1) I've never seen lag like this, I don't think, but maybe it's because I have a fairly high-end machine. It might be something that's exacerbated with lower-end machines, or in saves that go on a while.
It is influenced by saves aging. But it is legitimately the only sims game to have or ever had this issue and it's taking them a very long while to fix it.
2/3) Ah, I guess I've missed these cause I haven't done Dine Out much. I'm not sure I see how you come to the conclusion that the GP is practically worthless because of Chefs getting stuck sometimes, but it sounds like it can be very aggravating.
well 60% of the pack is running your own restaurant and it's practically impossible to ever get 5 start due to the issues.
5) I don't think that's a bug, so much as an unintended consequence of how Butlers are designed. Or have they stated that you're supposed to be able to go into speed 4 with Butlers?
Now that would be very silly here, watch your sim sleep for 10 IRL minutes because you hired a buttler?
10) When and who? I've never encountered this. It's been a long time since I played GTW careers, but I don't remember any game-breaking progression bugs.
Now that would be very silly here, watch your sim sleep for 10 IRL minutes because you hired a buttler?
I don't think my meaning is entirely clear. I meant that if the Butler is not sleeping, it's probably not supposed to allow speed 4 because of issues with going at speed 4 and trying to process the actions properly. If the Butler is sleeping, I would think it's supposed to allow that (and I thought it did? Or does it not?)
Hopping in here because I noticed my name being thrown around a lot
1. With regards to the 5M pin - Someone tried to take a comment I made towards a remark in a larger conversation as being confirmation on something that I did not respond to. I corrected them and that was all.
2. I am not a PR person, I am a Community Manager. They are not one in the same. I am fairly honest with you as much as I can be while PR tends to spin things. I have been very direct with you and choose not to sugar coat things because I believe you are all intelligent and should not be talked down to like children.
3. Team movements are none of your concern. Unless you work directly inside this studio or within EA there is zero reason why we would have to tell you about anyone moving off to work on other projects. As I've stated many a time in the last few days: This has had zero impact on our development. You don't know how long we've been working on this project (and no I will not discuss it as it is not my place) and you didn't even seem to notice the change until a SimGuru mentioned it.
4. We've said time and time again that there is no pattern to our releases. Bowling Night Stuff released when it was supposed to. The GP will be talked about when we want to and not before. And no, the announcement and soft launch release of The Sims Mobile did not impact our announcement for the upcoming GP. Content is being produced, developed, and released at the rate that we've mapped out internally, anything else is just speculation on your part.
phew, I think I covered the major bits I was thrown into. If not, ask away!
I hope you all have a lovely weekend
I have several things to say about this. Incoming book.
First and foremost, you're mostly discussing the least consequential points I've raised. There's no mention of why press copies were withheld. There's no mention why it's always been radio silence on the Sims 4 and Olympus/online topic, when this thread is clear proof people would care to hear about that; that's the entire subject matter of this thread yet you've omitted any commentary on that subject. There's a very strange implication that we've never noticed a change until a SimGuru mentioned it, which is either blatantly false (yes, I would say we've all absolutely noticed the EP production speed of Sims 4 is the slowest of the franchise) or misunderstands the purpose of that observation of mine. I didn't highlight workers being moved in an attempt to state this has definitively harmed the game, but rather to highlight that nothing about that news implies anything good from our perspective (best case it's neutral and we feel no meaningful difference, worst case it harms production or acts as an example of moves to come), yet we have users around here who would rather cling to the idea those workers are being replaced by Jesus himself and this is great news. The complaint was more geared towards those people and the community, not outrage with EA/Maxis for having the audacity to move some workers. (lolz)
Point is though, once again you've glossed over my biggest concerns. I'm not exactly blaming you for it, because if you were to tell me "I cannot discuss that," well, I'd expect that answer. However, regardless of intention, it's clear we cannot always rely on you to give us all the information we seek, especially when it might be bad or private information about the product. Logical, rational and completely expected, but as we can see in this thread, some people are still surprised and feel misled in past events. For me this is not about blame or attempting to demonize you or any one person from the Sims team, but rather an attempt to tell people they cannot just rely on what the Sims team says (or doesn't say) to try and get a feel for the direction of the game or definitive answers on some of the more controversial topics.
