Forum Announcement, Click Here to Read More From EA_Cade.

Should base game bundle early packs into it for all players to own now?

Comments

  • Calico45Calico45 Posts: 2,038 Member
    edited April 2021
    TOLKIEN wrote: »
    I think one thing that is missing in this conversation esp based on the last post above, is that this game now costs nearly $700USD or $1000 Canadian if your in Canada like me (if you were to buy it when its NOT on sale in).

    Thats an incredibly steep buy in cost for new players and to be fair the majority of you that DO buy packs usually buy them not soon after they are released or first go on sale (if its something you want vs not) over a period of years of release. A new player? A new player basically has no idea where to start and honestly unless your a grown adult with a lot of extra cash floating around most won't even buy more than one or two packs.

    Which brings back the argument why not include older packs now as a bundle (say the new game now includes 3 bundled packs) much like Sims 3 did when it was STILL producing packs. Nobody complained about this.

    More so I find it really weird that people would be angry that original 3 packs would be bundled with the base game for new players/buyers because what - you paid full price 6 years ago for them? Or last year on sale for $5? Really?

    I think there is a very bizarre social lesson on capitalism happening in the background here, but I'm not exactly sure how to identify what it is lol....

    Okay, your goal is confusing me more now. I noticed you went back and edited your original post. Was this about new player accessibility (which I feel the large base game discounts are great for) or for future gameplay like your original post suggested?

    What good, besides gifting those that have not paid for the content, will making old packs included in the base game do? The features usually selected are improved and expanded upon in future content. Are you claiming that it should be done to bring in new players or to advance gameplay in the future? Are these advantages over the old system of base game updates? As I see it, it would do nothing substantial apart from upsetting people.

    Also, complete editions are not that common and are certainly not default. I noticed your updated post included World of Warcraft now, but subscription games are a whole other beast entirely. You pay, new content or not, and you still have to buy the latest expansion if you do not want to wait.

    I have already mentioned Sims 3 and a various Paradox games not having complete editions, but what about things like Train Simulator? Train Simulator 2019 has no complete edition and requires over $2,000 to complete, even thought Train Simulator 2021 is a thing.

    So I do not understand your point anymore. I do not think complete editions are that common, nor is turning paid content to free content during a game's development life cycle, and since when was Sims 4 hurting for players to the point that it needed to make DLC free with all its sales?
  • OnverserOnverser Posts: 3,364 Member
    TOLKIEN wrote: »
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    TOLKIEN wrote: »
    So yes to clarify I'm saying add full packs into the base game - not as packs but AS base content like so many other service games eventually do.

    As for cost and user backlash - yes some people will be very mad that they paid for packs, but again games like World of Warcaft have been doing this since the game existed and its community doesn't lose its mind.

    What service games add paid dlc to the BG after people spent money on them as DLC other than an MMO with a subscription base service?

    More so I'm surprised how many people are against this idea - like giving away content or including it in the base game is bad. Apparently people don't like free content? I get that some of it wouldnt be wanted say vampires but again - the arguments that they shouldn't do this because free things is bad is just...unexpected.

    How is it unexpected? Of course people would be rightfully mad if they paid 40 dollars for an expansion and a week later it was made free. If you don't own the pack then yeah it's great to get free stuff, but if you spent your hard earned money for something of course you're gonna be annoyed if it gets made free for everyone as that's your money wasted for nothing. Maybe once the Sims 4 is over and long done then yeah it's fine to bundle it as a cheaper complete collection like Sims 2 but things people are still buying definitely shouldn't be added to the base game for free (unless refunds are given)
  • texxx78texxx78 Posts: 5,657 Member
    edited April 2021
    Onverser wrote: »
    TOLKIEN wrote: »
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    TOLKIEN wrote: »
    So yes to clarify I'm saying add full packs into the base game - not as packs but AS base content like so many other service games eventually do.

