cause about what gamers are and aren't entitled to, isn't the only real question asking yourself if the game is worth $60 to you, and if the DLC is worth $10?

$10 DLC is almost never worth $10 if you compare what you are getting to what comes in the main game, but no, that's not the only real question. It has less to do with entitlement and more about what reasonable expectations should be and if they are being met. Meeting an NPC in game that says "pay $10 and I'll join your party!" is fucking weak. As a consumer my expectation is that if I buy the full game for the traditional full-game price I'm not instantly shamed.

I'm pretty sure you can accuse anyone doing anything of acting entitled, it's really completely meaningless.

You can do DLC that feels like an addition to a complete game or a luxury item. DLC that makes someone feel good for owning without feeling bad for not owning. The problem with a lot of the Bioware DLC is it seems designed to make you feel like you are getting an incomplete package unless you shell out more. "There's a really cool story part here with an awesome environment and it unravels a mys - oh wait, you don't have the premium version LOL!"

Of course that is by design, because to maximize revenue you want to put out day 1 DLC and you *want* people who don't buy it to feel bad. (At least until mainstream AAA gaming becomes so anti-consumer publishers have to rethink.)

I am not a big DLC fan but even I am not completely opposed. However this kind of stuff that immediately casts your $60 full game purchase as the shitty version is just lame. And the fact that it's available free by doing X Y or Z makes it look suspiciously similar to online pass stuff. Like online passes it's free for the good customers - AKA not the filthy peasants who buy used or now even the no-frills model.

Obviously what you consider to be punitive-feeling DLC is highly subjective but I think almost everyone would agree that day 1 dlc that includes party members, increased inventory slots and such feels fairly different and worse than skins and such.

These types of games exist in a weird place in that they aren't something like League of Legends where you pay low to zero but everything is a la carte, nor are they single unified experiences. I don't feel like I'm mixing and matching features to add to a base game, I just feel like there are two versions of the game at launch, one of which is shittier than the other.

[jakonovski]

RPS puts it well (as usual): you should use DLC in such a way that the owning player feels he's getting something extra, not make the non-owning player feel like his base game is incomplete. An entirely psychological difference, but you'd think PR people would've figured it out by know.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/02/23/thought-mass-effects-day-one-dlc-explained-considered/

[caladein]

The DLC dude was part of the script from the beginning and was mentioned way back when the whole thing first leaked. So in that respect it's not a recent thing at all. Also, I find it kind of questionable that you can create a "separate" team by just sitting some dudes in a different cubicle and say "you're the dlc team, separate from the main development!"

On the practical side of it, it seems common practice to move people off of projects once "their job" is done for the most part.  Now that project could still be a completely different game, but is now also potentially DLC for the game they just finished their contribution to.  I don't think it's all strange for a large studio to be managing staggered projects in much the same way you're describing as questionable.

Usually with near-launch DLC there are three implicit arguments made against:

"ME3 and From Ashes are not worth the cost of both (or a bundled editions)."  I understand and accept an argument from value (or immersion, which is normally made explicitly).  But it's usually combined with rather absolute statements like "rip-off" and "boycotts" instead of being a person-by-person, case-by-case kind of thing, which is what all arguments about the value of a particular product boil down to.

"ME3 is not worth full price because resources were pulled away from it to make From Ashes."  Kind of similar to the first one, but really not.  Part one of the problem with this one is that creators frequently have to bump things to expansions, sequels, next season, or DLC because they simply don't fit with the budget, scheduling, or the whims of a superior.  The difference with DLC is that those things can just get added back in if the circumstances that stopped their inclusion change whereas in the past and with other media, the thing that's bumped might get rebirthed as something else or packaged in something much larger.

Part two is that it's sort of unknowable if those resources would have made the game better at all.  The most germane example would be DA2 and its lack of environments.  More resources almost certainly could have helped there, or they could have been up against Brooks's law in the first place.  It's just not something you can really tell before something is nearly out and without some inside knowledge.

The last one kind of got outlined by Margalis, but that's what I get for writing up something this long .

1. A new AAA game's standard edition is expected to cost $60 in 2012.
2. A “full-price” new purchase should include everything from a title that is ready at release and not trivial.
3. Mass Effect 3's standard edition retails new for $60.
4. From Ashes isn't trivial and is ready at release.
5. From Ashes isn't included in the standard edition of Mass Effect 3.
6. Mass Effect 3's standard edition doesn't include everything that it should.

