In the situation you mentioned, maybe, but anywhere else absolutely not. I like for packs to have some interconnection (i.e. getting calls inviting you to do an acitvity at a festival if you have both CL and GT) but no dependence on each other, please. I do not want another MFPS.
In the situation you mentioned, maybe, but anywhere else absolutely not. I like for packs to have some interconnection (i.e. getting calls inviting you to do an acitvity at a festival if you have both CL and GT) but no dependence on each other, please. I do not want another MFPS.
There was no dependence on Cats and Dogs - you just had content in it you couldn't use but you did not need that ep for rodents to work and everything else in the pack - except for the EXTRAs they added to the pack just for cats and dogs. Not having that pack did not make MFP NOT do what it was supposed to do. It made no difference at all.
If it was dependent - the rodents would not have worked. All I know is I feel we lost the chance to get more packs with other pets like birds and fish and maybe bunnies and reptiles because people had a hissy fit because of a few Cat and dog outfits - which were extras in the pack instead of the other way around. Now we get no stuff packs at all and I blame that on people going over the top about those pet clothes. I bought all the sps and now I don't get anymore.
I also think we might have gotten more packs that may have benefitted other eps too had people not gone balistic over it and now we can forget it - as I am pretty sure that is why they stopped making sps and moved Graham over to other packs.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Absolutely not. I can say that 50 times or more if you'd like.
I haven't bought My First Pet Stuff and I don't plan to up until the very end of TS4's cycle for completion only. I will not support such pack or such practices out of EA. I can't for the life of me comprehend anyone that would agree with such practice, I think that whoever supports it, is taking the gaming industry into an extremist era where companies just do whatever they want with our wallets, so to speak, because if that happens I will stop playing altogether so no cash from me. Even if I was the richest person on the planet it wouldn't make it right. I would never take part in it, I'm done with gaming companies taking advantage of us.
It's just completely ridiculous to have to buy DLC for DLC. And to make matters worse the pack was rushed. They clearly spent less than a SP's budget in it, because all I see is reskinned objects, objects that were already designed for a prior EP but sold separately and a horribly designed gameplay object.
In the matter of a certain feature of an EP being expanded/updated upon with other packs, that's a different concept altogether and that everyone gladly gets behind. The fact that after all these years they are still adding activities and expanding the Club feature from Get Together is something I very much get behind of. But that is a different matter, as you can still do all that the EP has to offer, it just builds onto it more. Think of it like the difference between a symbiosis vs commensalism, this latter one being commensalism.
In MFP the dogs and cats objects weren't extras at all, we didn't get the "normal" ammount of objects for a SP plus those, very much the contrary most of the objects can only be used by the pets.
Absolutely not. I can say that 50 times or more if you'd like.
I haven't bought My First Pet Stuff and I don't plan to up until the very end of TS4's cycle for completion only. I will not support such pack or such practices out of EA. I can't for the life of me comprehend anyone that would agree with such practice, I think that whoever supports it, is taking the gaming industry into an extremist era where companies just do whatever they want with our wallets, so to speak, because if that happens I will stop playing altogether so no cash from me. Even if I was the richest person on the planet it wouldn't make it right. I would never take part in it, I'm done with gaming companies taking advantage of us.
It's just completely ridiculous to have to buy DLC for DLC. And to make matters worse the pack was rushed. They clearly spent less than a SP's budget in it, because all I see is reskinned objects, objects that were already designed for a prior EP but sold separately and a horribly designed gameplay object.
In the matter of a certain feature of an EP being expanded upon with other packs, that's great. The fact that after all these years they are still adding things activities and expanding the Club feature from Get Together is something I very much get behind of. But that is a different matter, as you can still do all that the EP has to offer, it just builds onto it more.
