By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Witcher 3 season pass announced

Ruler on 07 April 2015
Volterra_90 said:
Technically they were not lying. 16 free DLCs and not-so-free "expansions". Expansions = DLCs in my mind, but, I might be wrong. It's only a matter of semantics.


Its DLC. Expansions would be if they would release both DLCs as standalone retail versions like sony did for First Light in Europe for Infamious second son.



Around the Network
Volterra_90 on 07 April 2015
Ruler said:
Volterra_90 said:
Technically they were not lying. 16 free DLCs and not-so-free "expansions". Expansions = DLCs in my mind, but, I might be wrong. It's only a matter of semantics.


Its DLC. Expansions would be if they would release both DLCs as standalone retail versions like sony did for First Light in Europe for Infamious second son.

Okay, I see the diference. But in the end, they are similar. The only difference is giving it as a standalone physical release or as a digital downloadable content. I don't actually mind the "format" of the release, only that the expansion/DLC is valuable.



Acevil on 07 April 2015
shikamaru317 said:
Lol, I really don't understand some of you guys. With Witcher 3 you get 200 hours of content for $60, compared to most AAA games nowadays that have 30 hours of content or less for $60. You get 16 free DLC's, the kind of stuff that most companies charge for (costumes, hair styles, horse armor, etc.), as well as new questlines. You get a selection of free physical goodies in the game case (map, soundtrack,etc.), a practice that died out years ago (most games don't even have an instruction manual in the case nowadays). And then you complain when they announce 2 substantial expansions (30 hours combined) that you have to pay for? *facepalm*


I think this is much tamer, than the previous thread regarding DLC. Some people are just really picky on the whole concept of DLC. While I understand and accept it. 



 

Skullwaker on 07 April 2015

Just like XCX, I don't have a problem with this considering the amount of content in the standalone game. As long as it doesn't cut crucial elements out of the story, it's fine imo.



Official Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE Thread

                                      

Ruler on 07 April 2015
Volterra_90 said:
Ruler said:


Its DLC. Expansions would be if they would release both DLCs as standalone retail versions like sony did for First Light in Europe for Infamious second son.

Okay, I see the diference. But in the end, they are similar. The only difference is giving it as a standalone physical release or as a digital downloadable content. I don't actually mind the "format" of the release, only that the expansion/DLC is valuable.


Standalone actually allows you to just pay 20-30 bucks and playing without the main game, dlc requires you to own the 60$ main game



Around the Network
Areym on 07 April 2015

Sounds like major adventures and not 2-3 hours forgettable tales of nothing. The game is suppose to have tons of content already, without DLC, so this is more for the true devout Witcher fans. If it's your first time with Witcher, probably best not to purchase the season pass right away.



"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian

Jizz_Beard_thePirate on 07 April 2015

Sighh oh well, I guess they couldn't give free dlc forever



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850

QUAKECore89 on 07 April 2015

Looks like i'll have to wait for GOTY edition.



chocoloco on 07 April 2015

Almost every open world game has had dlc for a long time. No big fucken deal.

The Witcher 2 did, but I do not remember what the missions were because I came to the Witcher well after it originally released on a version with the dlc included.



Zekkyou on 07 April 2015

As i said in the XCX DLC thread, if they're made after the core games goes gold, and introduce interesting new areas and side-stories (similar to Skyrim), i'm totally fine with this.