You mean to say disc.  But it's not a shady practice at all.  If a company decides you are going to pay for a particular DLC, you're going to pay for it.  Since that much is known about the content, then the question becomes how to get it to the player.  If they do not have the DLC files locally, they cannot see the DLC.  If I had DLC costumes, I want the person I'm playing against to also see me using it, and not the default.  Since everyone then needs the files, that means they have to be installed on the Hard Disk or be printed directly on the bluray disc.

Most people never complain about having to download DLC to their hard drive, yet that exact same data that is needed becomes a problem when it's on the disc?  That means less data is on the server, less data needs to be downloaded, and it can be made cheaper since it's not taking up as much space on the server.  It means when you're done playing the game, you don't have the entire DLC on your HDD.

If you are not licensed to use the content, you're not licensed to use it.  Regardless of rather or not it's on the disc, that's not how the law works.  Otherwise everyone would buy the physical disc game to get the dlc for free, which wouldn't be fair to anyone who downloaded the game.  Same exact data, just stored in a different spot.

As an end user, think about it-- it makes no difference where it's stored.

That's not the only thing I can complain about, it's the only thing I chose to mention.  The game has game breaking bugs.  You can fight outside of stage boundaries.  There is no excuse for that.  Bugs happen, but if the game wasn't rushed, that would have been discovered.  Like Yoshimitsu's glitch in Soul Calibur VI.

And yes, the company can charge whatever they want for the DLC. Just like I can call them out for bad consumer business practices, charging more for 60 costumes and 2 characters, than the entire game is worth.  If other companies try this, it's bad.  It's a season pass, mind you.  In 3 months, it's going to be another 93 dollar season pass.

Look at lootboxes, EA, and star wars.  Battlefront 2 is dead.  There will be no battlefront 3.  Yeah, we voted with our wallets.  Now a game is dead.  

So, guys, vote with your wallets.  As if that wasn't what we were going to already do anyway.  Not only am I not buying the DLC, I'm skipping the entire game because of how incompetent this company has been for consumer relations.  And with an acronym like "D.O.A., it can't afford to have something like this happen to it.  This is going to kill the series.  But, at least we voted with our wallets.

Maybe its just me.  I hardly ever look at DLC because I never buy it.  I purchase pretty much all fighting games because its my first love as far as games go but DLC has never been a thing I cared about.  My first and only concern is the main game is complete.  If that is the case it gets my money.  Any other extra stuff I consider fluff and not worth my time unless its priced right.

My gripe is that I always see gamers complain about developer supporting their game and actually charging for extra content believing it should be free.  The content should not be free because the work creating it isn't free.  Price is another thing and each developer has to pick the right sweet spot for sales.  If the price is too high then the community as a whole is at fault for supporting it.  

The problem is that gamers born pre-2000 know that a lot of the things sold and celebrated as "extras" today are things that were part of the actual games years ago.  Unlockable/hidden characters, alternate costumes, etc.  Those were all in game to be unlocked as a reward for playing.  Today, these things are carved out and sold back to the consumer at additional cost.

The problem is that gamers born pre-2000 know that a lot of the things sold and celebrated as "extras" today are things that were part of the actual games years ago.  Unlockable/hidden characters, alternate costumes, etc.  Those were all in game to be unlocked as a reward for playing.  Today, these things are carved out and sold back to the consumer at additional cost.

That is a lot of money for content that is primarily unknown to the consumer at the time of purchase.
Most of the costs seem to be attributed to costumes though, so it feels like an easy skip. But they must be making good money on costumes, so there will probably be plenty of people who pay for this, sadly.

Though while it's fully understandable why situations like that are suspicious, there are situations where it is not financially or physically viable for that content to be produced many months after release.
The reason for that is because even when it comes to internal development teams, and especially when talent is contracted from the outside, they can't always just sit around on the same project for months/years after the game has been finished. They have other projects they're supposed to move on to, leaving the remaining team that can stay for an extended time as a skeleton crew of its former self.

The saying 'time is money' is applicable here.
Publishers can invest the DLC budget during the initial game development period, to get that same work done during that time period, while they still have access to all the key designers and artists, etc.

Meanwhile Smash gives us 72 characters out of the box, putting developers like this to shame. Save for a few, fighting games are becoming/have become worse than the FPS map packs and paid skins.

That is not at all a fair comparison.  One character in dead or alive 6 has more unique animations and attacks than 2/3rds of that 72 character roster. 

Smash also has a 30 plus hour single player mode with a crap ton more interactive stages to fight in.  The comparison is completely fair and again, it puts these devs to shame.