Forum Announcement, Click Here to Read More From EA_Cade.
The Sims 4 vs. the Sims Franchise from a historical, statistical perspective
DeservedCriticism
Posts: 2,251 Member
Just wanted to sit down and compare some Sims game stats throughout the years, though I might as well share what I found since others might be interested:
The Sims 4 was released September 2nd, 2014. It has been on the market for 2 years and 6 months as of now, with April beginning the 7th month. In this time frame, it has released 3 expansion packs, 4 game packs and 10 stuff packs. The base game and all pack content at full price total out to be $360. Of that, $360 total, $60 is for the base game, $120 is for expansions, $80 is for game packs, and $100 is for stuff packs. The current release rate for expansion packs is one expansion per 10 months. The current release rate for game packs is one game pack per 7 and a half months. The current release rate for stuff packs is one stuff pack per 3 months. The Sims 4 has received mixed reviews, both from the established Simmers that have made videos since Sims 3, and from official critic reviews.
The Sims released on January 31st, in the year 2000. Within the first 2 years and 6 months of development, it had 4 expansions. Game packs and Stuff packs were not a thing at this time. Within the first 2 years and 6 months of development, the total retail value was $220. (assuming packs were $40...right?) The release rate for expansions was about one expansion per 7.5 months. The Sims remains one of the best-selling games of all time, and continues to be the best-selling Sims game of all time. The Sims lifespan continued until October 2003 when the last expansion was released, giving it an expansion total of 7 and a lifespan of about 3 years and 10 months.
The Sims 2 released on September 14th, 2004. Within the first 2 years and 6 months of development, it had 5 expansions and 4 stuff packs, just shy of 5 stuff packs (5th in April). Game packs were not a concept. The base game and all pack content at this point in time would total out to $340 to $360, depending on if you count the fifth stuff pack. (again, pricecheck? Correct? I forget pricing) The release rate at this time was one expansion per 6 months and one stuff pack per ~6-6.5 months. The Sims 2 is probably the least criticized of all Sims games and largely well-regarded universally by fans. It received glowing reviews and sold a (then) record 1 million copies in 10 days. (I would link the source but you'd just be getting the Sims 2's entire wiki page lolol) The Sims 2 lifespan continued until November 2008, giving it an expansion total of 8 and a stuff pack total of 10, alongside a total lifespan of 4 years and 2 months.
The Sims 3 released on June 2nd, 2009. Within the first 2 years and 6 months of development, it had 5 expansions and 4 stuff packs, alongside some store content which is difficult to tally, but for sake of simplicity we will tally the total neighborhood worlds released in the store at this time, which was 3 store worlds. Game packs were not a concept. The base game and all pack content and store world content at this point in time would total out to $380 (Riverview was free as an anti-piracy incentive and did not cost $20). The release rate at this time was one expansion per 6 months, one stuff pack per 7.5 months and one store world per 10 months. The Sims 3 met largely positive reviews with some degree of fan backlash due to dramatic changes to the experience, such as sacrificing the ability to switch households easily in exchange for a living world, or less ability to customize the town in exchange for the very same open world. It set a record for selling 1.4 million copies in it's first week. (again, wikipedia) The Sims 3 lifespan continued until October 2013, giving it an expansion total of 11, stuff pack total of 9 and a store world total of 11. It's total lifespan was 4 years and 4 months.
Observations:
-Historically, release rates have been subject to change and improvement. Sims 2's stuff packs began to release more frequently in the last two years, Sims 3's expansions began to release more frequently and Sims 3's store worlds began to release much more frequently. Sims 2 released about 2-3 more stuff packs than anticipated, Sims 3 released about 3 more expansions than anticipated and a whopping 6 more store worlds than anticipated.
-Historically, each iteration of the Sims has had a lifespan slightly longer than the former. The biggest leap in age length was an additional 4 months of development for Sims 2 over Sims 1.
