It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
For me it all depends on two questions :
A. Does it make sense to make something base game
B. Does the pack have enough left to be worth getting
For most things patched into the base game it makes sense. Especially something like the calendar so can be integrated into all packs. I am actually hoping for the baking skill to become base game one day so base game cakes can finally be baked instead of cooked.
Another thing to remember is whether or not the original pack is still worth getting. In the case of photography and the calendar, the pack it once belonged to,, seasons and get to work, still has plenty to offer. Season still has weather, holidays, a career, bees, scouts,... Get to work still has aliens, active careers, retail lots,... The hot tub on the other hand is a different matter. Perfect patio has nothing left to offer, not a single gameplay element. I feel cheated by that particular update and think this stuff pack should be reduced in price permanently or updated with something new.
Whe it comes to patching in single cas items, I used to be against it but nowadays I am OK with it.
I'm not bothered if they make some items Base Game. For instance, I chose not to purchase Eco Living, but they made ladders Base Game, which is the only thing of value I wanted from that pack. This allows me to make the choice, based on what the pack itself, gives.
I consider those ladders as something different. Ladders were base game from the moment they were announced. It was never exclusively dlc and patched in at a later date. And I am happy about that.
It is sometimes okay to make the DLC content base game, so long as the value we get back is greater or equal to what we lost.
I'm ok with certain mechanics being patched in to the base game, but not specific DLC objects. The calendar is the perfect example. As a DLC feature, it was primarily for showing seasons and holidays, both of which were features that influenced me to purchase the pack. Patching into base game makes it possible to justify spending developer hours integrating the calendar into new packs, since everyone can make use of it instead of only X% of players who would be able to use that function. Players without seasons still don't have access to holidays, which is fair; if those players want holidays, they can choose to purchase Seasons.
Bunk beds were not handled well. Make the mechanics base game, sure, so that way future packs can add bunk beds without needing to add code to make them usable every time. But taking an existing asset from DLC and patching that in devalues the content I paid for. Each time they release new content, EA has to convince me that their content is the additional cost (and I'll admit, so far it has been). If they're going to slowly patch it in rather than develop new bg content, their DLC is less valuable to me. Why pay money now if there's a chance it will be free later? The Sims franchise is clearing raking in dough; EA can afford to pay for the game artists to make a new bed, especially since they have to modify the asset anyway.
I'm ok with certain mechanics being patched in to the base game, but not specific DLC objects. The calendar is the perfect example. As a DLC feature, it was primarily for showing seasons and holidays, both of which were features that influenced me to purchase the pack. Patching into base game makes it possible to justify spending developer hours integrating the calendar into new packs, since everyone can make use of it instead of only X% of players who would be able to use that function. Players without seasons still don't have access to holidays, which is fair; if those players want holidays, they can choose to purchase Seasons.
Bunk beds were not handled well. Make the mechanics base game, sure, so that way future packs can add bunk beds without needing to add code to make them usable every time. But taking an existing asset from DLC and patching that in devalues the content I paid for. Each time they release new content, EA has to convince me that their content is the additional cost (and I'll admit, so far it has been). If they're going to slowly patch it in rather than develop new bg content, their DLC is less valuable to me. Why pay money now if there's a chance it will be free later? The Sims franchise is clearing raking in dough; EA can afford to pay for the game artists to make a new bed, especially since they have to modify the asset anyway.
Correct me I am wrong, but I am 95% sure bunkbeds were introduced in a BG patch and then we got a bunch of new varieties in DHD. Like they did ladders in Eco or ceiling fans in IL, with one new variety. I suppose I can dig up the old patch notes, coverage, and live stream, but if I am wrong which pack are they supposedly endemic to?
Edit: Yeah, I went back and dug it up since it was nagging at the back of my mind. We got the first iteration of bunkbeds back on March 23rd. Here is the Sims Community article talking about it.
