Boy, I cannot blame them for not talking. I bet you if a picture of one of their employees was posted on the website conspiracy theories would come out of the woodwork.

Seriously though, if you don't want the season pass don't buy it. It's that simple.

At any rate, how could Bethesda get away with crappy "Dog Armor" or "Power Armor re-skinned" if they plan on putting mods on every platform? A ton of people on PC even avoided Hearthfire because there was another Build-Your-Own-House mod, but at least Hearthfire included hiring a steward and adoption (both of which require voice acting for existing NPCs).

On that note, am I the only one wary of mods on consoles? Not of the idea of them so much as the implementation. Part of me can't shake the feeling that they're going to be confined to Bethesda.net, with Bethesda charging a fee.

Bethesda currently has no plans to incorporate paid mods according to Pete Hines and Todd Howard; if they do, it will be in a much different context than the [censored]storm for Skyrim (that lasted for what, five days?).

I don't expect a fee. But yeah, I do expect some kind of curation going on. Whether it's via Bethesda.net, or Sony/MS.... dunno. But I definitely expect someone to be keeping a handle on what gets "published" on console.

Since when has the simple solution over a complete optional purchase worked in the internet? You have to whine about everything! It's the law!

Well, I was trying to place this whole thing in some context. I read your post, but I think context in these situations is relevant. Thus, the context of these announcements is relevant. I'll respond to your post more directly but first I'm going to back up:

So Beth announced their plans for a season pass in a http://bethesda.net/?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=090915-F4SeasonPass#en/events/game/fallout-4-launch-and-beyond/2015/09/08/22 at Bethesda.net on September 9th. Their announcement of a season pass was one blurb within a larger entry titled "Fallout 4 - Launch and Beyond." In this blog post, they discuss their future plans for Fallout 4 past the rollout. They speak about "regular updates," in which they plan on having multiple free updates that add content or mechanics on top of the normal patches; the release for the Creation Kit (albeit with the hazy promise of "early next year,") and finally a paragraph titled "Downloadable Content," which is where that quote from the article was taken from.

So, to the extent which anyone actually is getting upset by this announcement, it seems pretty innocent to me. It makes sense to me for Bethesda to be talking about their plans to support the game after it's release, one of those things would be DLC. It's not like some isolated announcement where they only want to hype everyone for just this one thing - within the context of their post it would be odd if they didn't discuss the season pass, I think. Anyway, to your post:

So your major worry is that Bethesda is going to make $40 worth of DLC, and instead of making $60 worth of DLC (whether or not they would have more planned in this hypothetical,) decide to stop because they would consider themselves to have "fulfilled" their obligation to the Season Pass holders. That just seems... unfounded, to me.

DLC always makes money. That's why publishers love it so much. It's the gift that keeps on giving. Even if you buy a used game, if you buy the DLC then the company makes money. Years down the line. You can still buy Fallout 3 DLC. (Even the notorious Horse Armor DLC made Bethesda money - there was a Jim Sterling article back in 2011 talking about how people were still buying that DLC. Six years after the game had been released.)

Chances are that most people don't buy Season Passes - the benefit to a company for this sort of thing isn't that everyone's buying it, but that those who are, are giving them money up-front. Businesses usually would rather have money sooner than later. Most people are more likely to buy them piece-meal, and I wonder if the majority of people even buy more than one or two anyway.

Why would a company continue to develop DLC even if Season Pass holders would continue to get it for free?

Because they can still sell that DLC to everyone else (likely the vast majority) of people who don't have a Season Pass. If you put five out instead of three, then customers have more to choose from, thus they're more likely to find one they want to buy.

Obviously, it's a gamble. Companies have failed to come through on these things before. But it's rarely been about "oh, we've made enough so we'll just rest on our laurels" and it tends to have more to do with time constraints and development cycles. But I just really don't see them deciding not to develop more DLC just because a select few people will get it for free. Just doesn't make any sense to me, to be honest.

I have a lot more respect for CDProjektRed compared to other companies due to their DLC policies. Other companies might charge $5 for some horse armor while Witcher 3 gave it away for free. Only expansions cost money which is how it should be.

Tried Witcher 1, found the combat system so stupid ( changing stance against enemies and that's it ) to be so boring I didn't even try the second and third installment.

They got rid of the group, strong, and fast stances for Witcher 2 and 3. If you want to play Witcher 3 correctly on anything higher than easy, then it is a mix of dodging, signs, blades, and bombs. Also, it is a way to reduce the wait for Fallout 4.

u speaking about a horse armor from a game like 10 year old, ur whole love from CDpro is from Witcher 3 dlcs and update plan, same as the one Bethesda is using -.- plus Bethesda at least have a record of releasing decent to good DLC while CDpro need to probe that when they release the first one.

The horse armor was just an example. It could have been costumes, weapons, or some other cosmetic dlc that doesn't give additional content. MMOs are full of garbage like this and can get to outrageous prices like $70 for a monocle in Eve. Also, it is not love for CDpro, but respect. Love would mean that I would buy all of CDpro's games, respect means that I will buy only the CDpro's games that interest me. Although since Witcher and Cyberpunk 2077 are the only games that they are developing, then obviously I will buy both since they interest me.

