Forum:Game packs?
As you may or may not have noticed, EA has rolled out a new type of product, which they've dubbed a "Game Pack." Game Packs (or GPs for short) are somewhat like miniature expansions... they include new objects, interactions, features, and/or destinations, but have less content generally than a full-out expansion. According to EA sources, these aren't replacing Stuff Packs per se, but they generally will have more content than the TS2/TS3 era SPs did.
The introduction of the new type of pack raises a few questions, specifically with how we choose to organize information about packs. Right now, we have all info about packs redirected to Expansion pack; that article has info about EPs, SPs, and Compilation Packs (as of the time of writing, there is no on-wiki entry regarding GPs). But now more than ever, it's clear that the different packs don't all fit within the umbrella of "expansion pack," because EA has chosen to define an expansion pack as a tier of products that they offer, rather than it being all the non-base game content they provide. Having info about SPs, GPs and SPs on the EP page makes little sense so long as that page keeps its current name.
So from where I'm sitting, I see a couple options jump out. The first is that we keep all the content on the same page but rename that page to something other than Expansion Pack; into a name that will more broadly define content not from a base game. Whatever that term would be, would have to be decided as well. One idea that came to my mind is to lump all these things together as "content packs" and name that article accordingly. A second option would be to split information about EPs, SPs, CPs and GPs onto their own separate articles. Doing this would avoid confusion and solve the issue of what, collectively, these packs should be called. However, it would create some work on our end making all the links lead to the right places, and it may be difficult for us to get enough information for the SP or GP pages to stand on their own merits.
There may be other options worth considering, so if you can think of any please do suggest them. Otherwise, what does everyone think we should do in this situation? -- LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 01:06, December 20, 2014 (UTC)
- Initially I thought it might be a good idea to make pages for all the specific types of packs however looking at the expansion pack article there is not really that much information, to the extent that the stuff pack article, if made, would probably be just the one sentence we have and a list of stuff packs. I'm almost certain all the articles would be stuck as a stub. What I would like to do is to make one article that details everything, and just make stuff pack/expansion pack/etc redirect to the appropriate section on the article. Basically what we have now but renamed to a more catch-all title, for which content pack would probably be a decent title. ―ฬђ talk 03:34, December 20, 2014 (UTC)
- When I mentioned this issue on the IRC channel, I was in favor of essentially what you said, but in all honesty either approach would work and be alright with me - LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 02:39, December 23, 2014 (UTC)
Given little response here, I have boldly implemented a change; "Expansion pack" has been renamed to "Content pack", and there are sections on that page for EPs, GPs, SPs, and CPs. I'll leave this thread open to see if a consensus does develop either in line with or contrary to these changes. -- LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 05:12, January 11, 2015 (UTC)
Resolution[edit source]
It looks like nobody has anything to say on this matter and given an action has been performed to no complaints I see no reason to leave this open. If an issue on this matter does arise however, please make another thread. ―ฬђ talk 12:46, January 30, 2015 (UTC)