But that isn't really the right way to be looking at things. Shadowrun Returns is not an incomplete game. It is fully playable, enjoyable and worthwhile on its own. It doesn't need the DLC to have the complete experience (lack of save anywhere was annoying, and I suppose it would've been nice for them to patch it into the original game after all the feedback they got, but I don't know, maybe it wasn't feasible). There wasn't something intentionally left out of the game so that the developers could cash in at a later point with DLC. As far as I'm aware, you won't reach a point in the game where there'll be a big burly character who'll stop you and say "Only DLC purchasers beyond this point. If you want to buy the DLC for this game, click here!"

Of course, there ARE games that do that, and it is a abhorrent practice, but it isn't universal like that.
"DLC" isn't the same as on-disc DLC (assets and features that already exist in the game files and are unlocked by purchasing DLC) or day 1 DLC or...negative DLC (dunno what else to call it, but features intentionally stripped out of a game where they make an obvious gap in the gameplay and require buying DLC for the full experience).

DLC in and of itself isn't automatically bad, not to say that many publishers don't use it in an abhorrent way.

In fact, it is a very useful tool especially for indie developers who don't have near limitless funding. If they see that lots of people like their game, instead of having to spend more money on new assets or a new engine to create a sequel (or have poor ratings or complaints about it being the same because they used almost the same assets and engine), they can focus on new campaigns or other minor flourishes.

Well... They could have called it "Shadowrun Returns 2 - Dragonfall" and make it a standalone. The outcome would have been the same -> two seperate games. Saying that Dragonfall is a rip-off, because it's cut content that should've been included in the base game, is like... like... like complaining that the core rulebook of pen & paper Shadowrun doesn't come with all additional sourcebooks and adventures! Or like complaining because you have to buy another ticket to see Lord of the Rings 2, although you already paid to see Lord of the Rings (the first one, but this doesn't matter, since 2 and 3 are cut content).

Dragonfall isn't an additional armor or weapon. It doesn't add new skills to the base game. No new areas. Nothing. It's just a new story. That's very "Pen & Paper"-ish. Yes, I agree, it shouldn't be "DLC". Standalone campaigns would be preferable. But that's just a minor detail. Nothing that would justify to blacklist a developer...

I guess I just need to skip anything less than a year or two old to avoid this. My apologies to those who feel it shouldn't put me off like it does.

They have patched the original game alright and thus you don't need to have Dragonfall to be able to save anywhere. From Dragonfall's page:
"Save Anywhere: You can save your progress at any time during the game. The new save-game functionality is available in new downloads of Shadowrun Returns and through a patch for all existing copies."

I don't see RTC Mobile on here, and Dungeon Keeper is now the gold edition.
Thanks, and I agree somewhat. I just find it irritating to be surprised by new content coming out.

Good guy Harebrained Schemes :D

No. No, you can't. Yes, there are some examples where this is clear, but that's certainly not the majority of DLC here on GOG. Even the infamous Omerta DLC might have gotten some additional coding. Or not. I wouldn't know, because I didn't work with their internal toolkit. Did you?

Oh, I see what you are saying. In such an instance though, there is at least new writing.

I object mainly two aspects of DLCs:

1. If there are lots of tiny DLCs, it just makes buying games much more effort. It is easy to say "don't buy DLCs you don't like, like cosmetic ones. Buy only the important DLCs.", but there's the catch: how the heck do I know from two dozen tiny DLCs, which of them are really 100% cosmetic or completely irrelevant to me, and which make the game more enjoyable to me? If a DLC offers a new weapon and/or a new vehicle to the base game, is that an irrelevant DLC or not? How do I know without playing it first? Maybe someone else felt that e.g. that big truck in Far Cry 2 was quite irrelevant, but to me it wasn't. I much prefer playing FC2 with it, than without. Someone else might consider it only "cosmetic" as there are lots of other (smaller) vehicles as well in the game.

I still recall trying to figure out which DLCs for Darkstalkers 2 were "important" and which "cosmetic". The DLC descriptions on e.g. the Steam page were pretty useless, they didn't really open it up for me in "This DLC you definitely want" or "This DLC you could skip just as well". After all, it would be pretty poor marketing to make some DLC seem irrelevant.

2. Like many have suggested, waiting for the Complete GOTY edition is one solution I could also follow, as then I don't have to go through the pain in the previous point. But as others have said, it seems the publishers are playing with those too, ie. sometimes the "complete" versions don't have even all the currently released DLCs, or there are still some future additions. I was first interested in e.g. the Mass Effect Trilogy, but judging by the reviews it missed some pretty important DLCs for unknown reasons. Why would EA do that? The only explanation I can find is to milk a bit more from people who thought they'd be getting "the whole package" with the compilation

http://www.gamefront.com/surprise-the-mass-effect-trilogy-wont-include-all-dlc/
http://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/98921/what-do-i-need-to-complete-my-mass-effect-trilogy-collection

If DLC mainly meant a few (max 3, hopefully less) bigger additional "expansion packs", then I wouldn't really mind them. I am not necessarily against the idea of making additional content for the game afterwards.

Kudos to CDPR though to make such content in a form of free DLC. :)

Ronimo Games

Those guys made a Kickstarter campaign to gather funds for a DLC, despite the fact that their game is bad (I can't remember a multiplayer as bad) and incredible they got the money.

Thanks, this expresses it better than I did.

How Dare They?! They are destroying Social Welfare by releasing it Free!

I guess you wouldn't buy games like Doom, DN3D, or Quake since they had a bunch of expansions and mission packs. Oh, don't forget about Neverwinter Nights, which had quite a few expansions. Rollercoaster Tycoon as well.