Well, when I got up and came to CAG and saw 100 updates and only two active threads I thought, "Ah, shit! I missed a glitch..." but after reading I was relieved to see it was only a debate on DLC.
Anyhow, I agree with most of what has been said, on both sides of the table, how? I can understand the notion that games should be finished before release. That DLC is just held back to make more money. I'm cynical by nature so that argument makes allot of sense to me... AND it certainly does happen BUT its not fact in every chase of DLC. That said... Games before DLC where rarely complete if you go and truly look at them... Many of them had features/content cut because they simply ran out of time and sometimes now, in today's world, those features/content make it in later as DLC.
Anyhow, to keep this short (as I really should be in virtual NY right now) I'll cut to my closing...
I'm sure we've all know the Potter Stewart's quote about pornography, "I know it when I see it" and I think the same standard should be used when looking at DLC. Some of its offensive and is their to fleece a customer, some of it isn't and is there to offer a customer more of the product they loved. You'll never be able to define it as a whole.
Judge for yourself, using your wallet, its all you can do as its not going away anytime soon.
(other quick thoughts... SNES > Than All. There's was allot of shitty games released in the 80s/90s, probably 90% of them where, and the only reason that percentage has gone up as because of the evolution of the industry and digital distribution.)