Yes, but your post wasn't about that specific game. I can talk about Paradox's DLC policies regardless of which branch of their games your discussing because their largely the same in broad strokes company-wide; I can't talk about any specific issues with any specific DLC that I haven't played.
Here is my post, quoted in full:
I can see there's no convincing you Katarack, so I won't bother trying.
@Wormerine: with their grand strategy games Paradox has, I think, gone too far with their non-cosmetic DLC. Often these DLCs add new features to the game which, if you don't buy them, you don't have access to. This in itself isn't a problem per se, after all I don't think anyone would complain about the fact that people who didn't buy the White March expansions didn't get the extra content. The problem is that many of these extra features are still present in the game even if you don't buy the DLC but the player can't interact with them, and given these features often change the way the game plays this essentially means that a player who doesn't buy them is playing a now incomplete product. I think this is going too far.
I don't, however, see this as an issue if Paradox publish Deadfire, since Obsidian would be in charge of their own DLC policy. As far as I can tell, the only issue with Paradox publishing Deadfire is if they pull another price hike pre-sales.
Notice that I said "with their grand strategy games": that means I am referring to their grand strategy games i.e. Crusader Kings 2, Europa Universalis 4 and Hearts of Iron 4. I am not referring to Tyranny, since it is not a grand strategy game, nor indeed any other games that Paradox has developed or published*.
Europa Universalis 4 is their most successful grand strategy game, and has the largest amount of DLC, hence why I used it as an example. It is, however, entirely representative of their DLC policy for all their current grand strategy games. You could switch anything I said about EU4 with CK2 or HoI4 and the statements would remain true.
What you did was talk about the DLC in broad terms so that I would respond, and then try to norrow into a specific game in order to force a statement into my mouth so you could refute it and make me look like an idiot. It doesn't work like that.
No I didn't. You'll notice the first line of my post, and the fact that the main contents of the post followed "@Wormerine": I wasn't addressing you at all. I have zero interest in making you look like an idiot.
As I stated above, I was specifically talking about their grand strategy games, of which EU4 is the biggest. You then claimed that my language was inaccurate and reflected marketing lies, which is demonstrably false when it comes to Paradox's grand strategy games. I pointed this out to you, with the example of EU4 (but both CK2 and HoI4 have similar examples) and you claimed you were talking about a Tyranny DLC, which might very well be the case but you were replying to my post which was about their grand strategy games.
Even in one of your own posts at one point you said "The problem is that many of these extra features are still present in the game even if you don't buy the DLC but the player can't interact with them"...when talking about Paradox's strategy game DLC's.
Yes, I know. I wasn't saying their policy was good. However these features are new features. They are present in the base game after the patch that goes with the DLC is released. They aren't features that were cut from the original product during development.
Anyway, feel free to reply, but don't expect a response. I don't see any purpose to further conversation with you on this topic.
*Technically I could be referring to their older grand strategy games, but those all came out before the age of DLC.