Both. Huzzah, everyone wins!
Because all DLC costs unfathomable, out of proportion amounts of money, amiright? Valid point good sir! You're a genius without fault nor lesser opinion, I agree completely with your generic argument which I've never properly countered before, yessir.
There's nothin' wrong with DLC, there's somethin' wrong with how DLC is abused by companies like Crapcom. As such, not all DLC is a spawn of evil itself. Get over it. :P
Aye, this is coming from a poor fool who's no job, as well as someone who's only ever purchased a meager $15 worth of DLC through his many years of gaming as well.
"They" most certainly don't have me, good sir. Ya don't see me supportin' Crapcom, Treyarch, etc. I support DLC as a feature. With free DLC, time constraints no longer hurt games and content not finished by release can be polished up 'n added in afterwards. With DLC, games can be supported long after release in various different venues. Patching, fan-requested junk and outright new content. What would TF2 be without ANY of it's updates, eh? It'd be the 360 version. ... bleh
The companies who disrespect their fans with on-disc DLC or overpriced junk are the evil, not the existence of DLC itself. You know this to be true.
Then we're in agreement. Gaming companies that abuse the not-so-new but great concept of DLC via on-disc DLC, etc. are douchebags which ruin the potential of countless games, and their CEOs deserved t' be lynched by an angry cosplayin' mob. Wunderbar!
That too. It ain't necessarily always horrible though, not so long as it's free DLC bein' discussed. Better to plan what is unnecessary for the game on release than t' scramble at the last second to give a poor patch job that wasn't planned for the game due to unexpected time constraints.
Development of DLC (be it on-disc or off) prior to development, however... That's pretty damn stupid, and outright bullshit if it's gonna cost anythin'.