-At current rates, there is still some degree of risk that Sims 4 will have the lowest expansion count. If you add 4 months onto Sims 4's reasonably estimated lifespan (so a total of 4 years, 8 months), continue with the current rate of expansion release and apply a bonus +1 expansion just for generousity/optimism, the total expansion count still ends at 6-7 expansions. The above point argues it's possible for Sims 4 to pick up the pace, but it seems clear it will be competing with Sims 1's tally moreso than Sims 3's. Whether game packs supplement this loss is largely a matter of opinion.
-Surprisingly, there seems to be no correlation between price and edition. One might expect the price to increase as the franchise becomes more established, but Sims 2, Sims 3 and Sims 4 all have costed about the same amount within the same time frame. (granted, I may be misremembering stuff pack prices of Sims 2 since I never saw them advertised, or even expansion prices of 1 and 2 since 🐸🐸🐸🐸 I was a kid; I didn't own money!)
-Likewise, there seems to be no correlation between edition and release rate. Sims 4 has drastically dabbled with the release rate of packs, dramatically accelerating stuff pack release, nearly halving expansion pack release and adding a new pack type into the mix with a similar release rate to expansions. Only Sims 2 and Sims 3 seem to have pack release rates that resemble each other.
-Fan reception has gone down consistently over time. There is almost a direct correlation between fan satisfaction, sales and release number. Sims 1 holds both the most critical acclaim and the most sales, whilst reception and (almost) sales have gone down since. The only oddity is that Sims 2's sales numbers do not align, having sold less than 3 and looking to sell less than 4 potentially. (difficult if not impossible to call, but certainly plausible given the little we know about Sims 4 sales)
-One of the most dramatic, unlisted changes in editions is of course the content itself. Both Sims 1 and Sims 2 had expansions focused on creating community lots, whereas for Sims 3 and 4 these are largely base game concepts. Sims 2 and Sims 3 both had one life state per expansion, a tradition that was ended by Sims 4, Get Together. Sims 2 and Sims 3 largely segmented "stuff" and "gameplay features" and almost never mixed them amongst stuff packs and expansion packs, whereas Sims 4 has yet to release a stuff pack devoid of some kind of gameplay feature. Many more additional feature changes are a bit harder to pinpoint, such as skill frequency (tends to increase each addition), story progression and core features. (personalites, emotions, attraction, reputation, job progress, difficulty)
The Sims 4 was released September 2nd, 2014. It has been on the market for 2 years and 6 months as of now, with April beginning the 7th month. In this time frame, it has released 3 expansion packs, 4 game packs and 10 stuff packs. The base game and all pack content at full price total out to be $360. Of that, $360 total, $60 is for the base game, $120 is for expansions, $80 is for game packs, and $100 is for stuff packs. The current release rate for expansion packs is one expansion per 10 months. The current release rate for game packs is one game pack per 7 and a half months. The current release rate for stuff packs is one stuff pack per 3 months. The Sims 4 has received mixed reviews, both from the established Simmers that have made videos since Sims 3, and from official critic reviews.
The Sims released on January 31st, in the year 2000. Within the first 2 years and 6 months of development, it had 4 expansions. Game packs and Stuff packs were not a thing at this time. Within the first 2 years and 6 months of development, the total retail value was $220. (assuming packs were $40...right?) The release rate for expansions was about one expansion per 7.5 months. The Sims remains one of the best-selling games of all time, and continues to be the best-selling Sims game of all time. The Sims lifespan continued until October 2003 when the last expansion was released, giving it an expansion total of 7 and a lifespan of about 3 years and 10 months.
The Sims 2 released on September 14th, 2004. Within the first 2 years and 6 months of development, it had 5 expansions and 4 stuff packs, just shy of 5 stuff packs (5th in April). Game packs were not a concept. The base game and all pack content at this point in time would total out to $340 to $360, depending on if you count the fifth stuff pack. (again, pricecheck? Correct? I forget pricing) The release rate at this time was one expansion per 6 months and one stuff pack per ~6-6.5 months. The Sims 2 is probably the least criticized of all Sims games and largely well-regarded universally by fans. It received glowing reviews and sold a (then) record 1 million copies in 10 days. (I would link the source but you'd just be getting the Sims 2's entire wiki page lolol) The Sims 2 lifespan continued until November 2008, giving it an expansion total of 8 and a stuff pack total of 10, alongside a total lifespan of 4 years and 2 months.
The Sims 3 released on June 2nd, 2009. Within the first 2 years and 6 months of development, it had 5 expansions and 4 stuff packs, alongside some store content which is difficult to tally, but for sake of simplicity we will tally the total neighborhood worlds released in the store at this time, which was 3 store worlds. Game packs were not a concept. The base game and all pack content and store world content at this point in time would total out to $380 (Riverview was free as an anti-piracy incentive and did not cost $20). The release rate at this time was one expansion per 6 months, one stuff pack per 7.5 months and one store world per 10 months. The Sims 3 met largely positive reviews with some degree of fan backlash due to dramatic changes to the experience, such as sacrificing the ability to switch households easily in exchange for a living world, or less ability to customize the town in exchange for the very same open world. It set a record for selling 1.4 million copies in it's first week. (again, wikipedia) The Sims 3 lifespan continued until October 2013, giving it an expansion total of 11, stuff pack total of 9 and a store world total of 11. It's total lifespan was 4 years and 4 months.
Observations:
-Historically, release rates have been subject to change and improvement. Sims 2's stuff packs began to release more frequently in the last two years, Sims 3's expansions began to release more frequently and Sims 3's store worlds began to release much more frequently. Sims 2 released about 2-3 more stuff packs than anticipated, Sims 3 released about 3 more expansions than anticipated and a whopping 6 more store worlds than anticipated.
-Historically, each iteration of the Sims has had a lifespan slightly longer than the former. The biggest leap in age length was an additional 4 months of development for Sims 2 over Sims 1.
-At current rates, there is still some degree of risk that Sims 4 will have the lowest expansion count. If you add 4 months onto Sims 4's reasonably estimated lifespan (so a total of 4 years, 8 months), continue with the current rate of expansion release and apply a bonus +1 expansion just for generousity/optimism, the total expansion count still ends at 6-7 expansions. The above point argues it's possible for Sims 4 to pick up the pace, but it seems clear it will be competing with Sims 1's tally moreso than Sims 3's. Whether game packs supplement this loss is largely a matter of opinion.
-Surprisingly, there seems to be no correlation between price and edition. One might expect the price to increase as the franchise becomes more established, but Sims 2, Sims 3 and Sims 4 all have costed about the same amount within the same time frame. (granted, I may be misremembering stuff pack prices of Sims 2 since I never saw them advertised, or even expansion prices of 1 and 2 since 🐸🐸🐸🐸 I was a kid; I didn't own money!)
-Likewise, there seems to be no correlation between edition and release rate. Sims 4 has drastically dabbled with the release rate of packs, dramatically accelerating stuff pack release, nearly halving expansion pack release and adding a new pack type into the mix with a similar release rate to expansions. Only Sims 2 and Sims 3 seem to have pack release rates that resemble each other.
