The Witcher (PC) sold 2.1 million to date and The Witcher 2 (PC) sold 1.1m – both numbers are for the end of 2011, and both games are selling well.
What I said about the Witcher I was the sales of the game upon initial release, not to date which the figures you're presenting represent (which would probably bundles and sales event at GoG.com and Steam over so many years). Evidently their epic gestures including the remaking of Witcher I contributed to the sales figure we see today.
Do you realize that what SD did in response to EWOM was unprecedented? As in it's basically never happened? Spoiled consumers can jump up and down and say "that's just making things right" all they want. There are literally dozens, or hundreds, of highly touted games that launched in a terrible state like WOM. Name one where the company gave their supporters even one major UNDEVELOPED game as compensation, let alone two? It almost never happens. The undeveloped part being key. They ate the cost of developing a whole new game (two, in this case) in order to make things right. They developed two strategy games and gave them away for free to burned customers and at a discount to many others.
Mm, Final Fantasy IV? They removed the subscription cost shortly after launch and everyone who had FFIV is getting the ground-up re-development and re-launch of the MMO for free.
--
As I said in the thread title, that this is entirely subjective. Additionally I am comparing SD against CD Project Red whereas apologists here (and I don't mean to use this in a negative way) are comparing SD with the rest of the field.
FWIW there's not all that many titles that come to mind where an epic mismanaged release led to massive damage to a brand (i.e. other than E:WOM and FFIV - D3 and Simcity doesn't fall into this category for so many reasons).
At the end of the day, I'm just sharing a perspective and feedback 
Clearly the regular forum goers here are not representative of the general gaming public in that in general. Brand loyalty to SD is wayyy above average and consequently as marketing theory tells us, folks here have developed varying extent of price insensitivity and also will be more prone to be a SD apologist. And really I am myself not all that different despite making a critical (and perhaps even describable as entitled) post here in that I found myself being the only one to actively defend FE:LH and stress the things that FE:LH does right in my (big, software giant) company's gaming discussion group amongst others who were knocking FE off as not having multiplayer and how so many aspects of the game scream of being a low budget production.*
So again, I'll just iterate one (hopefully final) time that I am comparing SD to the company who probably who is the King in customer orientation in the gaming industry (CD Project Red) and not to the rest of the field. I will readily admit that I have always been of the impression that SD is one of the few good guys in the industry when compared to the rest of the field.
Hopefully this will help shift any further discussion of this topic away from whether this entire thread is all about gamer entitlement and whether SD is good/bad and more towards whether the content really needed to be $10 DLC especially in comparison to the things that CD Project Red does.
(Edit:
*P.S: Just a little note here I must say it came as a surprise to me to see no one else pushing or promoting FE:LH. This from a community (of geeks) that frequently promote Kickstarter campaigns and support indie games talking about how awesome the folks behind the games are, etc. Point being that either the E:WOM damage to SD brand was indeed great, or that SD reputation as being one of the good guys isn't as strong as I had thought.)