They were teased around the kit reveal, from what I remember, and later got their full functionality to slot items like desks properly. So never DLC exclusive, but there are examples of things like that like hot tubs.
I mean I think once some time has gone by, it's fine. Do people get upset when a pack they paid US $40 for goes on sale after some time, or becomes available for inclusion in a US $40 bundle with two other packs?
I started playing Sims in 2020 because Sims 2 bundled with Seasons, Pets, Nightlife, Open for Business, Bon Voyage, University, Happy Holiday Stuff, Family Fun Stuff, and Glamour Life Stuff was available on the App Store for all of US $35 or something. Which I'm sure is way less than most people paid if they bought that stuff at release. Then I happily moved over to Sims 4 not too long after.
I also love everything @Babykittyjade said, about enjoying it when others are happy
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
Adding calendars is fine with me since that's actually really helpful for everyone to have. That anniversary hot tub is not the same hot tub FYI...
However, adding random clothing items from packs is stupid because EA wants to look like the good guy for adding free content. It's a lazy thing to do if they wanted to add free content. They eventually figured out "hey, why not commission CC creators?"
It is always okay to make DLC content base game; we do not lose anything either way.
I think the example given by the OP of Lifestyles is a good one. Having lifestyles available in the base game, with cross play would benefit everyone. So would having the character traits that came with Parenthood. But I can't see any point in adding clothing or hairstyles, or furniture, for that matter.
I'm ok with certain mechanics being patched in to the base game, but not specific DLC objects. The calendar is the perfect example. As a DLC feature, it was primarily for showing seasons and holidays, both of which were features that influenced me to purchase the pack. Patching into base game makes it possible to justify spending developer hours integrating the calendar into new packs, since everyone can make use of it instead of only X% of players who would be able to use that function. Players without seasons still don't have access to holidays, which is fair; if those players want holidays, they can choose to purchase Seasons.
Bunk beds were not handled well. Make the mechanics base game, sure, so that way future packs can add bunk beds without needing to add code to make them usable every time. But taking an existing asset from DLC and patching that in devalues the content I paid for. Each time they release new content, EA has to convince me that their content is the additional cost (and I'll admit, so far it has been). If they're going to slowly patch it in rather than develop new bg content, their DLC is less valuable to me. Why pay money now if there's a chance it will be free later? The Sims franchise is clearing raking in dough; EA can afford to pay for the game artists to make a new bed, especially since they have to modify the asset anyway.
Correct me I am wrong, but I am 95% sure bunkbeds were introduced in a BG patch and then we got a bunch of new varieties in DHD. Like they did ladders in Eco or ceiling fans in IL, with one new variety. I suppose I can dig up the old patch notes, coverage, and live stream, but if I am wrong which pack are they supposedly endemic to?
Edit: Yeah, I went back and dug it up since it was nagging at the back of my mind. We got the first iteration of bunkbeds back on March 23rd. Here is the Sims Community article talking about it.
They were teased around the kit reveal, from what I remember, and later got their full functionality to slot items like desks properly. So never DLC exclusive, but there are examples of things like that like hot tubs.
@Calico45 My issue wasn't DHD bunkbeds (that's actually the way I'd prefer it), it was that they took a Parenthood bed and converted it to a basegame bunkbed in the patch instead of creating a new bg bunkbed or pulling from assets already in the base game.
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
For me, I'd say CAS assets and b/b are a bit much. QoL (like with calendars) is fine, so long as it is lacking if a DLC is not present (like Seasons), but still improves the BG experience. Skills are...iffy. Photography is fine, given GTW didn't have it as a main feature, but porting the items with it (other than a couple of the cameras) is too much. This still gives a better experience to BG, but not much better than with (for example) Moschino.
I really wish they would port baking. Just add the cupcake machine recipes to every oven, but only with GTW, and let us bake normal cakes and such otherwise.
Check out my 'Simming Tips' for detailed tips and tricks (TS4).