I could say the same thing about GF. Did you buy that with it's GP size world? I didn't because of that world and that was a slight on the ep itself but bet you supported that. Guess it depends on your priorities. I wanted the hamsters for my sims kids and got it. It was something I wanted so why should I not get it because you see it as you do. Well I see GF in a bad light but look how people praise that. I don't get it at all. And I could say THAT 50 more times. To each their own. But I will never support an ep with 1 main idea - that usually has 3 main big ideas (should have been 3 studio ideas - not one studio idea and two online ideas) and should have had at least a normal size world - especially based off the largest seaside city in the USA - but bet you are fine with that for 40 bucks. MFP cost 10 dollars and I got more than my moneys worth in my opinion.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Absolutely not. I can say that 50 times or more if you'd like.
I haven't bought My First Pet Stuff and I don't plan to up until the very end of TS4's cycle for completion only. I will not support such pack or such practices out of EA. I can't for the life of me comprehend anyone that would agree with such practice, I think that whoever supports it, is taking the gaming industry into an extremist era where companies just do whatever they want with our wallets, so to speak, because if that happens I will stop playing altogether so no cash from me. Even if I was the richest person on the planet it wouldn't make it right. I would never take part in it, I'm done with gaming companies taking advantage of us.
It's just completely ridiculous to have to buy DLC for DLC. And to make matters worse the pack was rushed. They clearly spent less than a SP's budget in it, because all I see is reskinned objects, objects that were already designed for a prior EP but sold separately and a horribly designed gameplay object.
In the matter of a certain feature of an EP being expanded upon with other packs, that's great. The fact that after all these years they are still adding things activities and expanding the Club feature from Get Together is something I very much get behind of. But that is a different matter, as you can still do all that the EP has to offer, it just builds onto it more.
I could say the same thing about GF. Did you buy that with it's GP size world? I didn't because of that world and that was a slight on the ep itself but bet you supported that. Guess it depends on your priorities. I wanted the hamsters for my sims kids and got it. It was something I wanted so why should I not get it because you see it as you do. Well I see GF in a bad light but look how people praise that. I don't get it at all. And I could say THAT 50 more times. To each their own. But I will never support an ep with 1 main idea - that usually has 3 main big ideas (should have been 3 studio ideas - not one studio idea and two online ideas) and should have had at least a normal size world - especially based off the largest seaside city in the USA - but bet you are fine with that for 40 bucks. MFP cost 10 dollars and I got more than my moneys worth in my opinion.
You know it does depend on my priorities, which are a human thing to have, I never said I didn't have them. I think buying DLC for DLC is much worse than buying an EP that happens to have a small world, it's my priority. Seasons had no world, and Get to Work also had a small world and I bought them as well. Honestly I like both of those EP's and I think they are worth it much like GF, but you know, I still complained about the small worlds, I wasn't impartial to it nor did I like it. So that's my opinion. Packs I thought weren't worth full price I bought on a sale.
As for the "should have three main things", fame and reputation are great systems, I love them and I don't mind only one active career since GF expands on a lot of things in the BG and even other EP's, there are many ways to get money and famous with it. I wish CL hadn't introduced singing and they had left it for GF, but what was done was done sadly.
Not really. But they should definitely give us the ability to build our own apartment lots (but TS2 Apartment Life style not TS3 Late Night). That large lot in the Get Famous world low rent area would be perfect for a small one.
It depends on the content. If a University EP was released, and then a second education-related pack came out revamping the system for younger Sims that required University, I would still buy it if it was a game or stuff pack.
Absolutely not. I can say that 50 times or more if you'd like.
I haven't bought My First Pet Stuff and I don't plan to up until the very end of TS4's cycle for completion only. I will not support such pack or such practices out of EA. I can't for the life of me comprehend anyone that would agree with such practice, I think that whoever supports it, is taking the gaming industry into an extremist era where companies just do whatever they want with our wallets, so to speak, because if that happens I will stop playing altogether so no cash from me. Even if I was the richest person on the planet it wouldn't make it right. I would never take part in it, I'm done with gaming companies taking advantage of us.
It's just completely ridiculous to have to buy DLC for DLC. And to make matters worse the pack was rushed. They clearly spent less than a SP's budget in it, because all I see is reskinned objects, objects that were already designed for a prior EP but sold separately and a horribly designed gameplay object.
