I'm a fan of no expansions or DLC (other than vanity items) in games, like it used to be before last gen and how it still is for the most part with Nintendo games.

Developers should concentrate into getting all the content in a game beforehand, and then work on new, better games after, not some shitty map that they'll sell you for $5 a pop (and when they are gracious enough to give them for free, people gush for them, even if they make up for it by selling core gameplay elements instead).

Also, isn't a season pass essentially Day 1 DLC? A company is basically telling you that they are already developing content that you will have to pay for, and they want you to pay for the (non-existing at that point) content is advance. It's almost worse, tbh. 

Just because I don't roll over and quietly ignore the fact that companies are using the same terrible strategies that crappy free-to-play mobile games do dosen't mean that I'm "a fan of a Company its devs can charge for whatever they want".

I'm a fan of companies that charge the standard $60 (or less) for a fulfilling game, and then for extra content sell vanity items. Companies like Nintendo, Valve, etc. Sony makes tons of amazing games that don't use the crappy expansion format, and I love those too. 

Oh, gotcha, sorry for the mistake.

I agree with expansion packs for some games (like World of Warcraft, Starcraft, etc) where the developers put a ton of work into the game because the game is going to last a long time in terms of lifespan.

I just don't support it for yearly franchises. 

so what is the problem here?

the season pass is 20€

it gave us a new class and MP abilities, it's going to give us a new co-op mode, and then 2-3 more additions to both MP and CO-OP modes (not maps). Value is only poor if you buy these things separately.

Every other FPS with MP sells 2-3 maps in a 15-20€ pack. Now that is atrocious. The 50€ season passes we see don't even have the same amount of content of KZ's season pass. Or if they do, they have the "same", but cost nearly 3 times more.

Except it's things that should have been included in the main game. I mean, c'mon charging for co-op? That's just low. I have Killzone, the game isn't worth the full $60, let alone the $20 they want for a season pass.

Just because other games do it worse dosen't mean it's any better. I prefer not to choose the lesser of the two evils. Gameplay modes are not at all hard to include in a normal game, it's the monetization strategy that companies use to squeeze money out of fans. Until people stop being suckers for it, they'll continue to get worse. They use the same strategy free-to-play games do, except they charge you $60 up front for an incomplete game, and have the audacity to ask you $20 for a Day 1 season pass that you'll need to complete the game.

Edit: And by the way, every other FPS offers season passes too. It's not just Killzone where the DLC is "only" $20.

"I have Killzone, the game isn't worth the full $60"

Yes. Yes it is.

Sell the maps and give the modes.

Graphics look nice and clean. Gameplay, meh. That art though, wtf. Why is the Marksman model covered in blades like Batman's vambrace? Looks stupid.

About the maps discussion, I agree with people who say give the maps away free but sell the modes. What happens when you sell maps is it can splinter the online community into groups of people with the premium content and those without. So if you wanna play a certain mode in a playlist, when maps are premium DLC, it becomes harder to experience them on those modes because you also have people without the DLC pooled into the playlist. The alternative is to create a DLC only playlist, which virtually every game does now, until a point in time when enough people with the DLC are playing to where you can get new maps a decent amount of time in the standard playlists. Where as with premium playlists, everyone has the maps, you just play the modes.

However, LOL @ praising them for giving out free maps. The game launched with what, 9 or 10? That's a low amount of maps for an online shooter. Even with the free ones, it will basically approach the 14-16 number that is pretty standard.

Another good reason for avoiding map DLC is it's Killzone. I read a lot about how deserted the online game is, imagine if maps were premium DLC there. You'd almost never get a chance to play them.

LOL you don't have to buy something they made after the game came out.  You know I generally don't agree with the people that say gamers complain too much these days, but sure as hell see where their point of view comes from.  Response like this.

You don't but I can't help but to feel shafted that I have to buy incomplete games with Day 1 Season Passes, knowing that if I want the full experience I will have to pay more money down the road. I don't have to buy the DLC if I don't want to, but then I have a gimped game that is incomplete. It's like buying a movie, and the company selling it to you takes out some important scenes, and tells you to buy them seperately. 

Yes, I will complain about it, because that's how change happens. If the community isn't vocal and just lies down and pretends that everything is perfectly fine, companies wil feel no need to change their practices. 

Only people who suck at the genre prefer co op..... 

...yeah.  I prefer co op on FPS and TPS games too.

I'm j/k with this post.