Bethesda's always been about the world, while Obsidian has struck me as having a tighter focus on the narrative and characters. Bethesda is improving- Fallout 4 is a lot better on the story front than FO3 could hope to be- but yeah. FNV was great, and it's DLC all worked together to make a better story. FO4's DLC...
I got a season pass, and I think it was worth the money for the time I've gotten out of it. But I think you get exactly what it's being sold as, which is good and bad.
The settlement DLC isn't really worth the price... unless you like settlements. But then, it's not claiming to be anything else. I've yet to meet anyone who was surprised at what was in it.
Automatron was good fun like an action flick... which was what I was expecting. Again, getting what I asked for. It's fun in terms of adding a new sort of companion and modification mechanic to some of the old. I loved the mission itself. But it's just a high-quality quest-line.
Far Harbor was the one to go above and beyond what was required, or even expected. It learned from the base game, and it shows- new sorts of settlement quests (hunting), crafting expansion, etc. It had a strong emphasis on atmosphere, and it does that well. It even balanced factions more than I was expecting. FNV DLC was still better as a whole, but in terms of enjoyment it's a respectable showing.
Fallout 4 DLC has been an extension of the game. Not necessarily an improvement, but not worse either. Overall, I will approve, because it is showing progression and it's clearly them testing out ideas that I hope they remember to make standard-issue in the next game.
FO3 set up a world. FO4 tied it to characters and factions and a lot of good mechanics. FNV already did it right, but FO5 should be better yet.