Moreover, I find any statements such as "anything else is just speculation on your part" to be rather worthless to the discussion. You're right; I can't know some of the stuff you listed off....precisely because your company purposefully withholds that exact information from me lolololol. What do you expect? Am I supposed to never speculate because I cannot know definitively without a shadow of a doubt? If that were the case, then EA/Maxis simply needs to withhold information and lord that fact over their fans to "win" a discussion.
You're basically holding a new type of candy bar right in front of my face, I'm asking if I can have a taste, and then you refuse and comment that I have no idea what it tastes like while implying you do....well, yeah. I know. I'd like to change that. I'd like to be better informed and I'd like more transparent information about Sims 4, including the less-than-stellar news about Sims 4 that may harm people's outlook of it, because to me even bad news can be traded for greater consumer trust in a team. But that's not in my hands. That's in your hands and the hands of EA/Maxis. Given the track record though, information deemed bad for Sims 4's reputation always goes mysteriously undiscussed by EA/Maxis. Even now, as I said, you glossed over my bigger points (and the bigger point of the thread) and instead chose to tackle smaller ones.
About the only portions of your post that inform me of anything are that Bowling and the new GP haven't had their releases moved or delayed, and that's because of the definitive fashion in which you confirm these things. Everything else is either untouched entirely or just has statements that don't confirm, deny or really change anything. Perhaps they're meant to imply I'm wrong or be perceived as such, but it's difficult for me to just take them as such when again, this company has made moves I've found misleading in the past. It's a request for blind faith (since I cannot obtain the proper information), but faith needs trust, and I don't really have trust in this company, precisely for some of those past events. If it's not a request for blind faith, then the other interpretation is it's more or less a statement saying "you might be wrong." Not even a "you're wrong," but a "you might be wrong." I know that, and restating it adds nothing to the discussion. There's no new revelations here, except the above....so what's your point?
You don't know how long we've been working on this project (and no I will not discuss it as it is not my place) and you didn't even seem to notice the change until a SimGuru mentioned it.
Two things: why wouldn't you discuss this or other issues such as withholding press release copies or Sims 4 and Olympus?
And the second point, how am I supposed to know if I've noticed a change or not? I'm not disagreeing with you here, but rather just want to highlight that that isn't really something you nor I can even really comment on or know for sure. For example, one of the two that got moved seemed to be on the EP team. There's videos of her discussing both Get to Work and Get Together. There's no such footage for City Living, and I personally consider City Living the worst one thusfar. For all I know, that could in some way be related to a loss in this person or others. Quite frankly though, I don't know when they left or the extent of their impact. As such, to state I haven't noticed is not really something any of us can say for certain, because for all we know I did, I just don't know to connect newfound problems or lost content to this move. Even if I did and even if I were to hear they did leave before City Living was developed, then I wouldn't know what kind of content they typically produced, so I wouldn't know to what extent I feel a difference. If I stated I did notice the loss, my claim would be equally ridiculous and unfounded. I don't see your point.
Team movements are none of your concern. Unless you work directly inside this studio or within EA there is zero reason why we would have to tell you about anyone moving off to work on other projects
Same question, really. To what extent is it not my concern? Clearly this news of Sims mobile has me quite shaken up and all around concerned, for a number of reasons. To see commentary on workers leaving but no statement on why or who joined on etc of course doesn't help. Thus, I'm concerned and would like to know if possible. If it's company policy to never share such information, that's perfectly reasonable and understandable 100% of the way; I'm not asking "why" to try and coax an answer out of you, I'm asking why because I truly want to know why I won't get that answer, as "none of your concern" tells me nothing. And again that's my whole point: it is probably not within the best interest of the company to announce "BY THE WAY WE FIRED LIKE 40 PEOPLE LOL OMG WUT R WE GONNA DO LOL" or "LOL WE'RE ENDING SIMS 4 DEVELOPMENT IN AUGUST LOL" (yes I know we have statements confirming this false; merely an absurd example) so as a general rule you'd want to keep all such info under wraps. Completely logical and understandable, but the end point stands: people should understand they won't always be able to rely on EA/Maxis for transparency.
