The 6 dollar characters I was referring to are digital not physical, I believe physical figures cost $15, on a brighter note Nintendo has been doing MK8 DLC right.

Could not have said it better... Thanks for making my day.

It's still the same thing, CapCom's on disc DLC (disk locked content), which should come with the core game. If they spout 16 playable characters but in fine print say only one's unlocked by default and you need pieces or DLC to unlock it, it's crap. At least the physical Skylanders you still have a figurine you can play with, so you can almost get away with it... almost...

Doesn't help they are targeting an age category that doesn't understand economics, and the only way to get them is by kids begging mom and dad to buy it for them, or getting it as a gift during Christmas.

I just wish it would all go away...

Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow is probably my favorite game of all time, but if the game were made today i belive the true ending and the Julius mode would've be dlc.

I only buy what I conisder "Proper" DLC, be it a extra mission or what DICE is doing in Battlefields with packs containing new weapons and maps and vehicles.
Wasn't Capcom responisble for the who whole true ending fiasco with Asura'a Wrath?

I didn't bother that much with DLC yet, so I have no clue about the most horrible ones. The Bioware DLCs (e.g. for the Mass Effect series) are quite expensive (in some cases more so than the games nowaday, making 2-4 hours extras more expensive than 40 hours of regular gameplay). And they hardly ever go on sale, and they're also complicated to buy. But they also offer actual content that worth's paying for if you're a fan. So they're not horrible, just a bit overpriced.

This one might not quite count, since it's for a F2P game, but here's a new character class and a bunch of items for 70 Euro: Neverwinter Dragonborn Legend Pack. ;)

What about the infamous horse armor dlc for oblivion?

Infact what was the controversy for that dlc? didn;t everyone know it was only cosmetic?

It did add some hp to the horse as well

DLC without worth, such as a skin change or a little worthless tweak (adding in cheats or such) are cash grabs, but ones people can choose to ignore.

I like games with plenty of content and when a developer wants to add extra on after the game is released I feel add-on packs are a great way to do it. The developer sees money so they are willing to put the effort in and the good ones I have always felt were a good price to quality.
Add-on packs are still considered DLC in our day and age, which is where we need to be careful. I actually enjoyed the SotS:Mindgames. It is a real add-on pack, where as the latest one (Juggernault) is a conventional DLC(skimpy add-on). I have not experienced much more in SotS:The Pit (I still suck big time), but the game is so enjoyable I actually wanted more, so these DLC/add-ons are a price I am willing to pay to play the extra bits of the game.
Because I am willing to pay the developer is motivated to add more to the game, keeping people interested. So in some respects good DLC is good for gamers and developers. We just need to try and ignore so much more of the bad DLC, and hope that in time the developers and publishers will learn. I know, those are nothing but a cash grab. The problem is I really want the Ironman and racoon ones. No interest in the game itself though, just the models.

These four. They cost 40%-50% as much as the base game, two adds a few maps, the other two a few vehicles, all were released on the same month as the base game. Don't think things can get uglier than that.

This one. Decided to go hunt for reviews of the other 2 DLCs as well.
And the series is actually a gold mine for abusive behaviour. See here, upper right corner.

I don't mind "trivial" DLC like costume packs, because it's perfectly easy to just not buy them. And I don't mind extensive DLC, that adds real value for my money (most of the Bioware DLC I've bought). So ... I don't actually mind most DLC at all, really, even if it's fashionable.

I guess I don't usually like DLC that adds new characters to the game, which Bioware and I suppose some others have done. It always feels like cut content to me, and it encourages story-telling where the actual characters don't matter to the story they're a part of (since the writers can't even know what the cast of the story they're writing is.)

As an overall concept, I like the idea of DLC; allowing game makers to create additional content for a game after release in order to enhance or extend the gameplay experience. Unfortunately, the bitter truth is that greedy game companies are taking advantage of this concept and twisting it into an attempt to get as much money out of their customers as possible. It is a real shame and one that I hope will die out someday. I don't know that it will, but a man can still hope.

All of that said, the worst kind of DLC is the kind that is developed and then never released. Sometimes games are not as successful as the publisher had originally hoped and so, instead of releasing the DLC in an attempt to get what few dollars they can from the few people who bought the game, they just abandon the DLC altogether. Now, for an example:

Hellboy: The Science of Evil was a game based off of the Hellboy comic books which featured the cast of the Hellboy movies as the voices of their respective characters. The game is a decent action/adventure title that launched near the release of the second film (it even came with a free movie ticket, too). The first player always controls Hellboy, but a second player can join in as either Liz Sherman or Abe Sapien. Alas, the game did not sell well. The real tragedy is that Konami had held back a fourth playable character, Lobster Johnson (as voiced by Bruce Campbell). The voice credit can even be seen in the games ending credits which lead some people to believe that the content was either on-disc or pulled out very close to release. Either way, the DLC was never released and there is no way to enable that character without it. As a fan of Bruce Campbell, I find this to be a real shame.

Depends, are we differentiating expansions from dlc?

Red Dead Redemption Undead Nightmare is awesome and worth it;
Some of the Fallout 3/NV expansions were awesome and worth it;
GTA4 expansions were awesome and worth it;
etc

Now, if we're talking about small stuff (pack of weapons, a single mission, cheats, a pack of cars, etc), they're all horrible and should not be supported, that's the kind of stuff you give to your userbase to keep loyalty and keep them for selling their games (well, on the consoles).

Now, when it comes to multiplayer, that's the worst part because that will split the community and the new maps or modes will mostly empty, Valve does it right, they keep their fanbase hooked to the game, give them free maps and weapons, sell a new version for cheap and make money out of cosmetic stuff. Then again, they barely release games and most of their money comes from Steam...