There are a lot of things about the way the modern video game industry works that frustrate me. Loot boxes, pre-orders, overpriced DLC, mandatory annual release schedules...
I do think that paying extra for a deluxe edition that will contain DLC later is kinda scammy. You're asking the consumer to pay, in advance, for something that you havent made yet. It's especially true when you don't even know what that DLC would be, or when it's part of a pre-order and you don't even know if the product is any good yet.
In Civ V, wasn't the deluxe edition bonus a bunch of map packs or something like that? That was crap. At least VI gave full civs. I would've prefered a couple of the DLC have been alternate leader packs with like 3 or 5 new leaders for existing civs, but whatever.
For me though, the thing that frustrates me more about Civ VI's DLC model in particular was that they seem to have come at the cost of improvements to the core game. I have A LOT of complaints with the core Civ VI experience. Some have been addressed by patches (the extra layer for religioys units was one of the best ones, IMO), but neither the DLC nor Rise & Fall made substantial improvements to A.I., unit balance, unit variety, interface (STILL no build queue?!), and so forth.
Well, generally speaking, it's probably different teams that work on DLC content vs stuff like AI improvements, so I don't think the DLC came at the "cost" of the rest; I think those things are lacking more because the civ6 team simply doesn't have them high on their priority list.
But the rest of your post I agree with. Pre-ordering is already a shaky enough proposition that we have to accept what they give us in good faith that also asking us to trust that they'll give us value from the DLC packs definitely made me and I'm sure many other people hesitant about buying the deluxe edition. Without having seen the game yet, trusting them to give value for DLC was just something that I didn't quite trust of them. In retrospect, I would have opted for the DLC pack, since I feel like they have done a good job with the DLC, and especially with adding the 2 extra free packs, definitely it turned in good value. The main thing I will fault them is that I think at the same time as they announced they were adding the 2 extra packs, they should have also come out with the "DD Upgrade" package for the same 20$ extra - I would have gladly paid for that. And it is also a little surprising that the DLC itself has not had any sales on them save for 3rd party sites - it still feels to me that by now, they would get more than twice the number of sales of them if they cut the prices in half of the DLC. But I'm not a marketing person at 2K/Firaxis, so maybe there's a reason they're not offering that.
video games have never been more expensive to make and have never been cheaper inflationwise for the customer (and thats not even taking into account steam sales), and people are still complaining.....
Its just sad how people take more effort in finding something to complain about, rather than enjoying their purchase. personally, I blame the likes of TB and Jimquisition who basicly say "if you enjoy a game, you are dumb, cause everything is ****", all coloured by their nostalgia glasses
Speakin of dumb, do never buy a game at full price, there are enough ways around it. hell, even Ubisoft hands out -20% coupons like candy
Yeah, as much as I complain about some of their marketing practises, I do think the game overall is quite solid. And I have been able to pick up some of the DLC on various sales. So maybe I will end up spending a little more than I would have otherwise, and not gotten to play the various civs as early as I could have, but I definitely think I've gotten my money's worth overall. I made a choice, essentially chose wrong. And in the end, it's not like it's costing me much - maybe a few bucks here or there, and having to play a 2nd or 3rd time as Kongo instead of a 1st time as Poland is not the end of the world to me.