There's no animosity here, nothing personal and no annoyance of mine with you or anyone else at EA/Maxis, just wanna make that clear. I am not saying I don't understand that certain questions will not be answered, but rather my point is that there are certain questions that will not be answered, and it would seem other members of this community don't seem to understand that. The result is always the same: optimism about less-than-stellar issues surrounding Sims 4, until one day we get confirmation of something that's bad news for us and some members of this community sit in shock and feel misled, others refuse to accept that this company would ever mislead them or withhold info....for whatever reason. My first post in this thread was a response to exactly such a user who felt misled.
Really my point is just logical here. We have some less discussed blemishes on Sims 4's track record where EA/Maxis makes little to no comment, and they're not discussed by EA/Maxis precisely because it's unwise to discuss those. Perfectly understandable on behalf of the company and it's workers, the only lesson being for users to understand to have some skepticism about what they're told. You once made a statement "we'll keep updating Sims 4 as long as it makes sense to," but with all due respect, this is again a rather empty statement with zero substance, as it makes no assertion of what qualifies as the conditions of "makes sense to." It does get people optimistic and thinking wishfully that Sims 4 will last longer, and beg your pardon, but you profit from optimistic customers, so yes I'll question the motivation of wording that statement in that exact fashion. I mean, that's twice now you've popped up in a thread I've commented on and made little commentary clarifications that say nothing much definitively. (this time it has two regarding pack delays) What's the purpose in that? Because quite frankly I have to question if it's not to give others the impression I'm wrong while never outright stating that much.
And on that note I don't see much purpose to you and I having a discussion. Again I say that respectfully; nothing personal and no ill will or any crap like that intended, because you have a rather clear motivation to tell people the positive things, and I find the constant optimism from the community a tad out-of-touch given past circumstances and given some current reactions, thus I advise caution to them. I'm not trying to shame EA or you or any company policy, merely to advise skepticism and show that we do have tangible evidence of hard-to-tackle issues for the Sims 4 that have been either ignored entirely and not commented on, or given only very vague and rather inconsequential answers. I can never hope to definitively prove my point, whilst you and the whole of EA/Maxis likewise refuse (or at the very least, heavily avoid) to provide info or evidence about the main concerns I've raised. We're at an impasse, and I don't see that changing, so I have to ask what the purpose is to this discussion unless something about that were to change, so here I am just questioning the purpose of your post.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
This has had zero impact on our development. You don't know how long we've been working on this project (and no I will not discuss it as it is not my place) and you didn't even seem to notice the change until a SimGuru mentioned it.
I'm sorry what? I don't want to sound disrespectful, but where have you been the past year or so? It is often discussed how slow the EP are coming, it was said by Graham (if I remember correctly), that the EP production would slow down to one a year beside every few months.
We did notice the change, the right thing to say would be to say we didn't knew why, but saying that we didn't even notice is insulting, and it show that you think we are plum.
I will give you this one warning: Please refrain from making statements about what I do and do not think of this community.
The Sims 4 is a different game compared to the past iterations and we are treating it differently. From the content we produce to the way we market the product. You assumed that we were going to keep things the way they were before, that was not something we confirmed nor did we ever promise that we would do that with this iteration. What we have done is brought a new experience into the Stuff Packs, introduced Game Packs, and have been bringing new experiences with our Expansion Packs. We made the decision prior to The Sims 4 releasing to no longer have split teams (meaning not all at EARS) which has proven to be in the best interest of the game and having a stable product since all things are developed side by side and can be cross checked with one another.
I wasn't comparing it to the previous iterations, I was only speaking about The Sims 4, the first EP came 7 months after the game release, the second one came 8 months after, and the third one 11 months, and then we was told by Grant (I said Graham earlier, my bad it was Grant) it would be around one per year now on, that's what I mean by we did notice a change, not a change compared to the iterations, but a change during the 2 years and half of The Sims 4.
