It surprises me that there are people that buy packs with money but it appears to be the case. I could understand it if they offered weapons and character cards for money but buying packs only to get repeated characters and weapons that you can't even trade isn't worth real money to me.

You've never played Magic the Gathering, it would seem :P (*looks at his pile of "common" junk cards*)

Actually I did. Common junk cards could be used for proxies, traded when somebody discovered they weren't as crappy as initially thought (I'm looking at you artifact lands), or used for playing "super deck".
Repeated character cards in ME3 just give experience to their respective class and most people already maxed out all the classes.

I was exaggerating a bit with the Magic reference. There are Magic cards that are objectively worse than others though though (would you rather (for 1 red mana) have: A 1/1 creature, a 2/1 creature or a 1/1 creature that you can sacrifice and deal 1 damage to any one target), and getting one of these is considered to be just as bad as getting one card less. Never did play with proxies though... (I stopped playing Magic when I started playing Warhammer. This was back in 98)

I accidentally bought too many "bioware points" once and decided I might as well buy one of the ME2 weapon packs so see what they are doing in that space. I have to admit, the new weapons played significantly differently and added some freshness to the game for a second playthrough. I remember the pistol that removed the reticule but added a laser sight changing the gameplay a lot.

For a couple bucks those things are worth it to some people, and I can kind of see why if it's your favorite recent game and you have money to spare. I'm not going to start buying them but I kind of get it after my experience.

That's not really what they do in ME3 though. The ME3 stuff is random chances at items and unlocks. You can earn them too by being generally successful in the game. What you're talking about I get and like in some cases. It's all for multiplayer, and all of it is random. That cool gun you're talking about? It could just end up being experience points for a class you don't even like to play. Or your 8th upgrade for a weapon accessory you never use.

I was only talking about the multiplayer only packs on Mass Effect 3. Think MTG or Pokemon boosters that you buy to get weapons and characters only for MP.

Gotcha, my mistake. I don't play multiplayer anything so it's hard for me to comment.

That doesn't excuse the behavior of corporations like EA. Just because the point of a corporation is to make money, doesn't mean, they are automatically only responsible for making money. I believe EA is responsible for selling high quality products at a fair price to all. Is there a good reason why they can't do this? Greed is not a good reason. Of course, I desire to live in a world that is fair, a world where you give up your hard earned money for something of value. A world where those in power are kind to those underneath them. If you desire something else, then of course you will disagree with me. No point in arguing. I'm just sharing my point of view.

All good and true. The point is that EA follows the money. If the players pays for DLC and goods like that, then there's a demand that EA sees a need to fill.
I'm not saying I agree with it. I am saying that's how it is. That's how EA does their business. They experiment to see how far they can go, how they can get a little more out of their franchises, and if the players still buy the products, then they take that as proof of theory.
With other words, if players want to hit EA where it truly hurts, then they need to get their act together. As long as we buy, EA will produce. I personally don't see EA doing anything morally wrong; this is a company that exists to serve a market. The market says go, they go. The market says change, they change. Right now, its the former. The majority of their costumers seems to be either cool or indifferent about their practises, so as long as the money keep rolling in, EA will continiue with buisness as usual. That's their way.
So yes, it is very much up to the players where EA goes from here. The capital decides.

Yes, that is how it is and will be for a very long time or forever but I think some of the things EA has done is morally wrong. For example, charging 50 to 60 euro for a game and then charging you for DLC, that is extremely important to the game(not an additional weapon or something like that). That is taking advantage of people. Not as bad as stealing but close. Do they have to do things like this to keep the machine going?

I wouldn't say any of the DLC I have seen so far is "extremely important". Sure, the Prothean character in ME3 was interesting, but hardly a requirement for enjoying the game. It was an experiment to find out if people would pay that little extra, while giving the collectors what they had asked for: exclusive ingame content rather than plastic statues. People bought it - hence proof of theory as far as EA is concerned.
Also keep in mind that DLC keeps people working. Better than being laid off. I'd think.

I was talking about the content from games that gets ripped out and sold as DLC for extra money, the same day the games come out. I'm all for DLC being made, sold and purchased after a complete game has been released, as long as the prices are reasonable.

I boycott games if they have day 1 DLC.

However, I don't mind paying for content a few months depending whether it was meant to be in the game to begin with. For example if the game is rushed out in an incomplete state and core content is then added DLC.

Egosoft is a great company. I loved the X series and they released new content always for free. The content included player stations and entire campaigns, as well as bug fixes.