    As for cost and user backlash - yes some people will be very mad that they paid for packs, but again games like World of Warcaft have been doing this since the game existed and its community doesn't lose its mind.

    What service games add paid dlc to the BG after people spent money on them as DLC other than an MMO with a subscription base service?

    More so I'm surprised how many people are against this idea - like giving away content or including it in the base game is bad. Apparently people don't like free content? I get that some of it wouldnt be wanted say vampires but again - the arguments that they shouldn't do this because free things is bad is just...unexpected.

    How is it unexpected? Of course people would be rightfully mad if they paid 40 dollars for an expansion and a week later it was made free. If you don't own the pack then yeah it's great to get free stuff, but if you spent your hard earned money for something of course you're gonna be annoyed if it gets made free for everyone as that's your money wasted for nothing. Maybe once the Sims 4 is over and long done then yeah it's fine to bundle it as a cheaper complete collection like Sims 2 but things people are still buying definitely shouldn't be added to the base game for free (unless refunds are given)

    I wouldn't say i'ld be mad but i would def adopt a new buying strategy from now on :lol:
  • ScobreScobre Posts: 20,665 Member
    This is why I think that TS5 will most likely be a subscription service game. It’s the only feasible way for base game to come with everything everyone is always yelling should be in base game and still be at a price most can afford and work on a multitude of computers. It would live on servers at EA/Maxis instead of individual computers, and then they can still add new content through updates without overwhelming individual systems.

    I wouldn’t mind if TS4 gets enhancements to its base, I would welcome it. I am always up for more. I genuinely enjoy the game. There’s talk of them possibly adding the calendar from Seasons to base game and I think that’s fine, especially if it means they can expand the functionality of it for all players. I have the pack, but moving the calendar to base game means they can tie its features to more packs and expand its features.
    MMOs actually require heftier computers to run which is why I giggle when so many people want it. Same with VR.

    I do think base game does need a lot of help and quality of life updates. Stardew Valley is a good example of an indie style game building upon its base without the need for paid DLC and selling extremely well by focusing on making it playable on different devices. I do think the idea of DLC is going to die out in a few years in general in gaming and going to be replaced by cross-platform play instead.
    “Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
  • Pamtastic72Pamtastic72 Posts: 4,545 Member
    Scobre wrote: »
    This is why I think that TS5 will most likely be a subscription service game. It’s the only feasible way for base game to come with everything everyone is always yelling should be in base game and still be at a price most can afford and work on a multitude of computers. It would live on servers at EA/Maxis instead of individual computers, and then they can still add new content through updates without overwhelming individual systems.

    I wouldn’t mind if TS4 gets enhancements to its base, I would welcome it. I am always up for more. I genuinely enjoy the game. There’s talk of them possibly adding the calendar from Seasons to base game and I think that’s fine, especially if it means they can expand the functionality of it for all players. I have the pack, but moving the calendar to base game means they can tie its features to more packs and expand its features.
    MMOs actually require heftier computers to run which is why I giggle when so many people want it. Same with VR.

    I do think base game does need a lot of help and quality of life updates. Stardew Valley is a good example of an indie style game building upon its base without the need for paid DLC and selling extremely well by focusing on making it playable on different devices. I do think the idea of DLC is going to die out in a few years in general in gaming and going to be replaced by cross-platform play instead.

    For me personally a subscription model would be a non starter. I also stand corrected on a previous point when I thought the OP was advocating for some pack features to be added to the base game when they in fact were saying entire packs. This would make me pretty angry. I could see maybe several years after the game wrapped entirely. But not if it’s still in its life cycle. Absolutely not.
  • Calico45Calico45 Posts: 2,038 Member
    edited April 2021
    Scobre wrote: »
    This is why I think that TS5 will most likely be a subscription service game. It’s the only feasible way for base game to come with everything everyone is always yelling should be in base game and still be at a price most can afford and work on a multitude of computers. It would live on servers at EA/Maxis instead of individual computers, and then they can still add new content through updates without overwhelming individual systems.

    I wouldn’t mind if TS4 gets enhancements to its base, I would welcome it. I am always up for more. I genuinely enjoy the game. There’s talk of them possibly adding the calendar from Seasons to base game and I think that’s fine, especially if it means they can expand the functionality of it for all players. I have the pack, but moving the calendar to base game means they can tie its features to more packs and expand its features.
    MMOs actually require heftier computers to run which is why I giggle when so many people want it. Same with VR.

    I do think base game does need a lot of help and quality of life updates. Stardew Valley is a good example of an indie style game building upon its base without the need for paid DLC and selling extremely well by focusing on making it playable on different devices. I do think the idea of DLC is going to die out in a few years in general in gaming and going to be replaced by cross-platform play instead.

    I realize it is a little off topic, but I am super curious why anyone would think DLC is going away. I think it is going to withstand the test of time just because of the pure profit that can be made. Microtransactions are big business, but even if we talk less scummy DLC being able to use previous assets and the same tech rather than moving on to a new game development cycle the profit is pretty apparent.

    Also, I do not know much about MMOs so I will leave it alone, but it shocks me to think there are people that do not realize you need a half decent PC for VR. Unless you have an all in one headset, of course, but that $1,000 was no joke even if there are more options now.
  • TOLKIENTOLKIEN Posts: 1,594 Member
    Per my posts, my original edit topic was for grammar reasons to better understand my question. As to my question, its honestly remained fluid in that I've been exploring many different arguments posed to me and responses based on what people are bringing up.

    I'm not sitting here saying "they should do it THIS way" but rather having an open discussion about packs, about pricing, about bundles and about the state of the game for new users.

    Per my question of capitalism, its not a jab at EA for selling packs - thats obvious its more this idea that what is once paid for cannot be given away for free at a later time even if its closing in on a decade post release - the idea of giving away packs people once paid for seems to anger people despite literal years passing and it brings to mind a question of how capitalism works in society where if a person pays for a product and its given away for free five years later this upsets the community?

    I guess this brings up a question of value and cost but also worth of a product 5 years after its released, although thats not to say some games don't remain full priced especially on consoles years and years after release too.

    Regardless I think this topic is more or less discussed and has been very interesting lol.

    For the record I doubt we will ever see a "complete" edition of the Sims 4 for a veeeeery long time, they still haven't done it with the Sims 3 (because it still sells understandably) and as long as the Sims 4 can make a penny the same will be for it.

    Who knows maybe in twenty years the game we all spent $500+ will be given away for free...or heck Epic Store could suddenly give the entire Sims 4 series away for free as some kind of Christmas surprise on its store lol. I wouldn't be so surprised if this actually happened tbh.

  • AntwerpoAntwerpo Posts: 90 Member
    TOLKIEN wrote: »
    Per my posts, my original edit topic was for grammar reasons to better understand my question. As to my question, its honestly remained fluid in that I've been exploring many different arguments posed to me and responses based on what people are bringing up.

    I'm not sitting here saying "they should do it THIS way" but rather having an open discussion about packs, about pricing, about bundles and about the state of the game for new users.

    Per my question of capitalism, its not a jab at EA for selling packs - thats obvious its more this idea that what is once paid for cannot be given away for free at a later time even if its closing in on a decade post release - the idea of giving away packs people once paid for seems to anger people despite literal years passing and it brings to mind a question of how capitalism works in society where if a person pays for a product and its given away for free five years later this upsets the community?

    I guess this brings up a question of value and cost but also worth of a product 5 years after its released, although thats not to say some games don't remain full priced especially on consoles years and years after release too.

    Regardless I think this topic is more or less discussed and has been very interesting lol.

    For the record I doubt we will ever see a "complete" edition of the Sims 4 for a veeeeery long time, they still haven't done it with the Sims 3 (because it still sells understandably) and as long as the Sims 4 can make a penny the same will be for it.

    Who knows maybe in twenty years the game we all spent $500+ will be given away for free...or heck Epic Store could suddenly give the entire Sims 4 series away for free as some kind of Christmas surprise on its store lol. I wouldn't be so surprised if this actually happened tbh.

    That's not what I read. I read that most people don't care if the DLC becomes free for everyone. What you seem to fail to read is the timing they suggest for such a free release. They just released Kits, who's gonna buy more Kits if you know it becomes free DLC after a short time anyway? If they hadn't released packs for years now, the sentiment would be different and the timing would be right for free DLC but as you can see DLC is still coming. It would be very stupid to sell new DLC and give the other DLC for free. I would wait till the new DLC would become free.
  • NationalPokedexNationalPokedex Posts: 829 Member
    edited April 2021
    I know you’re finished with this conversation but this is still a very strange concept to me. I am talking detached from any matter of cost or value, the idea of taking a whole pack and just putting it into the Base game feels...off. For example, right now there are 10 expansion packs, I think. Say they added GTW and GT to the Base game since they are older. By definition of adding the packs into the Base game, they’re no longer technically a pack, and should no longer be referred to as such. They are Base game content. So then the number of expansion packs falls to 8.

    This is why I brought up the topic of TS2 UC, because even thought the price fell for all of the packs over time, technically they’re still their own pack. Every pack is just attached with all of the others and Base game. Putting something in a bundle or collection doesn’t make it part of the Base game. In the description, it clearly specifies which packs are in the collection. It is not saying just the Base game because seasons, hobbies, university, apartments, etc. are not in the Base game. They are still to this day their own pack that has just been attached to the Base game for a low price. If I wanted to uninstall just one EP from TS2 UC, I could. Because it’s not in the Base game. That also goes to the points brought up by, I believe @Ellupelluellu and @VeeDub that some people purposefully avoid packs; putting them in the Base game would make them harder to avoid.

    So while I am acknowledging that you allowed your argument to stay fluid as the topic went on, this is why I referenced your OP in my previous posts, because that is the initial idea you posed (putting content into the Base game) and that is the one that I find most odd in concept. Collections are fine. I’ve bought TS4 bundles, I own the TS2 UC. I just can’t wrap my mind around putting out 6+ years worth of content and then suddenly saying all of those things essentially didn’t happen like they initially did.

    I’m not trying to start an argument, but rather to try to wrap my mind around this.

    Also, someone earlier mentioned how when they were buying packs for TS2/3, they kept being recommended Seasons as it’s a pack that many people feel is needed in the game. This right here is the whole reason why people say seasons/weather should be in the Base game. So you aren’t constantly compelled to go buy a pack that feels so integral to the overall game. This is EA’s problem with splitting up packs from an integrity standpoint and it’s the consumers problem from a financial standpoint. Adding some stuff to the Base game just proves the point of everyone who has been saying that by the 4th iteration of this series, things like weather, pets, university, etc. should never actually be DLC, but Base game from the beginning. I say this, OP, to say that you’re right that splitting up content makes it confusing/harder to get into the series, but EA knows people will pay for weather so why add it to begin with? I don’t know how much this makes sense but I feel like we have to acknowledge the practices at EA that haven’t really evolved (much like the game itself) over this series’s lifetime, because you wouldn’t haven’t to bring this up if they hadn’t turned this model into such a monster in the first place.
    Post edited by NationalPokedex on
  • SimburianSimburian Posts: 6,907 Member
    Whilst the game is still extant and being updated with packs I would be against earlier packs being incorporated into the base game. It might make a mess of my own games for a start and need a complete re-download of the changed base with all related consequences to lots, Gallery and Sims. Some Simmers might be forced to have packs they wouldn't have chosen to buy in the first place too. Collectors have never got any free giveaways when they collect toys or anything else do they? Why should computer gamers expect freebies all the time? Especially those that have refused to buy packs as they came out in the first place.

    New players can always load and pay for the packs one at a time and don't have to pay their money for it all at once do they?

    As to a new iteration I expect it might go Microsoft's Flight simulator way, with a huge reservoir of stuff, kept on servers, ready to download when wanted, so that all types of machines can play it - whatever power or storage capacity they have and downloads limited for those. EA and Microsoft have always collaborated to test their games and OS. We may not like it but EA's CEO is always talking about new technologies and Cloud storage.
  • SimKeatsSimKeats Posts: 2,186 Member
    It blows my mind how many people say things like "I would be upset if someone got for free, what I had to pay for" I mean, I can understand the sentiment, I felt that way when I was young and MMOs was a new business model still. All the games that kept putting out expansions always added the oldest ones to the base game, or put the pack as part of the purchase as the base game. Even companies like Blizzard right?
    And when people say things like "ooh, but this isn't an MMO!" oh come on, if EA answered honestly if they would rather you pay monthly or an upfront cost? Of course they would say "why not both!?" And honestly, how many platforms can you get Sims 4 on now for free if you have a subscription? A lot. Subscription to play, exactly their favorite method of collecting your money. But you bought the game and they are getting it for "free"! why aren't you upset about that?

    EA is infamous for their predatory, anti-consumer practices, and has "won awards" for basically making disappointing games.
  • logionlogion Posts: 4,712 Member
    edited April 2021
    That doesn't make sense to me financially (from EA's standpoint). EA would no longer be able to sell those packs and all that they would gain are more people getting the base game.

    Even if those people would buy newer DLC I think that would be a loss for EA. They are still selling those packs and they cost a lot of money if you don't buy them during a sale.

    And the people who have already bought all these packs would gain very little and it would not make them happy either.

    I don't like this business practice either because it feels like it's us the players that have to pay for it, if EA were worried that Maxis game will lose player growth after 6+ years, maybe they shouldn't have sold us 40 + DLC.
  • SimKeatsSimKeats Posts: 2,186 Member
    I'm not saying anything put forth is a change that should be made or not made, mostly just kind of shocked at peoples response.

    Although, I would have to say, from what I've seen, playing it free through something like playstation plus or ea play, what you get is quite limited. That seems... not very enticing. If you pay for HBO, you get all the shows, if you stop paying for HBO you stop getting all the shows.
    Buying DLC for a game you are renting seems mad.

    From a marketing point of view it would make more sense to offer all the dlc for the games you get access to for a slightly higher subscription, wouldn't it?
  • LustianiciaLustianicia Posts: 2,489 Member
    edited April 2021
    This makes absolutely no sense... why should new players to The Sims 4 be given early packs for free, while the rest of us needed to purchase them?

    The answer is no... and if EA decided to do this, then Paralives will just keep looking better and better!

    Stop giving EA horrible ideas... they've already done terrible things to this game as it is.

    Edit: Besides, the first three Sims games never did this... so why should Sims 4 be any different? Again, your idea makes no sense... at all. In all honesty, it really just sounds like you're someone who doesn't own all packs and are bitter because you'd have to buy them all if you want them in your game, so you're throwing this idea out there with the off chance that EA would actually end up doing it...
    Favorite Packs
    Sims 1: Hot Date
    Sims 2: Seasons
    Sims 2: Happy Holiday Stuff
    Sims 3: Seasons
    Sims 3: 70's, 80's, & 90's Stuff
    Sims 4: Seasons
    Sims 4: Paranormal Stuff
    Sims 4: Strangerville Game Pack

    78MB6Gb.jpg
  • SimKeatsSimKeats Posts: 2,186 Member
    This makes absolutely no sense... why should new players to The Sims 4 be given early packs for free, while the rest of us needed to purchase them?

    The answer is no... and if EA decided to do this, then Paralives will just keep looking better and better!

    Stop giving EA horrible ideas... they've already done terrible things to this game as it is.

    Edit: Besides, the first three Sims games never did this... so why should Sims 4 be any different? Again, your idea makes no sense... at all. In all honesty, it really just sounds like you're someone who doesn't own all packs and are bitter because you'd have to buy them all if you want them in your game, so you're throwing this idea out there with the off chance that EA would actually end up doing it...

    Who are you even talking to? I don't think anyone at this point in the thread is advocating anyone being given free stuff, but yes, you have made it abundantly clear that the very idea offends you, and doesn't make sense to you.
  • LustianiciaLustianicia Posts: 2,489 Member
    edited April 2021
    SimKeats wrote: »
    This makes absolutely no sense... why should new players to The Sims 4 be given early packs for free, while the rest of us needed to purchase them?

    The answer is no... and if EA decided to do this, then Paralives will just keep looking better and better!

    Stop giving EA horrible ideas... they've already done terrible things to this game as it is.

    Edit: Besides, the first three Sims games never did this... so why should Sims 4 be any different? Again, your idea makes no sense... at all. In all honesty, it really just sounds like you're someone who doesn't own all packs and are bitter because you'd have to buy them all if you want them in your game, so you're throwing this idea out there with the off chance that EA would actually end up doing it...

    Who are you even talking to? I don't think anyone at this point in the thread is advocating anyone being given free stuff, but yes, you have made it abundantly clear that the very idea offends you, and doesn't make sense to you.

    The entire thread is literally about bundling expansion pack content into the base game... lol Do you even know how to read? Your attempt at being snarky against me was honestly unnecessary... lol

    And yes, you're correct... the idea of people getting content for free that I had to pay for definitely IS offensive. It's a slap in the face from EA.
    Favorite Packs
    Sims 1: Hot Date
    Sims 2: Seasons
    Sims 2: Happy Holiday Stuff
    Sims 3: Seasons
    Sims 3: 70's, 80's, & 90's Stuff
    Sims 4: Seasons
    Sims 4: Paranormal Stuff
    Sims 4: Strangerville Game Pack

    78MB6Gb.jpg
  • UniqueKhaosUniqueKhaos Posts: 470 Member
    If Sims 4 is to grow they should give us packs, features, updates and bug fixes that we actually want, not whatever they pull out of a hat. Incorporating packs that we’ve paid for into base game now, for a game that has “years” to go, is in poor taste and has no logic or merit. There are frequent sales and if people want to have the full game, they should take advantage of them. I’m already annoyed at them making pack items base game when adding new features or doing updates.

    Once the game is done, if they choose to make an ultimate collection that’s fine but to do it now would ensure that many would never support their games again.
  • SimmerGeorgeSimmerGeorge Posts: 2,724 Member
    So should people now be upset the game was given out for free a few times? I mean most of us did pay for it.
    Where's my Sims 5 squad at?
  • CAPTAIN_NXR7CAPTAIN_NXR7 Posts: 4,451 Member
    edited April 2021
    Interesting discussion.

    Here are my 2 thoughts:

    1. Folks getting content for free many years down the line doesn’t upset me one bit. Good for them!

    It’s important that I feel I got my money’s worth at the time that I bought that content, all those moments that I played with this content when it was new & fresh, when I needed it, when I wanted it. This has more value to me than feeling narky just because someone got it for free a decade later. *

    Of course I could wait for 7- 10 years and hope stuff gets released for free so I don’t feel “I got ripped off”. I just don’t have that kind of mindset. I don’t have the patience. I live in the present, not in the far far future. But that’s my opinion and perhaps it’s a rare one.

    2. Adding all DLC content to Basegame is NOT something I’d agree upon. Too much bulk. Too much content forced on people who may not want that content. Adding non-intrusive systems such as calendars is OK but most should be added by choice. Keep it separate. Keep it simple.

    That’s all from me. 👍🏼



    * note: I can live with content added for free 6+ years after initial release of that content. As a paying customer I wouldn’t be too happy with a company who’d give everything away for free prior to that 6 year period.
  • Hearts4uHearts4u Posts: 1,775 Member
    edited April 2021
    Two aspects of growth could be attributed to the fact that:

    1. The base game has been free which does not bother me one bit.
    2. Periodic and regular sales which allows others to pick up content at a discounted price.

    So, while the game is still in production, it makes no sense to me for them to start combing or bundling packs into the base game. One, they are still developing and releasing content. Two, they can just continue to offer discounts which are great for consumers and increasing sales.
    Post edited by Hearts4u on
    Origin ID: littlebonnieblue
  • telemwilltelemwill Posts: 1,752 Member
    I got the base game when it was free. Would I have wanted expansion packs added on? For sure, if it was Seasons, maybe Parenthood, Outdoor Retreat, and a few of the early stuff packs. I think offering a bundle like that to entice new players would be great. And I wouldn't mind that I paid for for those packs myself.

    I wouldn't have wanted much more than that though. I like to play through the content slowly and would have found it overwhelming. And there are some packs I may not want at all or only after carefully considering how they will affect my game. I still haven't purchased Get Famous or Eco Living for instance.

    I have waited to purchase packs when they are on sale and when I was ready to play them. When I got City Living, I knew I wanted to play the Bheeda family right away, so I could name the baby. I just bought Discover University and planned it so I could move all the premades students into one house and have then graduate together. I know I would have missed not being able to do those things.
  • drake_mccartydrake_mccarty Posts: 6,114 Member
    On the topic of Gold Editions, I have never seen one for a game that didn’t have a season pass. In terms of a complete edition of Sims 3 or 4, that will never materialize. Literally too much content for that.
  • EA_LeelooEA_Leeloo Posts: 2,019 EA Staff (retired)
    Hey there! FYI: I moved this thread to the Game Feedback section. :)
  • SERVERFRASERVERFRA Posts: 7,108 Member
    I so agree with you @CAPTAIN_NXR7 , after over 6 1/2 years of Sims 4 that's not a bad deal for newbies.

    For myself & my daughter, we've played Sims 4 since 2014. However, we both had to wait until the fall of 2018 to finally be allowed to purchase any of the Game Packs & Stuff Packs thanks to our Canadian Red Tape. Since then, I mostly don't hesitate to getting the Game Packs & Stuff Packs. However, the Eco Living did first give me the "yikes!!" when the trailer came out. If it weren't for the toggle & the Green Environment I wouldn't have gotten it. I always look to the hidden treasures of each pack & try not to judge the pack by it's cover.
  • TOLKIENTOLKIEN Posts: 1,594 Member
    edited April 2021
    SERVERFRA wrote: »
    I so agree with you @CAPTAIN_NXR7 , after over 6 1/2 years of Sims 4 that's not a bad deal for newbies.

    For myself & my daughter, we've played Sims 4 since 2014. However, we both had to wait until the fall of 2018 to finally be allowed to purchase any of the Game Packs & Stuff Packs thanks to our Canadian Red Tape. Since then, I mostly don't hesitate to getting the Game Packs & Stuff Packs. However, the Eco Living did first give me the "yikes!!" when the trailer came out. If it weren't for the toggle & the Green Environment I wouldn't have gotten it. I always look to the hidden treasures of each pack & try not to judge the pack by it's cover.

    Aye what? I'm Canadian and not following your comment about Canadian red tape. The packs are released, well all games are at the same time worldwide.

    The only real issue in Canada is its cheaper (by nearly $15!) to buy the packs physically (online or in stores) because for whatever reason/excuse Origin marks up the price from retail of 39.99 CAD to $54 on their digital store - which is why I tell people just to buy the expansions in store. Obviously this isn't possible for other packs but at least the markup isn't as bad. (yes I know EA claims its due to regional pricing online but why sell the game for 39.99 CAD physically than and only mark it up the digital ver lol?)

    Regardless I'm not really sure that qualifies as red tape does it?
Sign In or Register to comment.
Return to top