First off, thanks JMich! :D

It's fun to see how the industry has evolved.

Although, to be comparable, this would have to be "Day -1 Expansions" - that is any expansions that were announced before the release of the actual game itself.

Adding content isn't new. DLC isn't exactly new. I don't think that there is anything really new here except a bit of rebranding and a spit shine with the ol' hype machine.

I don't have an issue with DLC - but it is somewhat disconcerting that we are being asked to stump up more cash for additional content without knowing what the main game is like. You can't determine their value if you have nothing to compare them against.

IIRC, DOOM was actually released as shareware, which used a different format. You got to play the first episode, and then paid for the rest IF YOU LIKED THEM. You can't really equate this to any form of DLC, per se, simply because it served as more of a playable demo.

Plus, at least the demo gave you some sort of reference to the value of the additional content.

Sorry, but I don't consider these to be expansion packs. I have been spoilt by the mod community, I guess.

A primary example here is Command & Conquer: Red Alert - it had two "expansions" - Counter Strike and Aftermath. The first of these was simply a scenario disk, and was acceptable if it wasn't eclipsed by the second expansion - which included new units. Since then, the standard for the franchise has been new units and extra gameplay in an expansion - whereas the previous standard was the scenario disk, which was all the previous instalment received.

A more recent example is the Sims - which has had phenomenal success as a franchise selling expansions and DLC with it's FOUR incarnations. However, it soon learnt to establish a difference between Expansions, "Stuff Packs" (i.e. a shed load of additional themed objects), and DLC (which focused primarily on new "worlds", single additional objects, and small sets of items that can be purchased individually).

A recent survey by EA about marketing for The Sims 4 saw that there was a demand for different tiers of additional content. These mainly broke down into three "tiers":

Additional Content using Existing Gameplay (Stuff Packs with more content)
Additional Content around a single new Gameplay Concept (Gameplay Packs)
Additional Content with a number of new Gameplay Concepts, including at least one significant gameplay changing mechanic (Expansion Packs).

The thing is that for most people, Expansion Packs should be of the third tier. Yet, the freebies being offered are of the first tier (which is most commonly associated with DLC). What CDPR is offering is of the second tier - the singular new gameplay concept being either new/expanded quest lines in the first offering, and a new area to explore in the second.

Your point? Yes, I am getting old for games...

That said, the issue with longevity is that aside from being a subjective matter, you actually get diminishing returns from a game the longer that you play it. This doesn't have to be in a single session, or even a single game. The first hour of playing a game will be different from the 200th hour of playing it.

Thus, a content update that adds 20+ hours of gameplay to a 200+ hour game already isn't that big of a deal, particularly if there is nothing new to add to the gameplay. This is because it has to be compared with the first 20+ hours of a second (or third) playthrough of the game itself.

That doesn't mean that there aren't people that want this type of content however. You only have to look at all those players of the Sims that bought their 200th sofa for their games... it's just that unless that is specifically what you want, the 200th sofa just isn't going to have the same impact as their 2nd, or even their 20th sofa...

I can see your point, JMich, and that is why this entirely smacks of damage limitation. The problem is that people don't actually work that way - in fact, trying to use damage limitation will often actually provoke the exact type of damage that was trying to be limited. The reason for this is that it highlights the concern of the damage in the first place.

Did CDPR really say that there was never going to be DLC for TW3? Do people really expect that if TW3 was successful, they would just jump to TW4 and NOT consider releasing future DLC? The standard pattern has always been a main game, and then a number of expansions, before moving on to another game.

The real factor here is that there are two different concerns that CDPR had to deal with, and they effectively prioritised one over the other.

The first concern was the completionists that yearn to have a complete game on release. They don't want to feel that they are paying for a game, only for them to have to pay for additional content later on, especially when that content is likely to be bundled in a deal later on.

However the second concern is that without the main game in circulation, there's nothing to value the additional content on. We are being asked to make a commitment now, which is entirely based on TW3 branding and hype, rather than any concrete evidence. This provokes issues like decision paralysis and the fear of missing out, because people end up playing out possible scenarios in their head. Ultimately, however, they are forced to gamble - do they take the deal now and hope for a good game, or do they wait until it is released, when the pre-order deals are no longer around?