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
When I'm thinking of seasons, in my opinion seasons should been in base game since the beginning and not be money grab in form of a dlc.
But here's the thing: I don't want Seasons. I don't want hot weather, or cold weather, or holidays inserting themselves. I have not bought that pack. I literally would not want those features if I can avoid them. It may be wildly popular. But that doesn't make it universally desirable. And if it is popular, it makes sense to sell that option.
The calendar appearing in my game has not unduly intruded - I mind it less than festival announcements for San Myshuno and Mt. Komorebi, which I very much wish I could disable. But I am glad not to have Seasons features, just as I am glad I can purchase Realm of Magic, and not have Vampires. I like to be selective in my content.
Look, it's okay to not want seasons, that's why I have written in my opinion and notin general, I can only speak for myself. For me it's desirable to have it in the game from beginning, for others not. That's okay, other have different opinions, I would be more concerned if everyone have the same opinion.
I started to play sims4 when seasons came out, although I bought the vanilla version when it was published 3 years earlier. fter my sims 3 disaster to I wanted to give that series a new chance. I did play it for 3 hours or so then stopped it. It was so abysmal boring to play without seasons, that I never touched the game again for three years. I loved to have the seasons in my game since sims 2, for me it's very important to have it in a life simulation from the beginning, but I wouldn't mind they offer a toggle for those who don't want this circle of seasons, which depends on the personal play. I wish they would offer more toggles.
I'm reminded of a competition show here in the UK called Four in a Bed in which B&B owners stay in each others B&Bs and pay what they think their stay is worth, and the winner is the B&B who was paid the most in relation to the actual cost of the room. However, rarely did anyone pay what they thought it was worth, and instead took the actual price and started knocking off £5 for every fault they could find (even if they search all over to find a speck of dust at the top of the wardrobe) regardless of the quality of the room or its asking price.
It sort of feels like this with what they have added in base game. Sure, it's not ideal a single asset is made base game instead of a completely new asset, but in the grand scheme of the DLCs they came from, they are specks of dust on top of the wardrobe. The outcry over the calendar was especially erroneous to me as people were acting like a huge, core gameplay mechanic of Seasons was being made base game when in reality it was a small quality of life improvement via a user interface that should've been base game when Seasons released due to its functionality for other packs, showing festivals and award shows, while the core gameplay mechanic that related to the Calendar, holidays, was still restricted to the pack.
The only thing that is a bit more than a speck of dust is the hot tub, which is the core gameplay of a pack, even if it was a stuff pack. At the same time, I always found it very annoying when an object is introduced in a pack but only has one or two variants, like in the Sims 3 there were only two professional bars (or three if you had Island Paradise), and whenever you built a bar, you had to completely around one of those styles, even worse with the coffee shop which came in one variant that matched only the cheap base game counters.
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
I'm ok with something like we will be getting in the Refresh for Spa Day for example, some nail colours and some enhancements to base game stuff. The Base game enhancements have to be things we got in previous base games or give a taster to what you could have if you bought the Game pack or the Expansion covering those things fully. Terrain tools should be universal as otherwise the Gallery would be unusable for many.
Things that are a main theme for a pack. like Seasons never should, or universities, butlers, llamas, cows, chickens and buildings made for specific packs like diners, bowling alleys, spas etc.
As the game is getting older though and if we want the game to keep going even after any Sims 5 or similar comes out next, anything that keeps Maxis still working on it could be excused by me if I got some added extras for my own bought packs!
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
It depends on the DLC content. If you have mechanics that get introduced in one DLC pack, then decide to use those mechanics further down the line in another DLC pack, it's probably best to shift those mechanics into the basegame so you don't have a situation where buying one DLC requires you to own the other one (players of Stellaris are no doubt familiar with this issue.)
There are exceptions, of course—having the My First Pet SP require the Cats&Dogs EP makes a measure of sense—but for the most part, selling something that doesn't work unless you also buy something else (other than "you need the basegame to get the DLC") is bad business. Customers feel nickel-and-dimed, and restricting your potential customer base tends to depress your revenue, so nobody wins.
(he/him)
And remember this above all. Our Roman gods are watching. Make sure they are not ashamed!
My NBA site, Pace and Space
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
I don't really care about the value because that's subjective anyway, different players like different types of content. Ultimately, I wouldn't want the overall enjoyability of the game to be held back just because something was first released in a pack of some sort. If there's a system or object or feature that could be expanded upon and improved by being transferred to the base game, I'm all for it, do that thing. But there are some cases where I feel like it can diminish the need for a pack altogether (*cough* hot tub *cough*) and in that situation, I do feel that maybe a pack refresh is in order, since that's a Thing now.
It is sometimes okay to make the DLC content base game, so long as the value we get back is greater or equal to what we lost.
Honestly, the patching of DLC content into base game just gives an impression that the Sims team has a lack of foresight in the direction they want the game to go in. For instance, the calendar update should have originally been in the base game when seasons came out because the feature can be used for future content (like the festival information we got or even a moon phase feature if they ever do a werewolf pack) and provides quality of life updates with the ability to plan events. What really baffled me recently was that the team patched in the vegetarian trait to the base game, but then made lactose intolerant tied to cottage living.
I think the team has done a better job avoiding this by offering basic base game items (like the bunk beds and nails that we will be receiving soon) and giving more options with the DLC. I hope the team continues doing this so we can avoid having DLC content patched in later.
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
Im generally fine with it since when they do it, its usually so that feature can be used in other things.
Like i didnt get why people were so upset about the calendar being added to base game. I like that the calendar wasnt yet another feature they added and quickly abandoned, im glad other packs can use it too. Im also glad they kept some calendar things exclusive to the seasons pack, like the holidays.
My speculations on hints for future content:
-Cars Update
-Spiral/Diagonal Stairs Update
-Hotel Pack
-Romance Pack (possibly combined with Hotel Pack)
-Bands Pack
-Royalty Pack
-Fashion Design Pack
-Fairies Pack
-Werewolf Pack
-France-inspired World
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
For me, I have no problem with it if it's not a key feature of the original DLC. For example, the calendar from Seasons is cool, but it's not a key feature -- the changing seasons is the key, and the impact that has on activities (it's like raaaain on your wedding day....), gardening, etc. And with all the different festivals we have plus the ability to schedule events in advance it's very useful. Something like aliens being made BG I might have a little more of an issue with because that's more of a key feature of GTW, but if we got regular police NPCs to go along with burglars I'd be okay with that since they wouldn't be a playable career.
Check out my Gallery! Origin ID: justme22
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
It doesn’t bother me if they do it. However it seems to offend a lot of other people so maybe they just shouldn’t for the sake of peace.
If they thought like that we’d never get anything ever again. The Paranormal stuff on Twitter had so many “nobody asked for this!” comments it was almost spambot levels. Anything they do is going to get a “why are you making this thing I don’t want instead of the thing I want!?” response.
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
Adding calendars is fine with me since that's actually really helpful for everyone to have. That anniversary hot tub is not the same hot tub FYI...
However, adding random clothing items from packs is stupid because EA wants to look like the good guy for adding free content. It's a lazy thing to do if they wanted to add free content. They eventually figured out "hey, why not commission CC creators?"
I'm fine with commissioning CC creators -- like Ebonix with her fingernails we're getting in the Spa Day refresh today. It's a way of recognizing the work creators have done to supplement the game, and heck, why reinvent the wheel if the content is out there?
Check out my Gallery! Origin ID: justme22
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
Im generally fine with it since when they do it, its usually so that feature can be used in other things.
Like i didnt get why people were so upset about the calendar being added to base game. I like that the calendar wasnt yet another feature they added and quickly abandoned, im glad other packs can use it too. Im also glad they kept some calendar things exclusive to the seasons pack, like the holidays.
I really like that now the festivals show up on the calendar -- so if Geekcon is coming up I can have my Geek teens take a vacation day from school to go enjoy themselves.
Check out my Gallery! Origin ID: justme22
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
I like it when things are made base game because many cannot afford to buy all the packs. I also like it if some things were available across several packs - say if espresso machines were made available to those with Dine Out because that makes total sense in my world. There are also things that should have been base game from the get go - like dance floors and DJ booths when we have night clubs (otherwise don't have night clubs in BG)
I can see the point of being annoyed when you've paid for something and then you get that one thing for free later, but overall I think the benefits are greater than the downsides. The one thing I would be hesitant about are things that massively alters gameplay or take too much away from the pack.
To give an example: Vampires are a pack of their own. I am not interested in vampires and have not bought the pack. If they suddenly introduced vampires into the base game, it would annoy me. Also if I had bought a pack only because I wanted vampires I would be similarly annoyed that I paid for something needlessly.
Another example would be if the main feature of a pack was suddenly made BG - so suddenly we could own a retail business without Get to work, or go to University without Discover University. Especially for the bigger expansions packs which we pay a lot of money for - but then I don't really see that happening. (Still restaurants as places to visit (not own) I'd be perfectly fine with even if I did buy Dine Out because really that should have been base game from the get go).
What I would love where if they released some of the stuff packs after a few years, or at least some items from them. They are cheap enough that it wouldn't really matter, and it would make the game richer over time. Maybe come up with a compensation for those who own the pack in those cases.
Moreover, I advise that the cart button must be destroyed!
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
I think it mostly depends on why they’re doing it.
Adding photography to the base game allowed it to be expanded on in the Moschino pack, and they did leave some stuff in Get To Work. I have Seasons and I don’t care that they made the Calendar base game because it’s not like they added the holidays, just the scheduling part.
It is a little weird when they just convert a window or hair to the base game.
It is sometimes okay to make the DLC content base game, so long as the value we get back is greater or equal to what we lost.
The only time I had a problem with them adding an item to base for free from a dlc was the hot tub , and not because of it being a dlc item, but because it was supposed to be an anniversary gift to the whole sims community. I saw it as a problem because if you already previously bought the DLC then what did you really get as a gift for the anniversary, just a reskin of an item you already bought. In this case they should have just created a brand new item as the gift. Other than that, I have no issue with items being added to base from DLC, it honestly doesn't bother me.
It depends on the DLC content; somethings should have always been base game/would have been better there and others should have always been DLC exclusive.
I think things like the calendar are fine to add to the base game as it wasn't the main selling point of the game. I honestly don't care what things they put into the base game because the packs go on sale all the time anyway and the things that they add are usually never the selling point of the pack. The only time I was upset was when they made a pack that needed another pack to play. If you look at the base game it's been free and on sale for $5.00. I bought it for $20.00 a couple of years after it came out. I'm not mad that people bought it for cheaper and even got the game for free and the same applies to them patching in some content from packs to the base game.
Check out my gallery for house builds! Username: aejp24
Comments
A. Does it make sense to make something base game
B. Does the pack have enough left to be worth getting
For most things patched into the base game it makes sense. Especially something like the calendar so can be integrated into all packs. I am actually hoping for the baking skill to become base game one day so base game cakes can finally be baked instead of cooked.
Another thing to remember is whether or not the original pack is still worth getting. In the case of photography and the calendar, the pack it once belonged to,, seasons and get to work, still has plenty to offer. Season still has weather, holidays, a career, bees, scouts,... Get to work still has aliens, active careers, retail lots,... The hot tub on the other hand is a different matter. Perfect patio has nothing left to offer, not a single gameplay element. I feel cheated by that particular update and think this stuff pack should be reduced in price permanently or updated with something new.
Whe it comes to patching in single cas items, I used to be against it but nowadays I am OK with it.
I consider those ladders as something different. Ladders were base game from the moment they were announced. It was never exclusively dlc and patched in at a later date. And I am happy about that.
Bunk beds were not handled well. Make the mechanics base game, sure, so that way future packs can add bunk beds without needing to add code to make them usable every time. But taking an existing asset from DLC and patching that in devalues the content I paid for. Each time they release new content, EA has to convince me that their content is the additional cost (and I'll admit, so far it has been). If they're going to slowly patch it in rather than develop new bg content, their DLC is less valuable to me. Why pay money now if there's a chance it will be free later? The Sims franchise is clearing raking in dough; EA can afford to pay for the game artists to make a new bed, especially since they have to modify the asset anyway.
Correct me I am wrong, but I am 95% sure bunkbeds were introduced in a BG patch and then we got a bunch of new varieties in DHD. Like they did ladders in Eco or ceiling fans in IL, with one new variety. I suppose I can dig up the old patch notes, coverage, and live stream, but if I am wrong which pack are they supposedly endemic to?
Edit: Yeah, I went back and dug it up since it was nagging at the back of my mind. We got the first iteration of bunkbeds back on March 23rd. Here is the Sims Community article talking about it.
https://simscommunity.info/2021/03/23/the-sims-4-bunk-beds-and-their-functionality/
They were teased around the kit reveal, from what I remember, and later got their full functionality to slot items like desks properly. So never DLC exclusive, but there are examples of things like that like hot tubs.
I started playing Sims in 2020 because Sims 2 bundled with Seasons, Pets, Nightlife, Open for Business, Bon Voyage, University, Happy Holiday Stuff, Family Fun Stuff, and Glamour Life Stuff was available on the App Store for all of US $35 or something. Which I'm sure is way less than most people paid if they bought that stuff at release. Then I happily moved over to Sims 4 not too long after.
I also love everything @Babykittyjade said, about enjoying it when others are happy
However, adding random clothing items from packs is stupid because EA wants to look like the good guy for adding free content. It's a lazy thing to do if they wanted to add free content. They eventually figured out "hey, why not commission CC creators?"
S3 simblr: http://simplysimming.tumblr.com/
S4 simblr: http://simlogic.tumblr.com/
@Calico45 My issue wasn't DHD bunkbeds (that's actually the way I'd prefer it), it was that they took a Parenthood bed and converted it to a basegame bunkbed in the patch instead of creating a new bg bunkbed or pulling from assets already in the base game.
I really wish they would port baking. Just add the cupcake machine recipes to every oven, but only with GTW, and let us bake normal cakes and such otherwise.
Look, it's okay to not want seasons, that's why I have written in my opinion and not in general, I can only speak for myself. For me it's desirable to have it in the game from beginning, for others not. That's okay, other have different opinions, I would be more concerned if everyone have the same opinion.
I started to play sims4 when seasons came out, although I bought the vanilla version when it was published 3 years earlier. fter my sims 3 disaster to I wanted to give that series a new chance. I did play it for 3 hours or so then stopped it. It was so abysmal boring to play without seasons, that I never touched the game again for three years. I loved to have the seasons in my game since sims 2, for me it's very important to have it in a life simulation from the beginning, but I wouldn't mind they offer a toggle for those who don't want this circle of seasons, which depends on the personal play. I wish they would offer more toggles.
It sort of feels like this with what they have added in base game. Sure, it's not ideal a single asset is made base game instead of a completely new asset, but in the grand scheme of the DLCs they came from, they are specks of dust on top of the wardrobe. The outcry over the calendar was especially erroneous to me as people were acting like a huge, core gameplay mechanic of Seasons was being made base game when in reality it was a small quality of life improvement via a user interface that should've been base game when Seasons released due to its functionality for other packs, showing festivals and award shows, while the core gameplay mechanic that related to the Calendar, holidays, was still restricted to the pack.
The only thing that is a bit more than a speck of dust is the hot tub, which is the core gameplay of a pack, even if it was a stuff pack. At the same time, I always found it very annoying when an object is introduced in a pack but only has one or two variants, like in the Sims 3 there were only two professional bars (or three if you had Island Paradise), and whenever you built a bar, you had to completely around one of those styles, even worse with the coffee shop which came in one variant that matched only the cheap base game counters.
Things that are a main theme for a pack. like Seasons never should, or universities, butlers, llamas, cows, chickens and buildings made for specific packs like diners, bowling alleys, spas etc.
As the game is getting older though and if we want the game to keep going even after any Sims 5 or similar comes out next, anything that keeps Maxis still working on it could be excused by me if I got some added extras for my own bought packs!
There are exceptions, of course—having the My First Pet SP require the Cats&Dogs EP makes a measure of sense—but for the most part, selling something that doesn't work unless you also buy something else (other than "you need the basegame to get the DLC") is bad business. Customers feel nickel-and-dimed, and restricting your potential customer base tends to depress your revenue, so nobody wins.
And remember this above all. Our Roman gods are watching. Make sure they are not ashamed!
My NBA site, Pace and Space
I think the team has done a better job avoiding this by offering basic base game items (like the bunk beds and nails that we will be receiving soon) and giving more options with the DLC. I hope the team continues doing this so we can avoid having DLC content patched in later.
Like i didnt get why people were so upset about the calendar being added to base game. I like that the calendar wasnt yet another feature they added and quickly abandoned, im glad other packs can use it too. Im also glad they kept some calendar things exclusive to the seasons pack, like the holidays.
-Cars Update
-Spiral/Diagonal Stairs Update
-Hotel Pack
-Romance Pack (possibly combined with Hotel Pack)
-Bands Pack
-Royalty Pack
-Fashion Design Pack
-Fairies Pack
-Werewolf Pack
-France-inspired World
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
If they thought like that we’d never get anything ever again. The Paranormal stuff on Twitter had so many “nobody asked for this!” comments it was almost spambot levels. Anything they do is going to get a “why are you making this thing I don’t want instead of the thing I want!?” response.
I'm fine with commissioning CC creators -- like Ebonix with her fingernails we're getting in the Spa Day refresh today. It's a way of recognizing the work creators have done to supplement the game, and heck, why reinvent the wheel if the content is out there?
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
I really like that now the festivals show up on the calendar -- so if Geekcon is coming up I can have my Geek teens take a vacation day from school to go enjoy themselves.
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
I can see the point of being annoyed when you've paid for something and then you get that one thing for free later, but overall I think the benefits are greater than the downsides. The one thing I would be hesitant about are things that massively alters gameplay or take too much away from the pack.
To give an example: Vampires are a pack of their own. I am not interested in vampires and have not bought the pack. If they suddenly introduced vampires into the base game, it would annoy me. Also if I had bought a pack only because I wanted vampires I would be similarly annoyed that I paid for something needlessly.
Another example would be if the main feature of a pack was suddenly made BG - so suddenly we could own a retail business without Get to work, or go to University without Discover University. Especially for the bigger expansions packs which we pay a lot of money for - but then I don't really see that happening. (Still restaurants as places to visit (not own) I'd be perfectly fine with even if I did buy Dine Out because really that should have been base game from the get go).
What I would love where if they released some of the stuff packs after a few years, or at least some items from them. They are cheap enough that it wouldn't really matter, and it would make the game richer over time. Maybe come up with a compensation for those who own the pack in those cases.
Adding photography to the base game allowed it to be expanded on in the Moschino pack, and they did leave some stuff in Get To Work. I have Seasons and I don’t care that they made the Calendar base game because it’s not like they added the holidays, just the scheduling part.
It is a little weird when they just convert a window or hair to the base game.