If people refuse to buy a game because they don't like what's in the package or don't want to support paying a premium for something that doesn't deliver on their wants, that's their choice. I don't think it's dangerous for consumers to speak with their wallets.
I mean, there's nothing we can do about consumers speaking with their wallets but people throw blame to consumers buying DLC as why games now are so DLC heavy. It works both ways.
Regardless, I think it's very dumb paying $60 for a game means it has to have a certain level of content or the developers are clearly trying to rip off the gaming public. $60 is a very low price for a game when you consider that games used to cost much, much more and that games used to cost much, much less to make. Certain games like CoD and GTAV can only have so much content because they're massive blockbusters. Yet people look at those games and think "These huge games were only $60 so why would I pay $60 for a game with a third of the content?"
The problem with that thinking leads to few, AAA games that are homogenized because being different is risky. The medium budget game has been effectively killed by AAA games because people won't pay full price for a game that had a quarter of a Halo game's budget.
If these games were forced to sell an equal amount of copies to a smaller budget game they'd have to charge $200+ to recoup their costs. This is why Call of Duty can throw in a campaign and other modes when the majority only play multiplayer. They sell so many copies it's worth it to spend development funds on other modes just to grab that segment of the market that only plays single player. My Dad is one of those people whereas I haven't touched CoD or Halo singleplayer in a decade.
Frankly, I wish these modes were just separate games with separate budgets. I really despise this Swiss army knife approach to game development where people buy games not based on what they actyally want out of them but rather if there's enough features on the checklist to justify not feeling scammed when you buy the game.
I mean, if games were priced as to what I got out of them then the Orange Box would have gotten like $5000 from me just for TF2 alone as I played that for 6 years, let alone the other great games in there. Something like Uncharted 4, which I really enjoyed, would be comparatively worth much less as I was done with it in a week. That doesn't mean I think it should be a sub-$60 game because it didn't have Witcher 3 levels of content.