In the matter of a certain feature of an EP being expanded upon with other packs, that's great. The fact that after all these years they are still adding things activities and expanding the Club feature from Get Together is something I very much get behind of. But that is a different matter, as you can still do all that the EP has to offer, it just builds onto it more.
I could say the same thing about GF. Did you buy that with it's GP size world? I didn't because of that world and that was a slight on the ep itself but bet you supported that. Guess it depends on your priorities. I wanted the hamsters for my sims kids and got it. It was something I wanted so why should I not get it because you see it as you do. Well I see GF in a bad light but look how people praise that. I don't get it at all. And I could say THAT 50 more times. To each their own. But I will never support an ep with 1 main idea - that usually has 3 main big ideas (should have been 3 studio ideas - not one studio idea and two online ideas) and should have had at least a normal size world - especially based off the largest seaside city in the USA - but bet you are fine with that for 40 bucks. MFP cost 10 dollars and I got more than my moneys worth in my opinion.
You know it does depend on my priorities, which are a human thing to have, I never said I didn't have them. I think buying DLC for DLC is much worse than buying an EP that happens to have a small world, it's my priority. Seasons had no world, and Get to Work also had a small world and I bought them as well. Honestly I like both of those EP's and I think they are worth it much like GF, but you know, I still complained about the small worlds, I wasn't impartial to it nor did I like it. So that's my opinion. Packs I thought weren't worth full price I bought on a sale.
As for the "should have three main things", fame and reputation are great systems, I love them and I don't mind only one active career since GF expands on a lot of things in the BG and even other EP's, there are many ways to get money and famous with it. I wish CL hadn't introduced singing and they had left it for GF, but what was done was done sadly.
I did not buy dlc for dlc I bought the small pet pack. Was not the least bit interested in what C&D dlc they have in it. Apparently every pack has dlc in it seeing most packs gives dlc for sims - clothes etc not just for that pack- so what they also had matching BASE GAME clothes for cats and dogs - all I saw was hamsters and what was involved for the small pets. Just like you can choose to disavow the fact GF had only one career where all the rest fame packs had 3 - well I guess it depends on what interested you in the pack. Also Sims 3 Seasons also did not have a world but when an ep has a world then usually it is a decent one. We complained big time over the first small world GTW but did they care - no instead they went on and on how this world represented LA and sims just starting out in the acting only to offer 1 empty lot, really you saw that okay?
It's despicable to me - that is no LA believe me. Not even remotely. And all because it looks like LA with all it's fx fakeness - that was to me an outrage. I can avoid the pet clothes in MFP but I cannot not see that world in GF.
I backed up what I said by not buying it and believe me I wanted a superstar kind of EP badly but not when they do that. Now that was milking - you paid for a fake world and people buying it encourages that. We were not loud enough with GTW - so they did it again - next time what will it be 3 lots and again 1 main idea....
By the way - I never use the free clothing for cats and dogs in MFP - I use the pack for what I bought it for. The clothing could have been - not there at all and the pack was worth 10 bucks as it delivered. More than I can say for GF. But then I guess it depends on the person buying. I got what I paid for - in my view GF people were way over charged. Can't wait to see what's next especially when they see they get away with 1 career and a tiny mostly unusable world. Imagine what it could have been with all that fake FX gone..
Post edited by Writin_Reg on
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Just to clarify, I'll give another example. In Get Famous, the L.A inspired world would have definitely benefited from apartments. Even in the backdrop in the Pinnacles neighborhood, you can see tall towers. Now the coding is there for apartment lots/penthouses from City Living. They could have had apartments be available for those who had CL, and those who don't own it would have seen empty lots where those apartments would have been.
I don't know how else to explain this, but since CL's main main feature is its apartments, I don't think they'll offer CL's main feature in another pack, unless we had CL. Maybe that's why it's probably better for them to introduce an Apartment lot type for the base game so everyone can plop them everywhere and make their own.
Playing onIntel Core i7-5960X 16 core CPU - 32 GB DDR4 Ram - GTX 980 Ti
In the situation you mentioned, maybe, but anywhere else absolutely not. I like for packs to have some interconnection (i.e. getting calls inviting you to do an acitvity at a festival if you have both CL and GT) but no dependence on each other, please. I do not want another MFPS.
There was no dependence on Cats and Dogs - you just had content in it you couldn't use but you did not need that ep for rodents to work and everything else in the pack - except for the EXTRAs they added to the pack just for cats and dogs. Not having that pack did not make MFP NOT do what it was supposed to do. It made no difference at all.
If it was dependent - the rodents would not have worked. All I know is I feel we lost the chance to get more packs with other pets like birds and fish and maybe bunnies and reptiles because people had a hissy fit because of a few Cat and dog outfits - which were extras in the pack instead of the other way around. Now we get no stuff packs at all and I blame that on people going over the top about those pet clothes. I bought all the sps and now I don't get anymore.
I also think we might have gotten more packs that may have benefitted other eps too had people not gone balistic over it and now we can forget it - as I am pretty sure that is why they stopped making sps and moved Graham over to other packs.
Either most didn't understand this or didn't buy it because principles. If it weren't for the outfits more people definitely would have bought it.
I'd really rather just have things as one EP than spread out over multiple SPs to add onto the EP though, although you make an interesting point.
The only reason why MFPS was such a flop to me was bc they made it a quick cashgrab where it added recolors of the same childish furniture that we got in C&D plus that creepy hamster suit and a handful of rodents.
The pack wouldn't have been so bad to me if they made it a pack to add different kinds of small pets.
I think for me its situational. If its free content, then yes, by all means I'd love to have more apartments, pet items, jobs etc ...that depend on already available content. The area that I find myself worried about is making new content for SALE dependent on other packs that we've already paid for (I'm looking at you, "My First Pet Stuff". I don't want to pay more for content that depends on other content that I may or may not have purchased. It'd mean in order to use what I'd already paid for, I had to buy something else. Doesn't seem fair.
Loving yourself is the most simple and complicated thing you can do for you.
i dont think it's fair. what if you only want one pack? why should you have to get one pack to get another? if one requires another, why are they separate packs?
when gravity falls and the earth becomes sky, fear the beast with just one eye
Absolutely not. That kind of behavior makes me side eye a company so quickly, I still have trust issues from MFPS. 🙅
I don't see any issues with expanding on past ideas in future packs however. Such as the example you gave, there's no reason that world couldn't be created for another EP and be completely independent of CL, offering all new things of it's own, that again if you have CL would just be more options of/for but not take anything away from players who purchase it without CL. I'm all for that! And there's so much they could do with such a pack that would make it all it's own! (As someone from the suburbs, I WANT THAT!😍)
BUT, there in also lays the related issue they would need to be sure to avoid - Make it it's *own* pack, include colors in the swatches from other (especially the related) packs so things can more easily be used together (that's always nice!), but in their own style and completely separate to avoid looking like leftovers. (Looking at you MFPS! lol)
It can be a fine line, but it's completely doable to create similiar EPs without them being DLC for DLC, which they should never ever be. It's just bad business.
It'd mean in order to use what I'd already paid for, I had to buy something else. Doesn't seem fair.
All DLC follows that principal.
It does indeed, but it's a matter of how deep down the rabbit hole a person wants to go. Requiring you buy A in order to by B, C, D and/or E means you need to buy only one other thing for any of the additional things. Requiring you to buy A in order to buy B, then making you also buy B, in order buy C, D, and/or E...stacks up the amount of money you 'must' spend to by quite a bit. And then, where does it stop. Do we now make you buy C, D and E, before you can buy F? etc.
Imagine a Sims game where each expansion required every single expansion previously released... While the depth of the gameplay would probably be so much richer, consumer choice won't exist at all. (though honestly, I am intrigued by what rich gameplay we'd get out of that.)
When DLC became a 'thing' a lot of people took issue with it on principle as well for the very same reasons. Once upon a time, popular games got new content added over time after release...for free. Developers did it to support their title and maintain interest, with the payout being the people would be into the game enough to buy the sequel. Expansion packs were still an exception at that time...they did exist, but they were much bigger in terms of content, and yet cheaper than EP's now (1/2 retail game price or lower, in general).
Somewhere, consumers do need to draw the line on what we allow them to expect us to pay for, or we'll end up having to pay them just to download game patches and updates...
(Disclaimer to add: I personally support the concept of paid DLC. Development costs are substantially higher than they were back in the day of the regular, free game content updates and developers deserve to get paid so they can eat and put their children through college. But I also recognize we need to not let it go too far in the direction of milking us for cash. Loot boxes in the Sims...for example, would really 🐸🐸🐸🐸 me off.)
If we're paying for something that expands the game, whether that's a EP, GP or SP, there shouldn't be another pack we have to buy to make that work.
DLC for, or requiring other DLC is wrong. In my opinion, MFP stuff should've been a patch update for Cats and Dogs.
Running with that theme, I would be fine with free updates or patches to existing DLCs, or DLCs that share things with already existing packs. But making it require another pack is just wrong.
For example, we could have an Alien Stuff Pack. It could come with abilities for more abilities and clothing for aliens, perhaps also introducing modern/sci-fi themed furniture. If you don't have GTW (The pack that introduced aliens to TS4), that's fine, but you won't get Sixam, or other alien aspects that GTW has. If you do, they work together and you get all the interactions and items. But you shouldn't make this stuff pack require GTW, imo.
(That wasn't explained very well but I hope you get my point)
They should just make appartments available if you have that pack without City Living. You don't get anything else with City Living, like San Myshuno or festivals or CAS/Build items, just a building type so why should you have to have City Living for that?
Considering how expensive EPs are it'd be pretty unfair.
Although possibly exception:
The pack has been out for a while (years) and there's something massive to add to it that they could never have thought of years ago and it's so much more content and work than a free patch. But this is pretty unlikely.
In the situation you mentioned, maybe, but anywhere else absolutely not. I like for packs to have some interconnection (i.e. getting calls inviting you to do an acitvity at a festival if you have both CL and GT) but no dependence on each other, please. I do not want another MFPS.
There was no dependence on Cats and Dogs - you just had content in it you couldn't use but you did not need that ep for rodents to work and everything else in the pack - except for the EXTRAs they added to the pack just for cats and dogs. Not having that pack did not make MFP NOT do what it was supposed to do. It made no difference at all.
If it was dependent - the rodents would not have worked. All I know is I feel we lost the chance to get more packs with other pets like birds and fish and maybe bunnies and reptiles because people had a hissy fit because of a few Cat and dog outfits - which were extras in the pack instead of the other way around. Now we get no stuff packs at all and I blame that on people going over the top about those pet clothes. I bought all the sps and now I don't get anymore.
I also think we might have gotten more packs that may have benefitted other eps too had people not gone balistic over it and now we can forget it - as I am pretty sure that is why they stopped making sps and moved Graham over to other packs.
Including pet objects like beds and food bowls and clothing for them is a dependency on another pack -period.
What else can you use it for? You call it having a hissy fit and going ballistic I call it simmers rejecting bad business. The same way you yourself rejected an entire pack because of the size of the world. Same thing.
Saying no thanks does not equate to a hissy fit. The rest of your post about stopping making packs is pure speculation.
'My First Pet' was a disaster for this exact reason... it should've NEVER been created to begin with! It's still the ONLY pack for The Sims I have NEVER purchased! I definitely hope EA/Maxis will never think about doing something like that again... NO MORE DLC FOR DLC!
and I knew that was the direction that EA was going with since Patio Pack was announced. Because hottubs, (patio pack) and butlers (Vintage Glamour) were original in EPs in at least Sims 2 and 3. I did try to warn people about by allowing EA to get away with putting hottubs and butlers in Sps would lead to something like My First Pets,
'My First Pet' was a disaster for this exact reason... it should've NEVER been created to begin with! It's still the ONLY pack for The Sims I have NEVER purchased! I definitely hope EA/Maxis will never think about doing something like that again... NO MORE DLC FOR DLC!
and I knew that was the direction that EA was going with since Patio Pack was announced. Because hottubs, (patio pack) and butlers (Vintage Glamour) were original in EPs in at least Sims 2 and 3. I did try to warn people about by allowing EA to get away with putting hottubs and butlers in Sps would lead to something like My First Pets,
Actually sounded to me as if you simply would go without these things if you did not buy the sps - just like people have to go without small pets because they did not buy the sp - as the devs of gps and eps did not intend to make anything that was in the sps in their packs. So you are not hurting EA you are going without period. Now they stopped sps I wonder how many other things we have to go without - maybe pool stuff or other pets like birds and things.
