Yes, the PS symbol is tiny and it goes unnoticed now cause it could have well been a PS+ montly game. I didn't even realise that's how I got it in my library, If I had known I'd have snatched up a sale by now but nope as soon as I now feel like doing the DLC I have to pay more than double it's price. The EU have gotten envolved for less, I'm surprised they already haven't put some form of consumer protections in place here. 

I don't think there is an issue really. If you played the game and the DLC while it was available for the subscription you still got a deal by potentially getting to enjoy the value of the DLC without paying for the cost of the base game.

For example if the base game cost $50 on its own but you played it for "free" through your subscription then you decided to splurge for the DLC that cost "$10" and played it as well then you got a $60 experience for the price of your subscription + $10. You still got some value for your purchase. You choosing not play it right away was your choice.

Yeah but gaming isn't like that. You can play a game, get far into it and then go, I need a break and ho and play something else and come back when it feels the time is right. I booted the DLC and thought, ya this isn't for right now, I'll do it later and then finish the Platinum for the game and I'll come back with a fresh head. Anyway...

For me, I'm canceling Ps Extra. PS monthly is fine by me and I'll buy the games I want from now on and as soon as Tales of Arise goes on sale again, I'll buy it but knowing my luck they won't see that I own the expansion and I'll have to buy it again. All I'm saying in the thread is it is anti consumer. They shouldn't be allowed to revoke access to content you directly paid even if the base game has an expiry date. DLC should also be free on subscription and that would be an easy fix but they want their cake and eat it too.

For others, I don't wanna see this happening to people, regulators would also not like to see this happen to consumers. This is no different than you owning the licence for the game and Regulators forcing them to be upfront with that and the licence could be revoked, so maybe the solution is a warning but not hidden in the EULA but an actual pop up at the purchase screen in big red letters for all DLC and MTX. 

By cancelling I'll loose access to Demon Souls, Returnal and Dave the Diver for it's DLC, the main reasons I'm on the service and will get around to palying as well as TLOU Part 1 but I'm fine with paying for them when they hit a sale or a PS monthly discount. The thing is I paid 144 euro more than a base PS+ monthly (174 euro with yhat DLC) over the last two years. Beat like eight games since the beginning of 2024 on it and have 5 more than I would complete if I had the feeling to do so. Idk if I got my moneies worth, only two or three are games I would have bought. I would probably own everything I have wanted and do currently wanna play by now for around the same but I'd own them and they'd be on my time. I hope to God this isn't the future of gaming, not only will the quality of games decline they refuse to sort out severe issues like this. 

This is how I see it.

I think if they're going to charge eighty dollars for games, it should have all future DLC included. Then they could sell seventy-dollar games without. This would please those angry about the hike, and also give those willing to pay more an incentive, since you'd end up saying money.

Pretty sure you get all the DLC included in your mobile subscription rentals.

Unfortunately not. Some  of the games I have played have DLC for purchase. A recent example asides from the Tales or Arise in the OT is high on Lifes DLC and there are many more examples. Very few have DLLc baked in but it's mostly that they use the mega deluxe premium, ultimute season pass options like TLOU Part 1 or Control. 

I'm talking about mobile games. My Netflix subscription has games without in-app purchases and just checked Apple and Google do the same.

That's the way to do it, Sony should follow this and make it clear to publisher to do it this way. 

Definitely anything should be allowed. The gamer has the choice whether to buy that DLC or not, knowing the conditions under which they will be able to play it.