Two Witcher 3 Paid Expansions Announced

You can always try to pay for the expansions by setting yourself up as a neighbourhood Witcher. Who knows what horrors lurk in the boonies of Boise?

CD Projekt RED may have announced they’ll release great gobs of DLC for free with The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt [official site], but they never said anything about expansions. In case you’re bad at reading subtext: they’re totally making expansions you’ll need to pay for, they announced today.

Two big, hefty expansions (that we know of) are in the works, one clocking in at around ten hours of new play and the second at twenty. Ayup, I certainly can’t begrudge them charging for bigguns. The two will be available together in an ‘Expansion Pass’ costing £19.99.

Expect new quests, items, enemies, and all that. The first expansion, Hearts of Stone, is due this October. It’ll see Geralt larking about in No Man’s Land and the city of Oxenfurt for about ten hours. Due in 2016 before the end of April, Blood and Wine will add the new region of Toussaint where, RED say, “an atmosphere of carefree indulgence and knightly ritual masks an ancient, bloody secret.” Ooh! I do like bloody secrets.

Here are some words from RED co-founder Marcin Iwiński:

“We remember the time when add-on disks truly expanded games by delivering meaningful content. As gamers, we’d like to bring that back. We’ve said in the past that if we ever decide to release paid content, it will be vast in size and represent real value for the money. Both our expansions offer more hours of gameplay than quite a few standalone games out there.”

That’s certainly true. And the free DLC they’ve announced so far is stuff that some Brand X RPGs would charge for: a new quest, costumes, and a range of beards. Given how splendid The Witcher 3 looks so far, I’ll be happy to have more excuses to make my fickle self return months after launch and then again.

44 Comments

  1. dsch says:

    Won’t someone think of how many Hours are being consumed? What if we run out of all the Hours?

    • DanMan says:

      We’ll just make more. Just like porn.

    • Unclepauly says:

      Research has already begun into alternative hour consumption. As we all know one day the hours WILL be used up completely, so we most definitely need to be ready when that time comes. Weirdly enough, higher power consumption reduces hour consumption, so it’s highly recommended to play Witcher 3 on the highest end PC you can find (also CRT monitor).

  2. Det. Bullock says:

    “Expansions”?
    When are we?
    In the 90s?

  3. BooleanBob says:

    It’s a bit like the rail network calling its users ‘passengers’ rather than ‘customers’. Change nothing but the word and people will be much happier, even if they’re getting the same thing.

    • Wulfram says:

      Not really. Expansions are different from DLC because DLC is sliced up smaller.

      At least in theory. If the expansions turn out to be insubstantial then you’ll have a point. But 10 hours sounds reasonable, unless a lot of that is shallow.

      • blastaz says:

        Doesn’t sound massively different to the two chunky bits of dlc for shadow of mordor.

        Proper expansions should change the games mechanics, add new spells and abilities, raise the level cap.

        Reusing and tweaking existing assets to give new quests is pretty much the definition of gameplay, as opposed to cosmetic, dlc.

        And it’s sixteen angles, just fyi…

        • Premium User Badge

          teije says:

          The difference is marketing mostly nowadays. Paradox for example has two types of DLCs for EUIV/CKII. The big ones that are really more like expansions, in that they change/add core gameplay elements, and the small ones, like unit & music packs. But they call both DLCs.

          I propose another acronym to further muddy the waters – PEC – “paid extra content”.

          • April March says:

            That actually sounds a lot more accurate a name than DLC. Like most PC gamers of today, the entirety of my recent library is ‘downloaded content’.

          • Cinek says:

            Paradox is a mess. I really wouldn’t use them as an example of anything when it comes to nomenclature.

        • Cinek says:

          To be fair – we don’t know anything about these expansion packs to make a calls like that. But IMHO adding a whole huge new area with tons of quests is a good start to calling something an expansion pack ;). Witcher 2 had some free DLCs adding a quest here or there (eg. Troll Trouble DLC), but there’s quite clear difference between them and what already-announced features are going to have for the Witcher 3 expansions.

      • airmikee says:

        Yeah, Civ5 really clarifies the difference. Two expansion packs, $30 each for G&K that added religion and spies, and BNW with added tourism, archaeology and revamped culture victories. Lots of little DLC packs, $5 for a scenario or a civ or two. I don’t mind the expansion packs, every Civilization game going back to the Civ2 has had two expansions, but the little DLC packs I didn’t bother with until they were 75-90% off during a Steam sale.

  4. chesh says:

    I saw “big, long” and worried they were going to be additional 200 hour chunks. 10-20 hours hardly compares, thank Horace.

    • Arglebargle says:

      I saw ‘big, long’ and rejoiced. Until I saw that it was going to be 10-20 hours. Hardly worth it. Guess I’m just anti-Cobbett…..

      Though I’m inclined just by the nature of the world they’ve created.

  5. PopeRatzo says:

    Pissing on your head and calling it, “rain”.

  6. waltC says:

    Well, with a 200-hour estimate to do “everything” in the game, an extra 5% of content for $20, and then another 10% of content for $20–equaling 15% of the main game for $40…doesn’t really seem like a whole lot. Much better if the ad-ons were $9.99, imo. But we’ll see…

    • jerf says:

      It’s actually £19.99 (or $25 in the US) for the two of them together. That is, to stress it once again, you pay £19.99 (or $25 in the US) once, and then you geth both the 10-hour and the 20-hour expasions.

  7. waltC says:

    Bring back the edit button!…;) OK, I see that *both* will cost $20–OK…alriiiiighty then…I got what I asked for, didn’t I?…;) (How does CDPR do that???)

