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

Forums - Gaming - Witcher 3 season pass announced

Volterra_90 said:
Ruler said:


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

I'm definitely stuck in the past. I remember buying an expansion for The Sims and it didn't work without the main game (I was young... lol). On topic, the point is that if the main game has a lot of content (and I think that The Witcher 3 will have it) and the DLCs/expansions/whatever are worth the prize, I'm fine with it. I really hate when you have to pay like 20 bucks for a 2 hours mission or something like that. That's abussive. I like how Nintendo handle the DLCs with Mario Kart, or Tecmo Koei with Hyrule Warriors or From Software with Dark Souls II (I know some people find them expensive, but I don't think so). And The Witcher 3 with the expansion pass costs 75 bucks. 5 more than The Order: 1886. Sorry to bring this game in the topic, but I think the contrast is clear.

The order costs now 30$ new



My online systems: Mac M4 Apple sillicon+16 GB, PC Vega 56+Amd Ryzen+32GB DDR4, Xbox Series X, PS4 Pro, Switch Lite, Playstation Vita TV, PS3, PSP

My retro systems: Wii U, DSi, Xbox, PS2, Dreamcast, N64, PS1, Sega Saturn, Neo Geo AES, SNES, Evercade

Around the Network
Hynad 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.

An expension by definition means that you need the original game to make it run. And it expends the scope, options, etc. of the game beyond what the original game had. First Light doesn't require you to have Second Son to run an is basically a game in and of itself. 

Look at Diablo and Starcraft if you want to understand what and expension is.


Look at warhamer, there were a lot of standalone expansions on pc and on consoles it was always standalone or an updated retail version



My online systems: Mac M4 Apple sillicon+16 GB, PC Vega 56+Amd Ryzen+32GB DDR4, Xbox Series X, PS4 Pro, Switch Lite, Playstation Vita TV, PS3, PSP

My retro systems: Wii U, DSi, Xbox, PS2, Dreamcast, N64, PS1, Sega Saturn, Neo Geo AES, SNES, Evercade

I always laughed at how people thought CDPR were some kind of Messiah on certain sites who would never ever dream of doing DLC or anything like that. News flash, they're a business, not a charity :P

Not the that this isn't sounding like a good value, it seems it will be. But I just found the CDPR worship so very funny and now even more so :P



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.

Actually, definitionally that is a contradiction.

One cannot simultaneously be an expansion and a standalone



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

no thanks to any season pass



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick

Around the Network
Ruler said:
Volterra_90 said:

I'm definitely stuck in the past. I remember buying an expansion for The Sims and it didn't work without the main game (I was young... lol). On topic, the point is that if the main game has a lot of content (and I think that The Witcher 3 will have it) and the DLCs/expansions/whatever are worth the prize, I'm fine with it. I really hate when you have to pay like 20 bucks for a 2 hours mission or something like that. That's abussive. I like how Nintendo handle the DLCs with Mario Kart, or Tecmo Koei with Hyrule Warriors or From Software with Dark Souls II (I know some people find them expensive, but I don't think so). And The Witcher 3 with the expansion pass costs 75 bucks. 5 more than The Order: 1886. Sorry to bring this game in the topic, but I think the contrast is clear.

The order costs now 30$ new

That doesn't change the fact that more or less half million people buy it for 70 bucks while The Witcher 3 with hundreds of hours of content costs 5 more. And if you don't want the expansions, it still has hundreds of hours of content, and cheaper than The Order. I'm not trying to downplay The Order, I'm praising the amount of content The Witcher 3 will offer.



PwerlvlAmy said:
no thanks to any season pass

This one actually sounds like it's worth the money, though. 

Are you going to to get the witcher 3? 

 

Also, TAKE MY MONEY CD PROJEKT RED!  



That's actually nice to hear - while I don't mind occasional shorter side-quest DLC, I really like when devs make an effort to tell another long(er) story set in same universe (and some of old days expansion packs were as good or even better than original games, like Mask of the Betrayer for NwN2).



I hope the main story is shorter than 200 hours... I don't have time for that. So this expansion stuff will not bother me for sure. But if we are taking this to bring up the dlc subject, i have to say, i hate the announcement of any kind of dlc prior to the game launch, dlc should be stuff devs do because people ask for it, not because they think is a good idea. That way they could do stuff that was really wanted and stop wasting time on things that might not interest a single soul. People always rise against the time devs waste on remasters but no one complain against unwanted dlc that takes, sometimes, more time to build than a port/remaster.



Proudest Platinums - BF: Bad Company, Killzone 2 , Battlefield 3 and GTA4

ironmanDX said:
PwerlvlAmy said:
no thanks to any season pass

This one actually sounds like it's worth the money, though. 

Are you going to to get the witcher 3? 

 

Also, TAKE MY MONEY CD PROJEKT RED!  


I'm getting Witcher 3, dont care about a season pass though



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick