Those who don't will miss the "more story" thing, which is being screwed. Of course, they can always pay more after the season pass for the DLC itself, which makes them double-screwed.

You don't make sense. You have to be fair here. The developers want to profit too.

You are given an opportunity to save your money, but you refused. The only way to get the DLCs is by buying them individually, which costs more, but you were given an opportunity which you refused. And I would say it's pretty fair. If you say no, that makes you greedy, not Naughty Dog.

You're missing the point, totally. There's no problem (Well, a bit yes) by including story DLC. What we're discussing is the fact that if the DLC will include fundamental, integral part of the story, and not something post-credits.

And I don't see what's the problem. I'M THE ONE PAYING. I HAVE THE RIGHT TO COMPLAIN. By that logic, people shouldn't complain about the One.  Well, no. Sorry.

What if you don't care about the multiplayer thing at all? You have to shut up too and buy the Season pass? You're still being screwed.

I can't be greedy if I'm the one paying for this. I could totally wait until I find this game used by a price of 15$ and purchase then. If they want people to buy it brand new 60$, they can be a bit more considerate.

Well that's a marketing strategy. They don't want to lose money. What is the point of making the season pass cheap, and making all individual DLCs cheap as well?

And sure you can be greedy if you are the one paying. If you want everything to be as cheap as you want, and make the producer lose money. That makes you greedy.

I like paying for things that are complete, thank you very much.

By that logic, you are saying Red Dead Redemption is incomplete, because it has a side-story DLC(Undead Nightmare)?

Well, I call BullCr@p.

I call that Game of the Year edition, buddy. And I don't remember season pass for Red Dead Redemption.