  8. SlimShanks says:

    If the game is as big as they say is it, I wonder if we will really feel any need for expansions? Aside from the marvelous expansion of Geralt’s beard, which is free.

    • LTK says:

      That’s the beauty of it, anyone who is left clamoring for more Witchering after the main game can pick up the expansions. People who’ve had their fill maybe won’t.

      • SlimShanks says:

        Surely if it was so simple then people wouldn’t be upset?

  9. evilgrin says:

    I made it about 2 hours into the second til I started falling asleep due to boredom.

    • SlimShanks says:

      You must have the attention span of a fruit fly on cocaine.

    • BobbyDylan says:

      What, Not enough Dude-Bro’s for you to shoot in the face?

  10. Cvnk says:

    Free DLC content available with the game’s release. AKA: the game.

  11. racccoon says:

    NOOOOOOOOOOO! to paid expansions

    WE PAY ENOUGH!!

  12. Misha says:

    I don’t mind paid expansions, not at all.

    But I DO wish that studios would at least have the decency to hold off announcing them until the actual game is out. Why? Not because it makes that much of a difference, logically. We all know that successful games spawn expansions and sequels and that is good.

    But when the studio, in effect, is saying “we have a lot of stuff that we want, and COULD add to the game, but we’re going to leave it out for now so we can make you pay for it later”, it makes at least ME wonder how much else they’re leaving out deliberately in order to charge for it later. Not so much an issue with this particular one, they’re already adding a lot of free stuff not included in the original pitch, but still.

    We’ve already got one EA, and that’s three too many. I don’t want to see it become a trend or I might just find another hobby.

    • Perkelnik says:

      Does it really matter when they announce it? They would be accused of holding the content back anyway…

    • nu1mlock says:

      Sure, if you’d rather wait another year for them to finish all the “expansions” before they release the game, then yes, they could hold off on releasing it until it’s done. I sure don’t want to wait another year.

      However, as it turns out, there are a lot of people that would be doing nothing right now when it nears release, so instead of doing nothing, they work on more content – which won’t be done until close to October (first) and close to April next year.

      The price they’re asking isn’t a lot either. Bethesda did this with Skyrim, adding new content. CDPR does it as well. Nothing wrong with this at all.

      • xcom says:

        if its a good expansion then so be it. what pisses me of, is that back in 2014 when witcher 3 was announced, i pre-ordered it immediately (having played witcher2 and i like the game) also to support the developers at CDPR. that was $54. original at $60. i thought i had a good buy. then now, check the official website, the game is now being sold at $44. so this really pisses me off. i should have not pre-ordered at all and waited for the game to be released and buy it. but i simple pre-ordered it before so i would think i can support them (LOL) but now the price is even cut lower. oh well, life lesson: DONT PRE-ORDER. Eff it. just wait for the game to be released and buy it then. I WILL NOT pre-order anymore.

        • nu1mlock says:

          You should probably contact them because it’s always been $44 (or something like that, I’m using €) ever since they started taking pre-orders if you owned the previous two games.

          • xcom says:

            well, here is the more complete story. back then in early 2014, witcher 3 was announced. i was excited. so i pre-ordered since there was a “pre-order” option. main purpose is simply to “get the development going” maybe they need the financial resources for the developers so lets just pre-order it. lets give em our hard earned money. the cost of the game if you pre-order is $53.99 from GOG.com, because i used GOG.com as my purchase site. ORIGINAL price is $60.00 also im quoting canadian dollars here. this purchase was made back in november 2014 from GOG website. anyway, im checking GOG website now and the game costs $42.29, yes there was a price cut out of nowhere! add the expansion pass which is posted at $19.99 so in total, $42.29+$19.99=$62.28 you get all the goodies! but because im so eager to pre-order before, my $53.99 purchase will only get the main game. no expansion pass. so now, if have to buy it, i will pay more! LOL, what kind of pre-order crap is this! but look at this, have i waited till may 2015 i would only be paying CDPR $62.28 and get the main game + expansion. because i did not pre-order. but because i pre-order, if i have to get the complete game (main game+expansion) that’s $53.99 + 19.99 = $73.98!!! that’s it. got my drift bro? it seems pre-ordering is a bad thing in this case. so pre-order experience was a bad experience. i guess the saying, “good things comes to those who waits” works for this one. anyway whatever sometimes things don’t go our way. have a nice day.

          • nu1mlock says:

            It’s still the same price as it’s always been. You’d get the pre-order offer, then another 5% for each of the other two games you have on GOG. Besides, all you have to do is contact their support, I’m certain they’ll make something work for you.

          • molamolacolacake says:

            Xcom, so you are saying the standard pre-order discount is showing 42.29 now? I’m in the US so pricing may be different, but the pre-order discount in general for me is still showing 53.99. It’s 47.99 once I log in because I own both previous Witcher titles. I’m guessing something has gone wrong on calculation or its showing you your discount for owning previous witcher titles? Anyway, I’d take nu1mlock’s advice and call their customer service and (calmly) explain your concern with the pricing. Otherwise, can’t you just cancel and re-order?

  13. drewski says:

    Just gives me an even stronger incentive to wait for a comprehensive edition.

  14. lowprices says:

    Selling a pre-order for a DLC season pass for a game that isn’t even out yet? Truly CDProjekt are ready to take their place in the ranks of AAA videogame development.

  15. Rao Dao Zao says:

    I remember when it was “I love this game, I hope they make an expansion” -> time passes -> expansion announced -> “Huzzah!”

    Game’s not out yet, isn’t this jumping the gun a bit? Can’t we let the hype train stop and then start it again when the time is right, rather than getting it all out up front?

    • Ieolus says:

      You forget that the game was delayed. If it had been released on their first deadline, announcing expansions 5 months later would be right on target.