The thing is they make the game and they can do what they like whether or not we like it as when we complain too loudly well they just end that kind of pack. Remember one thing EA thinks nothing of dropping an entire game from it's list so that's where complaints get us. They don't need us - they re too big for our little game and no one else will dare compete as they are too big for other studios to challenge. That is the problem when a company is this big and makes their own rules without really caring for the people who made them what they are. I was with EA before there was a Maxis here and saw many games and studios tossed when the players made more noise than the company liked. I doubt you will ever have to worry about sps or some of your fav dlc again - just fuss about it enough and EA will eradicate it period. They do not care what was done in the past - they have made that pretty clear when they keep telling us that Sims 4 is not like the past three games.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Comments
There was no dependence on Cats and Dogs - you just had content in it you couldn't use but you did not need that ep for rodents to work and everything else in the pack - except for the EXTRAs they added to the pack just for cats and dogs. Not having that pack did not make MFP NOT do what it was supposed to do. It made no difference at all.
If it was dependent - the rodents would not have worked. All I know is I feel we lost the chance to get more packs with other pets like birds and fish and maybe bunnies and reptiles because people had a hissy fit because of a few Cat and dog outfits - which were extras in the pack instead of the other way around. Now we get no stuff packs at all and I blame that on people going over the top about those pet clothes. I bought all the sps and now I don't get anymore.
I also think we might have gotten more packs that may have benefitted other eps too had people not gone balistic over it and now we can forget it - as I am pretty sure that is why they stopped making sps and moved Graham over to other packs.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
I haven't bought My First Pet Stuff and I don't plan to up until the very end of TS4's cycle for completion only. I will not support such pack or such practices out of EA. I can't for the life of me comprehend anyone that would agree with such practice, I think that whoever supports it, is taking the gaming industry into an extremist era where companies just do whatever they want with our wallets, so to speak, because if that happens I will stop playing altogether so no cash from me. Even if I was the richest person on the planet it wouldn't make it right. I would never take part in it, I'm done with gaming companies taking advantage of us.
It's just completely ridiculous to have to buy DLC for DLC. And to make matters worse the pack was rushed. They clearly spent less than a SP's budget in it, because all I see is reskinned objects, objects that were already designed for a prior EP but sold separately and a horribly designed gameplay object.
In the matter of a certain feature of an EP being expanded/updated upon with other packs, that's a different concept altogether and that everyone gladly gets behind. The fact that after all these years they are still adding activities and expanding the Club feature from Get Together is something I very much get behind of. But that is a different matter, as you can still do all that the EP has to offer, it just builds onto it more. Think of it like the difference between a symbiosis vs commensalism, this latter one being commensalism.
In MFP the dogs and cats objects weren't extras at all, we didn't get the "normal" ammount of objects for a SP plus those, very much the contrary most of the objects can only be used by the pets.
I could say the same thing about GF. Did you buy that with it's GP size world? I didn't because of that world and that was a slight on the ep itself but bet you supported that. Guess it depends on your priorities. I wanted the hamsters for my sims kids and got it. It was something I wanted so why should I not get it because you see it as you do. Well I see GF in a bad light but look how people praise that. I don't get it at all. And I could say THAT 50 more times. To each their own. But I will never support an ep with 1 main idea - that usually has 3 main big ideas (should have been 3 studio ideas - not one studio idea and two online ideas) and should have had at least a normal size world - especially based off the largest seaside city in the USA - but bet you are fine with that for 40 bucks. MFP cost 10 dollars and I got more than my moneys worth in my opinion.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
You know it does depend on my priorities, which are a human thing to have, I never said I didn't have them. I think buying DLC for DLC is much worse than buying an EP that happens to have a small world, it's my priority. Seasons had no world, and Get to Work also had a small world and I bought them as well. Honestly I like both of those EP's and I think they are worth it much like GF, but you know, I still complained about the small worlds, I wasn't impartial to it nor did I like it. So that's my opinion. Packs I thought weren't worth full price I bought on a sale.