I do know that it can change, I understand that The Sims 4 isn't the same than the iterations, and wouldn't always be exactly 7-8 months, but passing from 7-8 months to 11-12 months, that's a big difference in production/development, that's 4 months, it's none of my business if The Sims 4 doesn't follow any pattern with the packs, I'm just saying that we did notice a change in the production/development, you don't pass from 7-8 months to 11-12 months without a reason, that you guys couldn't share the why of it isn't the question here, I do understand at 100% that you guys aren't allowed to speak about future projects or how the teams are divided or not between packs or projects, I don't work at EA it's none of my business how the team(s) is/are managed, all I'm saying is we did notice a change, we maybe didn't know what it was exactly, but we noticed.
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe the slow down of EP have nothing to do with it, but whatever the reason is, the production/development of EP slowed down, I'm not saying it's wrong or not saying ''how dare you'', I'm not asking why or how, that's not of my business, but it did slow down, and we did noticed it.
They shouldn't have tried to drop this game mobile fully aware of the fact they hadn't fixed the technical difficulties on PC AND Desktop. I loved the Sims 3, it was so fun and stress-relieving, so I decided to get Sims 4 as a show of support for Maxis and Electronic Arts, and because I really liked Sims 3. My computer is a very new laptop, with basically a trilobite worth of space and Sims 4 only requires about ten gigabytes for the entire download, maybe less. My CPU is stellar and I never have any issues with it. Except for when I play Sims 4. The game freezes, it is exorbitantly laggy and slow. But, I did my own troubleshooting, because I can program and code, without deleting my game and getting rid of all of my progress and it runs about 95% better. I am definitely not deleting my mods which are basically just custom content, because it was super laggy before I used modifications and when I paid seventy dollars for it the day after it came out on September 3, 2014. I don't ask the tech gurus for help or get technical support from the site because they aren't even informed about how to help you when they work for technical support of the game and it's their job, and they just mess everything up. WARNING: Do not allow a tech guru to have remote access to your game.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
When building a sequel I expect them to note what worked, what didn't work, take out what didn't work and try again. The Sims fanbase is already fairly forgiving in the fact that everyone EXPECTS to buy back the expansion content over time.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
It's not about wanting every feature. The problem is twofold.
1) Saying "this game is different" is a dismissal of complaints. For example if you complained "this game should be open world," I could reply back and state that with open world come a number of advantages and disadvantages that they felt overall aren't worth it, arguing that they'd rather prioritize rotational play or multiple families per save file even if it comes at the cost of things like story progression. That may not be an answer you like, but it is an answer as to the method that let's you know and understand their reasoning. If you ask that same question and I answer "this game is different," I haven't exactly expounded upon any of my thoughts or reasoning.
2) The method and the purpose in omitting something. If I tell you "this game is different," it's a bit difficult to explain how being "different" means firefighters need to be skipped. Sometimes being different is a good explanation for changes, but other times it isn't, as being different and housing a traditional feature are not mutually exclusive. In this case, stating "it's different" doesn't really explain anything about why Firefighters are gone, nor justify it.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
I've been trying to stay out of this fray- lol. Especially since it mostly comes down to consumer perception versus reality in a partial information vacuum and current climate of high corporate distrust BUT I just have to say this in regard to the above- I think it's unreasonable for the budget for the game to be lower than before, that's the unreasonable part. LEGAL DISCLAIMER: My preceding statement is wholly and completely based on the possibility of unknown probability that the budget is in fact lower. A possibility which I have absolutely no evidence to support and in fact did not make but only responded to as though it contained some manner of validity. DISCLAIMER ENDED Now I'll just go and get another drink and bag of kettle corn.
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
When building a sequel I expect them to note what worked, what didn't work, take out what didn't work and try again. The Sims fanbase is already fairly forgiving in the fact that everyone EXPECTS to buy back the expansion content over time.
that's a fair expectation, too bad almost no one seems to follow the same logic as features that were considered unsuccessful are still being demanded in the forums
as for the sims community being forgiving, and that being the reason, I would have to disagree. There's plenty of people within the community who are upset that the base game is not a shiny version of TS3 + all expansions. And even if those people didn't exist, plenty of other games follow the expansion pack model and have communities which support it, so I don't know why this community would be any more forgiving than those.
that's a fair expectation, too bad almost no one seems to follow the same logic as features that were considered unsuccessful are still being demanded in the forums
as for the sims community being forgiving, and that being the reason, I would have to disagree. There's plenty of people within the community who are upset that the base game is not a shiny version of TS3 + all expansions. And even if those people didn't exist, plenty of other games follow the expansion pack model and have communities which support it, so I don't know why this community would be any more forgiving than those.
because normally players expect a new game to release with the features that were implemented in expansions in a previous game. Civilization gets really negative reviews often for "not being a complete game".
I understand "the open world did not work" bit, however the exchange was supposed to be stability. And the game is not in a very good shape right now, so I don't feel like that was a fair trade.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
I've been trying to stay out of this fray- lol. Especially since it mostly comes down to consumer perception versus reality in a partial information vacuum and current climate of high corporate distrust BUT I just have to say this in regard to the above- I think it's unreasonable for the budget for the game to be lower than before, that's the unreasonable part. LEGAL DISCLAIMER: My preceding statement is wholly and complete based on the possibility of unknown probability that the budget is in fact lower. A possibility which I have absolutely no evidence to support and in fact did not make but only responded to as though it contained some manner of validity. DISCLAIMER ENDED Now I'll just go and get another drink and bag of kettle corn.
I don't mean to be the guy that says "ea is always right!" because they obviously aren't. but in respect to major business decisions you think they would allocate the game a lower budget (which they have already said to be the case) for.. no reason? the genre simply isn't as popular as it used to be. it's not as groundbreaking as it was in the early-mid 2000s.
I just think it's a bit naïve to assume we know enough to make claims like that, disagreeing with probably dozens, or hundreds of business professionals.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
Who asking for every feature in the previous games. I still expect a good fraction of it to be in this game. Since it is a sequel
that's a fair expectation, too bad almost no one seems to follow the same logic as features that were considered unsuccessful are still being demanded in the forums
as for the sims community being forgiving, and that being the reason, I would have to disagree. There's plenty of people within the community who are upset that the base game is not a shiny version of TS3 + all expansions. And even if those people didn't exist, plenty of other games follow the expansion pack model and have communities which support it, so I don't know why this community would be any more forgiving than those.
because normally players expect a new game to release with the features that were implemented in expansions in a previous game. Civilization gets really negative reviews often for "not being a complete game".
I understand "the open world did not work" bit, however the exchange was supposed to be stability. And the game is not in a very good shape right now, so I don't feel like that was a fair trade.
that's a completely fair, and reasonable opinion. I don't disagree at all.
I don't mean to be the guy that says "ea is always right!" because they obviously aren't. but in respect to major business decisions you think they would allocate the game a lower budget (which they have already said to be the case) for.. no reason? the genre simply isn't as popular as it used to be. it's not as groundbreaking as it was in the early-mid 2000s.
I just think it's a bit naïve to assume we know enough to make claims like that, disagreeing with probably dozens, or hundreds of business professionals.
they're the only ones in the genre.
As for claims that it isn't popular anymore? They shut down Simcity because of it and look how great Cities: Skylines are doing. If anything simulation is on the rise currently. Many shop/ hospital/ building simulators in the vein of prison architect are coming out to get a chunk of that success, we have Parkitect and Planet coaster both competing side by side by seizing different elements of park simulation, we know that Planet Zoo is in development and Cities: Skylines 2 is likely. Semi life simulators such as Youtuber's Life and Stardew Valley are even managing to steal a bit of The Sims fan-base, if the forums that I visit are anything to go by.