-Fan reception has gone down consistently over time. There is almost a direct correlation between fan satisfaction, sales and release number. Sims 1 holds both the most critical acclaim and the most sales, whilst reception and (almost) sales have gone down since. The only oddity is that Sims 2's sales numbers do not align, having sold less than 3 and looking to sell less than 4 potentially. (difficult if not impossible to call, but certainly plausible given the little we know about Sims 4 sales)
-One of the most dramatic, unlisted changes in editions is of course the content itself. Both Sims 1 and Sims 2 had expansions focused on creating community lots, whereas for Sims 3 and 4 these are largely base game concepts. Sims 2 and Sims 3 both had one life state per expansion, a tradition that was ended by Sims 4, Get Together. Sims 2 and Sims 3 largely segmented "stuff" and "gameplay features" and almost never mixed them amongst stuff packs and expansion packs, whereas Sims 4 has yet to release a stuff pack devoid of some kind of gameplay feature. Many more additional feature changes are a bit harder to pinpoint, such as skill frequency (tends to increase each addition), story progression and core features. (personalites, emotions, attraction, reputation, job progress, difficulty)
"Who are you, that do not know your history?"
15
Comments
I'm actually quite eager to see the upcoming quarterly teaser and the next half year in general. It's possible Toddlers distracted from expansion development, and without them in the way, we may see a boost to expansion release rate. I actually expect to see Pets this Summer, though I'm unsure if Pets will be a one-off or just the beginning of an accelerated expansion release. If we don't see Pets by ~August? I'd say the outlook is pessimistic. If we see Pets this Summer and then see another expansion by ~February of next year? Then it's optimistic.
Another possible change is that if I'm not mistaken, Rachel was more or less the project lead for Sims 4, though she left sometime last year. It's possible that...well, maybe she just wasn't a very good project lead. As such, a replacement might also see some improvements.
I'm still quite pessimistic about the idea Sims 4 will have a significantly longer life, though. I see no evidence for EA deciding to change their model with this game, and I think if the team could absolutely confirm release would last much longer, they probably would, since it's an optimistic message for the game in general.
I'm ok with a lower Expansion count if the EP + GP count keeps up, as it seems to more or less be doing. But I know we all value what comes in those package sizes differently, and for every Simmer who says GPs are better than EPs there's another who prefers what needs an EP-sized pack (I know I want weather!).
This could very well be the case, but I couldn't find anything while googling. At any rate I suppose any errors in pricing for Sims 1 could just be seen as "adjusting for inflation," and overall at least we still see that Sims 1 is the cheapest of the four by a longshot. If anything I'd be more concerned I may have gotten some numbers wrong for Sims 2.
If people were to turn this into a flame war, I'm not so sure the thread can be held accountable. I did my best to provide as much of the facts as possible and made only very basic observations that seemed fair and non-intrusive based on those said facts. People are free to interpret it as they may, but there's nothing inflammatory about facts.
Origin ID: hannaaj22
I agree. But I am a little depressed. I think I've bought them all. All. All the way back to the original. There may have been a few of the packs I missed in Sims 3, because I stopped playing for a few years, and I haven't bought Vampires ... yet.
However much have I spent? Break it to me easy please. Add to it that I just bought a gaming rig to run the game and any potential future iterations too!
Base game - $60
All Expansions - $440
All Stuff Packs - $200
All Store Worlds - Minimum $200, though some were $40 instead of $20, so I'd estimate about $250-$300
All Store Content - ????
Total those up and you have about $900 minimum. I vaguely recall being curious one day and wanting to see the entire value of Sims 3 at it's full pricetag. I believe the pricetag was $1350. I'm 99% sure that is the total I came to, but I cannot be absolutely certain my math was right or that the extra store content itself was indeed about ~$300-$400 like it would need to be to bump the $900 up to that much.
Either way, depending on how much you bought, the Sims 3 could easily cost you a grand.
Side note: why is this in off-topic now?
$4000? How? Did you buy the game four times? It was a $900 total if you bought all packs plus the store neighborhoods, $1350 total if you bought all packs and every piece of store content.
Why would you say this! Knowing roughly how much I spent on ts3 makes me want to cry. TT.TT
You mean for every item in it? I'd like to see that myself.
There was a time out here when the store was hot topic number one and I vaguely recall seeing someone post a ridiculous number.
I think I spent a total of $20 in that store...
