Eh, I don't really agree with a lot of what you were saying regarding DLC. I find it hard to see your comparison between the bonus editions of movies/DVD's and the DLC of games, as these are two different medium and two entirely different scenarios. Yes, bonus editions of movies do cost more, but it's usually just a bit more, here in America the standard is for a 20 dollar movie the bonus edition is 25-30, meaning a 25-50 percent markup. For DLC, if you buy the game at the full price of 60 dollars, buying the DLC can mark up upwards of 50%, around 30 dollars for maybe a few DLC or some 15 dollar map packs, or it can be upwards of 100% or more, like with games such as Dragon Age Origins. Paying an extra 10 dollars is not seen as a huge deal, the amount seems worth the extras. However, the amount of 30-60 dollars for more content, resulting in a game costing, for the 100% experience, being upwards of 90 dollars to 120 dollars, is quite a lot of money, thus the amount of griping you get about DLC exists. 90 dollars for a game is far too much money, I get that they are a luxury, but during this economic downturn and people being far more selective with their disposable income spending that much money on a game is just becoming less and less feasible.
I also don't get your argument about people being entitled to things supporting one argument yet disregarding it for another. For example, you said that it was not okay for gamers to expect content to be on the game, especially when it came to DLC, since it was considered extra content that didn't take away from the main storyline and gameplay experience (most of the time). However, at the same time, you used gamers expectations about multiplayer to reinforce your argument against the Ubisoft pay to play online experience.
It makes no sense to use people's expectations about games to support your argument in one instance and then use it to defame your opponents in another argument. For day 1 DLC, people EXPECT that the content that is being released on day 1 for extra money should be on the disc due to it not making any sense, in the minds of people, to pay full price for a game and then to have to pay more in order to get 100% of the game. Likewise, some people DONT expect multiplayer to be in a game, and Ubisoft could certainly use that as an incentive to charge for online access for a game and some people would see it as a nice bonus. Not to attack you personally, but it doesn't look good when you put yourself in a situation like this, both railing against and supporting an aspect of an argument depending on whether or not it fits your argument at the time.