If The Sims is doing worse now than before, they only have themselves to blame.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
Who asking for every feature in the previous games. I still expect a good fraction of it to be in this game. Since it is a sequel
that's.. one expectation I suppose. It isn't mine. I actually am not one of the people who wanted TS4 to be a pretty version of TS3. To me, repeating the same things over and over again in every iteration 1. gets in the way of new development and 2. is boring, repetitive, and feels like a waste of money.
that's just my opinion though. you don't agree and you don't have to.
And if you've seen these forums, you can find demands for just about every ts3 feature being imported to ts4. Every. Single. One.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
I've been trying to stay out of this fray- lol. Especially since it mostly comes down to consumer perception versus reality in a partial information vacuum and current climate of high corporate distrust BUT I just have to say this in regard to the above- I think it's unreasonable for the budget for the game to be lower than before, that's the unreasonable part. LEGAL DISCLAIMER: My preceding statement is wholly and complete based on the possibility of unknown probability that the budget is in fact lower. A possibility which I have absolutely no evidence to support and in fact did not make but only responded to as though it contained some manner of validity. DISCLAIMER ENDED Now I'll just go and get another drink and bag of kettle corn.
I don't mean to be the guy that says "ea is always right!" because they obviously aren't. but in respect to major business decisions you think they would allocate the game a lower budget (which they have already said to be the case) for.. no reason? the genre simply isn't as popular as it used to be. it's not as groundbreaking as it was in the early-mid 2000s.
I just think it's a bit naïve to assume we know enough to make claims like that, disagreeing with probably dozens, or hundreds of business professionals.
If they have stated that they are operating with a lower budget- which I in no way remembered reading and I don't consider information to be fact until I see corroborating evidence to support it- then it also in no way changes my opinion that the move is unreasonable. That's my personal feeling on the subject and if you should consider that naive then so be it. That is your personal feeling regarding my feeling. However, dozens and even hundreds of people all working together have made the wrong decision in the past and they will again in the future. If someone(s) within EA/Maxis made that decision to lower the budget on a supposed AAA title then I find it unreasonable, despite what you may or may not think of my (someone who you do not know) qualifications as a "business professional" or lack thereof.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
I've been trying to stay out of this fray- lol. Especially since it mostly comes down to consumer perception versus reality in a partial information vacuum and current climate of high corporate distrust BUT I just have to say this in regard to the above- I think it's unreasonable for the budget for the game to be lower than before, that's the unreasonable part. LEGAL DISCLAIMER: My preceding statement is wholly and complete based on the possibility of unknown probability that the budget is in fact lower. A possibility which I have absolutely no evidence to support and in fact did not make but only responded to as though it contained some manner of validity. DISCLAIMER ENDED Now I'll just go and get another drink and bag of kettle corn.
I don't mean to be the guy that says "ea is always right!" because they obviously aren't. but in respect to major business decisions you think they would allocate the game a lower budget (which they have already said to be the case) for.. no reason? the genre simply isn't as popular as it used to be. it's not as groundbreaking as it was in the early-mid 2000s.
I just think it's a bit naïve to assume we know enough to make claims like that, disagreeing with probably dozens, or hundreds of business professionals.
If they have stated that they are operating with a lower budget- which I in no way remembered reading and I don't consider information to be fact until I see corroborating evidence to support it- then it also in no way changes my opinion that the move is unreasonable. That's my personal feeling on the subject and if you should consider that naive then so be it. That is your personal feeling regarding my feeling. However, dozens and even hundreds of people all working together have made the wrong decision in the past and they will again in the future. If someone(s) within EA/Maxis made that decision to lower the budget on a supposed AAA title then I find it unreasonable, despite what you may or may not think of my (someone who you do not know) qualifications as a "business professional" or lack thereof.