I got all the EP's up to *Seasons and maybe 3 SP's
I've always figured I spent about $1500 on TS3, with owning all but one stuff pack, and the entire store apart from a few hat hairs. However, I believe it has repaid its value to me over the last 8 years ten times over. I don't believe I have spent as many hours in any other game as I have in TS3, apart from one other. Not only that, but the game will keep me occupied for years to come. I may leave it alone for a month or two while playing something else, but I always go back to it and I always enjoy it.
The game is always there, and thanks to having it on disc, it will always be there and I don't need to rely on filthy Origin for anything to do with my Sims games.
I think my "investment" is worthwhile.
PoppySims Archive
InnaLisa Pose Archive
Devolution of Sims - a once customisable open world sandbox which has become a DLC Party catalog in a shoebox
I ♡ Pudding
@DeservedCriticism- I included my PC in that figure. And actually saying that it could be slightly more or less than that as I don't know exactly how many EPs, SPs, and store content I've received as gifts or how much I've bought for others over the years.
It's clearly discussion about TS4's expansions, and the rate at which they're released, and how much they cost in comparison to other Sims base games.
I wonder how well the stuff packs sold in Sims2 and Sims3. Back in the Sims1 days it was a very lucrative hobby to make CC for the game. Some sites had a $5/mos fee for downloading their content and I belonged to a site where we had "donations". Remember one set made a whooping $6000. That being said, of course EA was aware of that and wanted their fair share, thus the stuff packs. As a player today though, why would you buy a stuff pack with only stuff when you can get all that CC for free? That is why I think this Sims4 model of stuff packs have changed and now include a gameplay item as well. I know a lot of you are angry and think they should be included in EP's and some are displeased at the many stuff packs. I don't defend how EA divides it up, but I can understand why. I also wonder if they're trying to make this game last longer so they can churn out more stuff packs and have us patiently wait for expansions
BUT I hate to be the party pooper...however n=4 is an awfully small sample size to draw any meaningful correlations from (actually statistically impossible given your parameters since you run out of degrees of freedom, but that's another story).
I think the easiest explanation is that EA simply does whatever is most profitable. Really the short answer is game development costs money, and a simple way to reduce cost is to let each installment run for a longer time. Especially now with digital sales, the cost of producing extra copies of a game is basically zero.
Now about the number of stuff packs...the thing is, firms will almost ALWAYS have an incentive to sell products in the smallest increments possible. A bit of murky economic theory (don't quote me though, this is microeconomics and I'm a macro guy) involved but the jist of it is, it's easier to convince someone (on average) to purchase a small item for $10 than to purchase a large item for $40. And if you can convince enough people to buy the $10 item, it makes more sense to just create more $10 items than the $40 item. It just so happens that people are more receptive to smaller content packs nowadays and EA knows that. I blame the cultural acceptance of micro-transactions. Ideally, EA would want to sell items individually, but that obviously didn't work out (theory != real life sometimes)
As for the actual content in the DLC, again it's an application of economics in that averages are better than extremes. Averages being packs with both content and gamplay while extremes being an either/or relationship. Let's say Vintage Stuff pack for example. Maybe I don't actually want the old-timey tables and chairs, but I want the butler. So I'll purchase the pack anyway despite not wanting 50% of the stuff. Now that Bowling is out, maybe I don't like Bowling but I like the way the lights look. So I buy that one too. By including both gameplay and content, EA doubly insures that there at least be something people like, and maybe it will be worth $10. The problem is you'd end up with a lot of semi-unsatisfied customers. But 100 semi-unsatisfied customers is just as profitable as 100 completely satisfied customers, and certainly more profitable than 50 satisfied customers.
And herein lies the problem with TS4 and it's relative lack of content...but that's already been repeated ad nauseum so I'll spare you the rest of the story.
You and I are pretty much on the same page though, both with our outlook for the game and our preference for macro over micro. I've always said the gameplay content in stuff packs was being "held hostage" to encourage sales.