As for the "should have three main things", fame and reputation are great systems, I love them and I don't mind only one active career since GF expands on a lot of things in the BG and even other EP's, there are many ways to get money and famous with it. I wish CL hadn't introduced singing and they had left it for GF, but what was done was done sadly.
I did not buy dlc for dlc I bought the small pet pack. Was not the least bit interested in what C&D dlc they have in it. Apparently every pack has dlc in it seeing most packs gives dlc for sims - clothes etc not just for that pack- so what they also had matching BASE GAME clothes for cats and dogs - all I saw was hamsters and what was involved for the small pets. Just like you can choose to disavow the fact GF had only one career where all the rest fame packs had 3 - well I guess it depends on what interested you in the pack. Also Sims 3 Seasons also did not have a world but when an ep has a world then usually it is a decent one. We complained big time over the first small world GTW but did they care - no instead they went on and on how this world represented LA and sims just starting out in the acting only to offer 1 empty lot, really you saw that okay?
It's despicable to me - that is no LA believe me. Not even remotely. And all because it looks like LA with all it's fx fakeness - that was to me an outrage. I can avoid the pet clothes in MFP but I cannot not see that world in GF.
I backed up what I said by not buying it and believe me I wanted a superstar kind of EP badly but not when they do that. Now that was milking - you paid for a fake world and people buying it encourages that. We were not loud enough with GTW - so they did it again - next time what will it be 3 lots and again 1 main idea....
By the way - I never use the free clothing for cats and dogs in MFP - I use the pack for what I bought it for. The clothing could have been - not there at all and the pack was worth 10 bucks as it delivered. More than I can say for GF. But then I guess it depends on the person buying. I got what I paid for - in my view GF people were way over charged. Can't wait to see what's next especially when they see they get away with 1 career and a tiny mostly unusable world. Imagine what it could have been with all that fake FX gone..
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
I don't know how else to explain this, but since CL's main main feature is its apartments, I don't think they'll offer CL's main feature in another pack, unless we had CL. Maybe that's why it's probably better for them to introduce an Apartment lot type for the base game so everyone can plop them everywhere and make their own.
Either most didn't understand this or didn't buy it because principles. If it weren't for the outfits more people definitely would have bought it.
I'd really rather just have things as one EP than spread out over multiple SPs to add onto the EP though, although you make an interesting point.
But I would probably do it GP price and or on sale.
The pack wouldn't have been so bad to me if they made it a pack to add different kinds of small pets.
All DLC follows that principal.
Well, yes, for the base game it's an expansion of. Not DLC *for* DLC, which is rather different and rather unfair (not to mention just not cool).
I build things some times. Origin ID: MsShaSha
I don't see any issues with expanding on past ideas in future packs however. Such as the example you gave, there's no reason that world couldn't be created for another EP and be completely independent of CL, offering all new things of it's own, that again if you have CL would just be more options of/for but not take anything away from players who purchase it without CL. I'm all for that! And there's so much they could do with such a pack that would make it all it's own! (As someone from the suburbs, I WANT THAT!😍)
BUT, there in also lays the related issue they would need to be sure to avoid - Make it it's *own* pack, include colors in the swatches from other (especially the related) packs so things can more easily be used together (that's always nice!), but in their own style and completely separate to avoid looking like leftovers. (Looking at you MFPS! lol)
It can be a fine line, but it's completely doable to create similiar EPs without them being DLC for DLC, which they should never ever be. It's just bad business.