DLC isn't bad if it is value for money. The Horse Armour debacle was about the fact that it had no real value. It wasn't about the fact that it was DLC.

That is the same here - none of the complaints are about the Expansion Pass being DLC. It is primarily about the fact that it is impossible to percieve the value of the proposed DLC, and the effects that it appears to have on the percieved value of TW3 itself.

Ultimately, what CDPR is actually offering is a pre-order for a $75 game, or a pre-order for a $50 game with bits missing. It might seem strange, but that is how people tend to think. The fear of missing out is a powerful psychological motivator, and it can and will be ruthlessly used in sales. It's not very customer friendly, however.

By waiting, CDPR could have reduced the effect that FOMO would have had on the customer. There is a greater chance that customers will have picked up the TW3, and become a fan that would have bought the additional DLC willingly once they could percieve it's value. Instead, CDPR jumped the gun, and have just managed to alienate a lot of the people who were willing to pre-order TW3 and take a risk...

Trust me, there are fates far worse than becoming another EA.
Like, for example, becoming another JoWood or, say, another Troika.

Because...? Take away the option to purchase and it's an announcement. There's no pre-order incentive (yet?). Could they have handled the announcement better? Maybe, depending on the circumstances which saw them announce now rather than later. Should I freak out and imagine them as pseudo-EA? No.

It can be hard to differentiate between being lied to and the general feeling of being manipulated and feeling betrayed.

Whether this is intentional by CDPR is irrelevant, since most people are expressing concern, relating their personal feelings, and reacting based on new information.

With the Expansion Pass, GOG has 1000 games. I thought that it would be cause for celebration. Why do I have a sour taste in my mouth?

Update: With the post by iWi, the sour taste has been replaced by Cherries Jubilee. What iWi said makes perfect sense. I wish that it had been said a lot earlier; like several days before the release of the Expansion Pass. Communicate. Communicate. Communicate.

Their timing is off.

I've got the Witcher 3 pre-ordered here on gog.com, not something I normally do and for me it's a pretty big investment. But I have faith in these guys and I want to support them.

But now you're telling me my money isn't good enough and that you want more money for me to have the "full experience".

Sure - making games is expensive. But they should have let the basic game stand on its own legs before they started asking us to spend more money for expansions.

You can slice it any way you want it, you can call it something else. But to me this is day zero DLC. It might be very good DLC but it's still DLC.

They should have held off with the expansions for 6 months, made them perfect, and then said "actually sorry - they are so big and cost so much money to make that we can't give them away for free". I could have respected that.

At least they should offer a good pre-order deal for us who signed up early.

Please, excuse my English.

A-effing-greed.

Day one DLCs are DLCs that are released on release date, not DLC announced at or before release date.

Also having expansion announced before the release date is not really anything new (and I am talking about expansion and not DLCs), the recently released Pillars of Eternity had an expansion announced long before release date, same thing for War for the Overlord, Shadowrun, etc...

I'd like to add that in the past they helped each other and used each other assets to generate growth.
They worked together in symbiosis so while they are separate one's failure would definitely not be good for the other.

What's wrong with GOG/CDP RED PR these days. You would THINK they'd understand their audience by now but they've been running from PR disaster to PR disaster for at least a year now. You'd also think their PR department would eventually learn from their mistakes but instead they repeat same mistakes again and again every few months. How is it possible they managed to turn announcement that could've been great given correct timing and wording into this nonsense.

It's sad that I don't even really get that upset from these anymore, it's happened so often that I'm thinking more in lines of "here they go again". Shows how much much my expectations have gone down over the years. I suppose I should've learned not to have high expectations for anything by now as I'll only get disapointed when those expectations eventually fall short. And they always do, eventually.

The original DOOM had 3 episodes, one of which was available in the shareware version. If you got The Ultimate DOOM, you had 4 episodes. "The Complete DOOM Accessory Pack" contained wad files to increase the number of available maps, though I think you needed to replace the current ones, or at least run the game with a parameter. So they did release map packs for DOOM, similar to DLCs.