Just realized something interesting, the bombs in the Fallout universe drop in 2077 and Cyberpunk 2077 supposedly takes place in 2077. Coincidence?

DLC is optional. They are already saying that it will be cheaper to get a season pass than just buying the DLC. They have openly stated they are unsure of what DLC they will do as well, and I am sure it will be good.

Season passes are the norm now, so get off you damn bandwagon and be happy you will get DLC cheaper.

BUT HERES THE REAL KICK

Dont want to buy the season pass straight away? YOU DONT HAVE TO

Think BGS DLC svcks are rather wait? YOU CAN DO THAT TO

Complaining that people have already bought a season pass? ITS THEIR MONEY SO SOD OFF BABY

Always whining these days, they are giving an option for cheaper DLC and I bet people would be complaining if they didnt do a season pass as well. Its like 40% of these forums hate Fallout 4 yet act like they HAVE to get it.

But......I do have to get it. I gotta yet my fix man

Pretty much this (polite applause)...

With Bethesda's minimalist marketing campaign, I realise that every day is a slow news day around here,

but taking issue with a $30 Season Pass from a publisher with a decent DLC record, that no-one has any obligation to buy, is fairly lame.

Decrying the general principle of Season Passes is another matter.

IMO it comes from the general distrust some customers have towards the games industry as a whole after stuff like on-disk DLC, a million exclusive DLCs based on where you buy it and for what platform, augment your pre-order and other crap. Bethesda has been doing pretty well with DLCs/expansions (horse armor not withstanding and they admited their mistake with that so props to them) so they haven't provided many reasons to be distrustful.

Personally I don't pre-order or buy season passes. I believe it enourages crappy practices from certain publishers and devs. You don't have to go back too much to get an example: Arkham Knight.

The whiners will get over it eventually. Most complainers end up going against their word and getting what ever product their nitpicking over anyways so they arent left out.

Yeah, not gonna lie; if i dont get fallout 4 on release day i may go insane

That's judging peoples work and that is very wrong and not all mods are low quality junk, maybe in your opinion mods are junk but bethesda won't polish fallout 4 all the way, you think for one one moment anythings perfect? This seems like your trying to put peoples work down, when you know so little of what your saying about mods. I tell you one thing mods are never going to be low quality junk.

I think he was being sarcastic.

Thing is, modders don't get paid by the hour; they make some profit from donations, so polishing their work won't cut into their profit (it'll only increase it).

Complainers will complain. Though complaining about the opportunity to basically save money makes little sense to me.

Yup, there's a large number of forum goers here who if you dig through the forums enough, you'll find many a post about how they refuse to buy another Bethesda game after Oblivion/Fallout 3/Skyrim, yet have been posting in these forums very regularly posting about how they are excited to see this feature or how much they hope this feature is in Fallout 3/Skyrim/Fallout 4 etc.

Basically, I think some people complain just to see how much attention they get.

One could argue that Bethesda is just being honest in telling us that they don't know yet how exactly the DLCs will look like.

But we all know that being honest to a very bad thing and we want to be lied to about the great stuff they will put into the DLCs. Bethesda should over-promise and then not being able to deliver, because that's the way it is done nowadays. If Bethesda doesn't give us a reason to rage-monger on the internet about their broken promises, we all are going to be disappointed and will never buy any game from the in the future. It's then your fault, Bethesda, for not going with the times.

Some people will always look for things to be unhappy about. I think this is the case here. And as someone mentioned, the season pass isn't even for sale yet, they are just letting us know about the opportunity. Bethesda wanted to try something new for their company and that shows innovation. I trust them to do right by me when the time comes.

Here's the thing: Bethesda is in all likelihood going to build the DLC around what the most well-liked and well-reviewed areas of the game are. If people love settlements & crafting and there's demand for more of it, then they'll probably do DLC to expand on it. If people love flying around on the vertibird, they'll probably do DLC to expand on it. If people love the companions and want to see more of them, they'll probably do DLC to expand on it. If people love a particular part of the story and want to see it explored more, they'll probably do DLC to expand on it. How that DLC will be packaged is anyone's guess, but waiting to see what people especially enjoy about the game before choosing what to build their DLC around is a good thing. Certainly, they've already got some DLC in the oven, but holding off until they've got a good recipe before they cook the rest is just good business sense.

Well, or companies (As we've seen) realize that advertising Passes as "all the DLC!" is a bad plan, and instead the define it a bit more. So if, after they've released all the DLC they planned for the pass, they can then release new ones. Either on a "Season 2" pass, or just as loose purchases for everyone.

Of course, I've seen threads from the conspiracy/"glass all empty" crowd, suggesting that the "free" Witcher DLC is actually all Cut Content that they removed from the game in order to then give it to you for "free" and generate good press by tricking gullible people.

----

re: expensive Cosmetic items in games.... honestly, I prefer that kind of microtransaction in online games. Because they're entirely optional, unlike basic Quality-of-Life stuff like storage space or transportation options, or pay-2-win "selling power" stuff.

Of course, these things are generally in multiplayer/online/MMO games, so they're not really comparable to single-player RPG DLC. (Also, they'd be kind of pointless in a Beth game, considering that Mods are a thing - people can make all the clothes & cosmetics they want. There's no market for it. New game engine functions, and new official storyline stuff, works much better there.)