"BatmanFanGirl;c-17598283" wrote:
There is no way that a game pack from 10 years ago could provide the same content at the same price all these years later.
This isn't true though. We're dealing mostly in digital goods, so what matters most is the number of units sold, not necessarily how much each one costs. If Sims 4 does a lot more sales than Sims 3, they'll be making substantially more money even if the Sims 4 games are half the price. The expense of selling additional units is almost nothing due to the lack of shipping/packaging/other costs, which is why there are frequent sales. We also don't know how much this game costs to develop. EA has outsourced a lot of quality control to China, Romania, and India... so it's possible that Sims 4 costs less than Sims 3. I'm sure EA has monitored customer habits extensively and through that have discovered that $10 stuff packs are easy money. Many people are willing to spend $10 on little content because a lot of people simply don't care much about $10. But for $20 they need a lot more (hence the creation of game packs) and for $40 or $50 well... it might not be worth it to EA to charge $50 for anything because they are likely to end up making less on it than they would on a $40 pack due to not enough people buying it initially. People already wait for the $40 packs to go on sale. There's really almost no way that they'll have extra money to reinvest due to selling an EP for $50.
The market is currently telling EA that $50 for an EP doesn't work. Maybe things will change in the future, but maybe not. We don't know if EPs have a better ROI than GPs or SPs and I really doubt that making EPs more expensive will encourage EA to invest more in the Sims. I don't even want EA to have the idea that they should charge more, because they already don't have too much incentive to reinvest.