It is about expectations, and as such, I can't fault people for being unhappy about a product not meeting theirs.  At the same time, I think those same expectations sort of got us to this point in the first place.  I don't think the piecemeal approach is going to be overthrown by everyone realizing that hey, inflation happens and such, but it'd be nice.

[Velorath]

Also, where do you want to draw the line between what is considered a separate team working on a separate budget?  Is geographical location the issue for you?  If the ME and DA teams are both working in the same building, do you consider them to be working on the same project just because they might be one cubicle away from each other?  If the ME3 DLC was developed by Bioware Montreal (like the Arrival DLC was) would that make it a sufficiently different team to you rather than if it was some people picked from the ME3 team to work as a DLC team?

That's just all org-chart nonsense that has nothing to do with the end user. Deus Ex had a separate team working on bosses from a contracting budget...and? Make those bosses DLC!

At the end of the day, instead of making this into some kind of moral cause about what gamers are and aren't entitled to, isn't the only real question asking yourself if the game is worth $60 to you, and if the DLC is worth $10?

$10 DLC is almost never worth $10 if you compare what you are getting to what comes in the main game, but no, that's not the only real question. It has less to do with entitlement and more about what reasonable expectations should be and if they are being met. Meeting an NPC in game that says "pay $10 and I'll join your party!" is fucking weak. As a consumer my expectation is that if I buy the full game for the traditional full-game price I'm not instantly shamed.

I'm pretty sure you can accuse anyone doing anything of acting entitled, it's really completely meaningless.

You can do DLC that feels like an addition to a complete game or a luxury item. DLC that makes someone feel good for owning without feeling bad for not owning. The problem with a lot of the Bioware DLC is it seems designed to make you feel like you are getting an incomplete package unless you shell out more. "There's a really cool story part here with an awesome environment and it unravels a mys - oh wait, you don't have the premium version LOL!"

Of course that is by design, because to maximize revenue you want to put out day 1 DLC and you *want* people who don't buy it to feel bad. (At least until mainstream AAA gaming becomes so anti-consumer publishers have to rethink.)

I am not a big DLC fan but even I am not completely opposed. However this kind of stuff that immediately casts your $60 full game purchase as the shitty version is just lame. And the fact that it's available free by doing X Y or Z makes it look suspiciously similar to online pass stuff. Like online passes it's free for the good customers - AKA not the filthy peasants who buy used or now even the no-frills model.

Obviously what you consider to be punitive-feeling DLC is highly subjective but I think almost everyone would agree that day 1 dlc that includes party members, increased inventory slots and such feels fairly different and worse than skins and such.

These types of games exist in a weird place in that they aren't something like League of Legends where you pay low to zero but everything is a la carte, nor are they single unified experiences. I don't feel like I'm mixing and matching features to add to a base game, I just feel like there are two versions of the game at launch, one of which is shittier than the other.

Any type of quality assessment of the DLC will have to wait until after the game comes out (same goes for the base game as well really).  I see a lot of anger on boards that there's no way this character can't be completely vital to the story (I disagree but I won't go into full ME nerd details unless needed), or that it makes standard edition owners feel like second class citizens, but I think it's a little early for that discussion.

Clearly I'm a huge fan of the series.  I pre-orded the Digital Deluxe version when the free Battlefield 3 promotion was going on so with 2 games and all the other stuff that's included in the Digital Deluxe version (I'm still not entirely sure if it comes with the Soundtrack by I love me some Clint Mansell) I feel like I'm getting a pretty good value.  In the case of some other games I'd be ok with buying the game and not buying any Day 1 DLC and still feel like I got a full product.  L.A. Noire, Alan Wake, and Heavy Rain all had DLC that came at launch (in the case of L.A. Noire which had some exclusive cases from pre-ordering from certain retailers, or,out fairly quickly after launch that I never bothered with.  Hell, with Alan Wake and Heavy Rain I think some of it was free, but I felt like I had experienced a full product already, and didn't really feel like going through it.  I didn't buy the Deus Ex: HR DLC, even though it takes place during the main story, because I was done with the game, but I don't feel like a second class citizen now because I didn't experience the "full" story.  I skipped a ton of the DLC for both Dragon Age games as well because the first few I bought were fairly disappointing.

