The only people that have a problem with DLCs are:
A) Those who can't afford it.
B) Those that don't WANT to afford it.
C) Those who have a sense of entitlement and feel like anything past a base game should be released for free, even if the paid expansion/DLC has enough content to justify a separate purchase.
That's really all there is to it. You either can't or don't want to afford it, or you feel like you should get it for free. These days, no one ever takes development time into consideration. Battlefield 3 along with the Back to Karkand expansion is A LOT of content for the price (how many $50-60 games have we all been disappointed by lately?) - I mean, is there any other shooter that rivals it? Battlefield 3 was worth the price of admission, and a lot of people even scored deals on it to get it around $40~ on launch. I, for one, appreciate just having a game that really pushes the graphical envelope and makes full use of my hardware, rather than re-badged console port. That it has a lot of content to offer is icing on the cake.
Having said that, the sad thing is, even if the future DLCs add a considerable amount of content, people will still whine that a company is still going to find a way to make money, even if the content is worth it - because, you know, this isn't a capitalist society or anything, and EA doesn't have a business to run or shareholders that they're held accountable to. No, instead, they should slave away their dev team's time to make free expansions for everyone for the next decade, with nothing to show for it, and set a standard that everything SHOULD be free down the road...right?
Is the future DLC worth it for you? Great, buy it if you enjoy the game and want more content. Not worth it for you? Don't buy it, cause no one's forcing a gun to your head and asking you to spend a few more dollars. Such a simple concept, yet people would rather whine and moan about it.