There was a discussion in another thread about how the stuff pack team is likely an overwhelming majority designers rather than programmers, so even if reassigned to expansions or the like, they'd be somewhat limited in how they could help. (aka what content this would provide) Thing is...any company worth it's own salt is probably gonna have extensive data on what pulls in profit, what's the sweet spot for workers, how many employees do they need etc, right? Yet here we are, and they've got a surplus of designers for stuff packs and nothing else. I know for Sims 3 they hired a second team to produce Expansions near the end, and now that's gone. Dunno if they've hired more designers than usual or if they have the same headcount, but split up between projects differently, but clearly as you say, there was a clear intention by the company to up the amount of stuff packs; a change like that doesn't just happen for no reason.
That to me is rather concerning. If nothing else, it shows that the powers that be are testing the waters on how to up profit moreso than focusing on the game quality. It feels like all companies eventually hit a point they forget product quality and focus more on marketing or mitigating expenses, and it definitely feels like we're here, in a couple aspects. Hopefully things will change, and they very well could (both because as you say, this sample is admittedly too small AND even this small sample shows changes happening this far into development), but only time will tell.
I'm kind of in awkward place with the Sims 4. On one hand, I actually like the game itself. On some level, I am glad the franchise is making money, to the extent that it is also somewhat in the playerbase's interest that The Sims be financially successful since it means more content.
I just don't like EA's business model and that extends to beyond just the Sims franchise. The problem is, I'm not really sure just how much say the Sims 4 staff actually has over the game's development. It's completely possible that EA is making all the decisions, and the actual game developers are just as fed up as we are. Or maybe not, there's no way for me to know for sure. If that is true, then I'm not really optimistic about The Sims changing their content releases since that's just how EA does things. Making just enough content for players to remain interested in the franchise but ultimately viewing them as profit sources rather than customers.
It also doesn't help that The Sims effectively holds a monopoly on an "Everyday Life" sim, and EA absolutely knows that. So ultimately they can afford to ignore fairly significant portion of player complaints. I mean, who else are we going to go to, right? Now, if we had some competing franchise to The Sims 4, it probably won't solve the problem with the overabundance of stuff packs (since what's really stopping the other guy from doing the same thing? It works...) but at least EA now must think twice before releasing content and maybe listening to the players more.
@The_Dismal_Scientist All I know is that traditionally, of course the publisher gets to call the shots in terms of funding and likely release date as well. Bethesda (publisher) famously provided Obsidian with 1.5 years to develop Fallout New Vegas, which was considered really short and restrictive. In that scenario, Obsidian could've of course refused the deal or negotiated, but we also don't really know how the negotiations actually looked. The game got limited advertising (compared to Bethesda made games) and I also know some of the payment depended on reception of the game.
In that case, Bethesda and Obsidian are two seperate entities though. Maxis was dissolved pretty shortly after Sims 4 was released, so I imagine they don't really get a huge say in negotiations. Most the Sims staff can probably do is ask for additional funding, but if EA provides is another matter.
What's really crazy to me is as you say, they effectively have a monopoly. Anyone else gets their hands on a monopoly...? You better believe they take good care of it. Who cares about trimming down production costs when your income is practically guarenteed?! That the players have nothing else to turn to is one way of looking at it, but Cities Skylines for example pretty much took away any claim Simcity had on being the only city building sim. "Even a God can bleed," so I consider it a bit of a gamble to sit here with a monopoly on one of the best selling franchises of all time and play around with the production costs.
I really wish EA was more open about their sales and general data on this game, cause I have to admit I'm insanely curious how exactly the decisions are being made. It just all seems very focused on the short term and how to save costs on development today without putting much thought into the potential of the franchise if support remains satisfactory for their customers. Especially so since EA has commented they "want to improve" on customer satisfaction (after they won Worst Company in America and similar criticisms), yet here they are neglecting the number one life simulator and focusing more on profit.