Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
It works out.
That's not true. While it does vary from game to game, there have been many games over the past 20 years that have had expansions the same price that the base game was at release, often with the base game having already been reduced in price resulting in the expansion costing more than the base game at time of expansion release. This has been the case with every FFXIV expansion, for example, which similarly adds at least as much content as was in the base game.
Games with expansions cheaper than the original price of the base game typically add less content than the base game had, such as Tales of the Sword Coast for Baldur's Gate 1.
New hub, two new big maps, one new small map, graphical updates, new monsters, new story, more weapons, more armor WITH set bonuses now, new mechanics, and that's just off the top of my head.