You said that "more of the same" is no longer perceived as being of value. For a teenager or a kid, more of the same is exactly what they crave. As you grow older, "more of the same" ends up boring, not exciting. Nostalgia is usually a case that ignores said point, mainly because we all have a game that we can play over and over again and not get bored by it.

I would just like to echo these sentiments as I believe Pheace and Wishbone have nailed the problem that most people have with this Expansion Pass preorder potential cash grab given CDPR's history. I whole heartedly agree that had CDPR just announced these expansions without immediately asking people to pay for it while the main game isn't even out yet then it would have been mostly received with enthusiasm, especially if The Witcher 3 turns out to be everything they have promised and surpasses people's expectations.

I hope the PR department is paying attention to these posts instead of sleeping at the desk and compiling most of the Good News™ announcements in a red bull infused frenzy. As the saying goes "actions speak louder then words" so yeah its good to hear that CDPR is giving away 16 DLCs for free but we don't know what all of them are yet. I mean sure we have heard the game would be a 200+ hour experience with a seamless open world where players can explore as far as they can see, but we can't be certain until people actually play it. Its easy to talk the talk and say they are really different then other big bad developers and publishers but they should also show us with their actions.

This was a great opportunity for CDPR to change the trend of propagating the preorder culture and selling additional non-existent content on the promise of it being worthwhile. I mean seriously, we don't even have screenshots from the expansions and yet its page is up on GOG so that people can buy it practically on blind faith. Now ofcourse CDPR can't go back in time and undo what has been done but I sincerely hope that they have learned something from this experience so they can apply the knowledge for their future releases. If you truly want to stand out from the industry then please stop following the same marketing trend as the rest of the companies that are out to nickle and dime consumers every chance they get.

All the people that support CDPR for being the good guys really want is to actually see you guys doing things differently then the standard practices of this bottom line focused industry. Part of the reason for this really strong reaction is that a lot of people have preordered just to show their support despite not even having a system capable of running the game and would never consider doing so for a game by any other company. So it is my humble request that you think about the constructive things that have been highlighted by a lot of folks here and respond because then we would know that you are indeed listening to the feedback of your customers, thank you.

Actually, I don't think that either Gods and Kings or Brave New World were "intentionally left out" - rather they were things and ideas that people felt were missing that were in previous instalments.

That's why these are expansions - they add significant content and game play changes that makes you wonder how they ever got by without them.

Interestingly enough, I think that the DLC for Civ V waned significantly after the first expansion was released. Previously, they were releasing content that was already being released by modders.

I also recently picked up the Digital Edition of Talisman. This has a lot of DLC of different types. The "Runestones" and extra characters are your classic DLC fare - and really aren't worth it unless you are a die hard fan. However, the actual expansions ARE worth it - and are exactly the same as the expansion for the board game itself.

Technically, this makes the expansions "intentionally left out content" but given the value and worth of the original board game expansions, seeing the evolution of the game makes this much more acceptable...

Why the heck are people bitching about this? This is not DLC, this is EXPANSIONS. Have we all forgotten what those are? And, geez, 20 bucks for 2 REAL Expansion Packs (Less than what Bungie charged for Destiny Expansion Packs). And these expansion packs are being developed AFTER the actual game is done. Add on, for free, all the DLC that is going to be offered and this is a great option / value. That of course is assuming you find value in the core game, etc..

Again, bitching about REAL expansion packs being SOLD, due to the cost associated with making them, is stupid. That is a fact. You can judge the actual value of those expansion as information comes out, naturally, but charging for them does not make the company evil, etc.. It is just logical and just.

Expansion packs are normally used to update the engine and adjust the gameplay with new mechanics, without requiring a total overhaul of the entire game. Thus, the existing software could be used to give new life into the game itself.

Some franchises actually use expansion packs to extend the life cycle of their game significantly, adding more and more to the game, without requiring a total restart, which is normally required after a few years when existing game play is examined and drastically altered to the point that it is actually better to rebuild the engine from scratch than simply add to it.

Bear in mind that new games are not necessarily sequels in anything other than production history. For example, the Sims 3 was made after the Sims 2, yet it is in fact more of a prequel (it is "set" before the Sims) than a sequel...