Where does a product like FFXIII-2 fall?  Here we have a game that was put together quickly largely because they wanted to get more use out of FFXIII's art assests which was a fairly costly game to make.  In this instance they got the game done comparatively quickly, recycled some stuff from the previous game, and are charging $60 for it.  Plus, they're doing DLC for it, and some of the DLC lets you play as characters from the first game that aren't playable in FFXIII-2 (the first such patch allowing you to play as pretty much the only likable character from FFXIII).  I can sit here and rage that I should get XIII-2 cheaper because it's using assets whose development I already paid for once, or I could just say that the product doesn't interest me enough to spend $60 for, plus however much all the DLC will cost.

[Margalis]

I just don't want to feel bad when I pay full price for a game. To me part of the value of a game is feeling glad I got it rather than sad that I got the shitty version.

It's like how if you buy a standard airline ticket every year airlines add another reminder that you are a low-class customer. When you board the plane there are 40 different priority classes that go before you, now there are separate check-in lines, and separate security lines. The airlines are doing everything they can to say "man, you experience sure sucks ass. Too bad you didn't pay more!"

When I get in my car a robot voice doesn't say "leather seats sure would be more comfortable - sucks to be you! Jam your credit card in this slot and I'll schedule you for seat replacement." When I play a Bioware game I expect an NPC that says "fuck you bitch, pay me $10 or I won't cooperate! Also good luck storing all those items sucker!" Or if I play a game like Marvel Ultimate Alliance when I go the character select screen I expect to see HALF the fucking characters grayed-out with the text "FUCK YOU CHEAPSKATE" superimposed over them. I really should not expect that.

I recently bought Mario 3D Land. It feels like a complete game to me. If, on the day it came out, there was $10 DLC, it would no longer feel like a complete game, even though it was objectively the same as before. But gaming is all about enjoyment and subjectivity. There's no point in being all "let's look at it objectively" because objectively there is very little reason to play games.

If $10 DLC came out a year from now for it would I feel differently? Probably. But then what if I found out it was actually developed at the same time and delayed to trick me?

I don't know, and really I don't care. It's not about the math of the value prop or what team worked on it or when or if the feature was "removed" vs designed out. There are two entirely separate things here:

1. Is the game, on it's own merits, worth the money in some respect
2. Regardless of the answer to 1, when I buy the game do I feel sad, because the developers fully intend me to feel sad, so they can upsell me and effectively raise the price of new games?

It doesn't help that for something like car upgrades I know exactly what I'm getting. I live in California, yes I want air-conditioning. I don't like leather seats, no I don't want them.

How cool is this fucking new party member and the new area and such? Who the fuck knows? For all I know it might be boring and terribly written to the point where it detracts from the game. But I don't know and I have no way to find out. Literally all I can really know is that on release the full version I just bought isn't the full version. It's not informed a la carte shopping. It's not even about having everything available. Go ahead, put up day 1 DLC with a crazy hat in it. I really don't care. In that case I know what I'm getting, I can make an informed choice.

My primary objection is that were I to buy the standard version I would feel bad, and that is very much by design. That's not my psychological quirk, that reaction is entirely expected and is supposed to drive DLC sales.

I dunno, imagine you go to a theater and there are two versions of the same movie playing, one of which costs more and has extra scenes because after the movie was shot some people who worked on the movie then shot some more scenes mumble mumble. These are not special features at the end of the movie, it just has some extra scenes. You really going to feel good when you see that your standard priced ticket doesn't get you into the "premium" version?

"But the standard one is still a good movie easily worth the price of your ticket!" Lol. That would NOT make it feel ok.

[Velorath]

1. Is the game, on it's own merits, worth the money in some respect
2. Regardless of the answer to 1, when I buy the game do I feel sad, because the developers fully intend me to feel sad, so they can upsell me and effectively raise the price of new games?

I think back in my younger days I might have been "sad" about this kind of thing for lack of a better way to put it because I had a tendency with RPG's in particular to be a completionist.  I believe it was FFX that finally broke me out of that with the stuff like dodging lightning 200 times and such.   Anyhow, these days most games wear out their welcome with me before I've even finished the game, although more often than not I'll at least push myself to finish.  A lot of the time the last thing I want to do is tack another hour or two onto a game.  ME is an exception for me, as was the Mortal Kombat reboot (bought 3 out of 4 DLC characters, my friends came over pretty frequently to play).  Deus Ex might have been if the DLC sounded interesting.  The Fallout 3 DLC was a bit hit or miss but I played through most of it.  I own but haven't tried the New Vegas DLC yet. 