I build things some times. Origin ID: MsShaSha
It does indeed, but it's a matter of how deep down the rabbit hole a person wants to go. Requiring you buy A in order to by B, C, D and/or E means you need to buy only one other thing for any of the additional things. Requiring you to buy A in order to buy B, then making you also buy B, in order buy C, D, and/or E...stacks up the amount of money you 'must' spend to by quite a bit. And then, where does it stop. Do we now make you buy C, D and E, before you can buy F? etc.
Imagine a Sims game where each expansion required every single expansion previously released... While the depth of the gameplay would probably be so much richer, consumer choice won't exist at all. (though honestly, I am intrigued by what rich gameplay we'd get out of that.)
When DLC became a 'thing' a lot of people took issue with it on principle as well for the very same reasons. Once upon a time, popular games got new content added over time after release...for free. Developers did it to support their title and maintain interest, with the payout being the people would be into the game enough to buy the sequel. Expansion packs were still an exception at that time...they did exist, but they were much bigger in terms of content, and yet cheaper than EP's now (1/2 retail game price or lower, in general).
Somewhere, consumers do need to draw the line on what we allow them to expect us to pay for, or we'll end up having to pay them just to download game patches and updates...
(Disclaimer to add: I personally support the concept of paid DLC. Development costs are substantially higher than they were back in the day of the regular, free game content updates and developers deserve to get paid so they can eat and put their children through college. But I also recognize we need to not let it go too far in the direction of milking us for cash. Loot boxes in the Sims...for example, would really 🐸🐸🐸🐸 me off.)
The Winters family Tree --- My Mods
DLC for, or requiring other DLC is wrong. In my opinion, MFP stuff should've been a patch update for Cats and Dogs.
Running with that theme, I would be fine with free updates or patches to existing DLCs, or DLCs that share things with already existing packs. But making it require another pack is just wrong.
For example, we could have an Alien Stuff Pack. It could come with abilities for more abilities and clothing for aliens, perhaps also introducing modern/sci-fi themed furniture. If you don't have GTW (The pack that introduced aliens to TS4), that's fine, but you won't get Sixam, or other alien aspects that GTW has. If you do, they work together and you get all the interactions and items. But you shouldn't make this stuff pack require GTW, imo.
(That wasn't explained very well but I hope you get my point)
Considering how expensive EPs are it'd be pretty unfair.
Although possibly exception:
The pack has been out for a while (years) and there's something massive to add to it that they could never have thought of years ago and it's so much more content and work than a free patch. But this is pretty unlikely.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmFyY60q4J0PJNKCePjVG8g
Including pet objects like beds and food bowls and clothing for them is a dependency on another pack -period.
What else can you use it for? You call it having a hissy fit and going ballistic I call it simmers rejecting bad business. The same way you yourself rejected an entire pack because of the size of the world. Same thing.
Saying no thanks does not equate to a hissy fit. The rest of your post about stopping making packs is pure speculation.
and I knew that was the direction that EA was going with since Patio Pack was announced. Because hottubs, (patio pack) and butlers (Vintage Glamour) were original in EPs in at least Sims 2 and 3. I did try to warn people about by allowing EA to get away with putting hottubs and butlers in Sps would lead to something like My First Pets,
Actually sounded to me as if you simply would go without these things if you did not buy the sps - just like people have to go without small pets because they did not buy the sp - as the devs of gps and eps did not intend to make anything that was in the sps in their packs. So you are not hurting EA you are going without period. Now they stopped sps I wonder how many other things we have to go without - maybe pool stuff or other pets like birds and things.
The thing is they make the game and they can do what they like whether or not we like it as when we complain too loudly well they just end that kind of pack. Remember one thing EA thinks nothing of dropping an entire game from it's list so that's where complaints get us. They don't need us - they re too big for our little game and no one else will dare compete as they are too big for other studios to challenge. That is the problem when a company is this big and makes their own rules without really caring for the people who made them what they are. I was with EA before there was a Maxis here and saw many games and studios tossed when the players made more noise than the company liked. I doubt you will ever have to worry about sps or some of your fav dlc again - just fuss about it enough and EA will eradicate it period. They do not care what was done in the past - they have made that pretty clear when they keep telling us that Sims 4 is not like the past three games.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....