Thoughts on DLC?

I personally don't need it. I'm not a completionist, and I barely have the interest or time to finish the games I do play before moving onto new ones. I'm all for supporting developers, but I personally don't need anymore on the base game. I do however, disapprove of all the shady business some developers have been doing in this area.

What about you guys?

Depends on how it's used

If it generally adds to the experience, makes me want to go back to a game and is worth the price, I'm all for it. There's certain games I don't want to stop playing and DLC/Expansions allow me to continue playing. The Witcher 3 did this very well I thought.

I'll only buy it for game I love though, I was disappointed with Fallout 4, therefore I'm not going to buy its expansions

I don't mind them. However, when a company offers a DLC to a game that already has that part but you can't play that part because it is not added I don't approve that. I don't know if you People remember Assassin's Creed II one of the sequences were only accessible after the release of the DLC.

DLC is fine when it´s actually new content and not just tidbits that has been removed from the main game. But unfortunately most companies use it the wrong way today. And that is just crap it´s bad for gaming.

Depends on how much I enjoy the game. I do tend to wait for the "GOTY edition" or "Definitive" versions to come out most of the time though.
I cannot stand when DLC is released in weeks, or less, of a game's initial release. What a slap on the face.

I don't have a problem with dlc myself. Just like the games themselves if I'm interested in it then I'll buy it.

DLC is just a tool and like any tool, it can be used for both good and bad. When it is used to add new content that otherwise would have never been created after the game has already been out then it is good and if I really like the game, I will probably purchase it. On the other hand, when developers just withhold content from the main game so they can sell it as DLC, that's a bad use of DLC and I try not to support that.

Dark Souls (series) and Bloodborne benefits from DLC.

Overall depends how it's done or handled to be honest. Some I like, most I don't.

I don't buy it, unless it's a GOTY edition that includes the DLC.

Should always be free :)

Depends. I loved the Witcher 3 and Skyrim DLC. Usually I'm done with the game after I beat the story.

I don't dislike DLC per say, though I highly prefer DLC that is identical to an Expansion Pack. Such as Blood and Wine for the Witcher 3, Far Harbour for Fallout 4. Meaning it adds not only a new location but also new features, additional story etc.

Cosmetic DLC I also generally don't mind since it's merely cosmetical and isn't required to fully enjoy a game, which makes it entirely optional.

DLC I do dislike are things like the Javik DLC for Mass Effect 3, or the "Augment your pre-order" that Deus Ex - Mankind divided tried out ( though they withdrew it after the blacklash). DLC that deliberatly removes or resticts a part of the game behind a request for additional money is something I do dislike. Simply cause it comes off as an attempt to squeeze out more money from you in a sort of passive blackmail manner. And while it is entirely optional, it's still rather sour to get that presented to you.

CD Projekt Red showed how to do DLC correctly

Do you also work for free? or do you expect your effort to be rewarded with a wage?

I am fine with DLC which are actual extra work and not taken from content that would otherwise be in the game, comes with a price. Content that clearly have been taken from the main game and cut into DLC like EA do and 2K did with MAfia is shit and should be free.

I think you forgot Rockstar did that long before CDPR came out with their "dlc"