In those cases, if a developer makes something I like so much that I really want more of it, especially after 20-100 hours of having played the game already, I have no problem supporting them with additional purposes.  Otherwise I don't really give a damn about missing out on DLC content.  If they put a character in the next Halo game that asks me if I want to by some premium content, I'll be a little annoyed at the in-game sales pitch (for the record, I think it was handled pretty poorly in DA:O, but I don't remember any such prompts in ME2), but I'll just move on without buying it.

[kildorn]

Man, I remember when DLC was mocked for being overpriced horse armor. So the marketing folks go "well it has to be something more meaningful than THAT", and now it's being crucified for being a character?

Really, I'll grab my pitchfork if it turns out on release that he's a huge deal to the plot and changes everything/explains a shitload. But unless that's true.. it's a CE bonus being offered to non CE owners. I actually like the idea that CE exclusives aren't entirely pinned to "and I'd like some huge random tin and some book I'll never look at again in order to get this in game content!"

[jakonovski]

edit: I misread so I'm just going to say that there's also a shirtless James Vega (aka douchelord) in the CE.

[ajax34i]

Bioware's DLC antics sound like Bethesda's "we let the devs see what they could code using the devtoolkit in 3 weeks" and players being angry that all the awesome should have already been in the vanilla Skyrim.

[Fabricated]

I know literally no one who was mad the game jam stuff wasn't in skyrim by default. I know lots of people who are mad about ME3's ridiculous DLC shit.

[jakonovski]

Bioware's DLC antics sound like Bethesda's "we let the devs see what they could code using the devtoolkit in 3 weeks" and players being angry that all the awesome should have already been in the vanilla Skyrim.

Except that this was done entirely before release (From Ashes could've been a day1 patch, or the resources could've been used to polish the game) and the Bethesda thing was part of post-launch support that culminated in comprehensive mod tools.

Bad analogies are the bane of accurate discussion.

[kildorn]

I know literally no one who was mad the game jam stuff wasn't in skyrim by default. I know lots of people who are mad about ME3's ridiculous DLC shit.

Are they mad at ME3 for having DLC missions in the CE, or are they mad about the race of the DLC character?

Because DLC missions/characters in a CE/preorder have been common for a while. The only thing new with the ME3 DLC is that the character's race is a big deal in theory.

[ajax34i]

Accurate discussion, lol.  Critical bits of information are not presently available, namely exactly what will be in the DLC, and exactly what will be "missing" from the vanilla game.

I plan to wait for a BIIF before buying ME3, and by then it'll be obvious whether this DLC is worth $10.  Bioware is EA is a faceless corporation; judge them by the quality of their product and buy or not buy.  Just like every other manufacturer.

EDIT:  The Protheans - their race is a big deal...  actually no, it's not.  Their technology is the only thing that's a big deal.  I bet you the DLC will have some idiot Prothean bum from some forsaken planet who won't know anything about anything and will just be surprised at having been cryomelted back to life.

[jakonovski]

There are no facts missing regarding the Bioware/Bethesda difference here. We know perfectly well that Bioware is releasing paid day 1 DLC, and that Bethesda ended up releasing mod tools as post-launch support for no extra charge.

edit: all I'm saying here is, let us not equate two things that are not equal.

[HaemishM]

Everyone is right though, they should have made it CE exclusive instead of selling it optionally. That would have gone over SO MUCH BETTER.

edit: I can't help but think that it's the race of the character that is causing the drama. If it was Zaeed for $10 optional DLC in the CE box, no shits would be given.

I think the fact that the DLC has a goddamn Prothean in it has a HUGE screaming deal to do with the wailing and gnashing of teeth. Didn't the goddamn Protehans build the Citadel? Aren't they the makers of the warp gates? I mean, it's essentially the goddamn Vorlons - and having them in a DLC is like showing Kosh without his environment suit, but only if you bought the deluxe package. It IS gouging, especially on a $60 game.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Unless at some point, shepard finds a lost ship/colony/planet of protheans and while you are there(if you spend money!) you can do a mission/quest for one of them who then joins your party.

Of course, I'm not buying this until it's on steam anyways.