I guess I worded myself poorly. It's not about you (or me) not being business professionals. It's that we don't have the numbers or the statistics laid out in front of us. The people who made the decision do. They might not be right all the time (this is obvious, insert toddler story, bla bla bla), but their opinion is weighed on a lot more than mine is. So for me to go and say "the budget should have been higher!" , just kind of goes unsupported. It isn't about feelings, or anything like that.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
I've been trying to stay out of this fray- lol. Especially since it mostly comes down to consumer perception versus reality in a partial information vacuum and current climate of high corporate distrust BUT I just have to say this in regard to the above- I think it's unreasonable for the budget for the game to be lower than before, that's the unreasonable part. LEGAL DISCLAIMER: My preceding statement is wholly and complete based on the possibility of unknown probability that the budget is in fact lower. A possibility which I have absolutely no evidence to support and in fact did not make but only responded to as though it contained some manner of validity. DISCLAIMER ENDED Now I'll just go and get another drink and bag of kettle corn.
I don't mean to be the guy that says "ea is always right!" because they obviously aren't. but in respect to major business decisions you think they would allocate the game a lower budget (which they have already said to be the case) for.. no reason? the genre simply isn't as popular as it used to be. it's not as groundbreaking as it was in the early-mid 2000s.
I just think it's a bit naïve to assume we know enough to make claims like that, disagreeing with probably dozens, or hundreds of business professionals.
If they have stated that they are operating with a lower budget- which I in no way remembered reading and I don't consider information to be fact until I see corroborating evidence to support it- then it also in no way changes my opinion that the move is unreasonable. That's my personal feeling on the subject and if you should consider that naive then so be it. That is your personal feeling regarding my feeling. However, dozens and even hundreds of people all working together have made the wrong decision in the past and they will again in the future. If someone(s) within EA/Maxis made that decision to lower the budget on a supposed AAA title then I find it unreasonable, despite what you may or may not think of my (someone who you do not know) qualifications as a "business professional" or lack thereof.
I guess I worded myself poorly. It's not about you (or me) not being business professionals. It's that we don't have the numbers or the statistics laid out in front of us. The people who made the decision do. They might not be right all the time (this is obvious, insert toddler story, bla bla bla), but their opinion is weighed on a lot more than mine is. So for me to go and say "the budget should have been higher!" , just kind of goes unsupported. It isn't about feelings, or anything like that.
It's about my first statement above perception- that's what I mean by "feeling". Not emotions but how I and others perceive it. Consumer perception is higher than reality when it comes to purchasing a a product. My perception is that it's a bad move to cut the budget and if they have publicly stated that they did then that makes the perception even worse. It colors everything the consumer, myself in this case, sees from that point on in a shade of "cheaper" quality due to cheaper production. I'm going to automatically be searching for where the cut was made and what was left out because the statement that the company is trying to produce the same product at a cheaper price has formed that image in my head. That may not be fact. The product, in fact, may be quite good but it is perception that counts- not fact and perception is what corporations should most concern themselves with. That's why I think it's an unreasonable decision to cut the budget and even more unreasonable to announce it. It ignores perception. And yes, no matter what facts and figures I may have been presented with I would have bristled at cutting the budget. In fact I did at a recent board meeting where cutting the budget of a program was suggested- you can believe that or not. To my thinking losing consumer base is not a result of spending too much money and regaining or retaining base is not a result of spending less. Shrug- it's a point of view, mine and I'm not apt to change it with any amount of arguing nor you yours I think so here I'll bow out. Feel free to deliver your final argument or not, as you wish.
I don't want to be rude here. Why the sims 4 supposed to be a new gaming experience .It is still the fourth game of the franchise. Meaning people compare it to past games, and how things work. Because of its a sequel, and its fourth iteration.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
I've been trying to stay out of this fray- lol. Especially since it mostly comes down to consumer perception versus reality in a partial information vacuum and current climate of high corporate distrust BUT I just have to say this in regard to the above- I think it's unreasonable for the budget for the game to be lower than before, that's the unreasonable part. LEGAL DISCLAIMER: My preceding statement is wholly and complete based on the possibility of unknown probability that the budget is in fact lower. A possibility which I have absolutely no evidence to support and in fact did not make but only responded to as though it contained some manner of validity. DISCLAIMER ENDED Now I'll just go and get another drink and bag of kettle corn.
I don't mean to be the guy that says "ea is always right!" because they obviously aren't. but in respect to major business decisions you think they would allocate the game a lower budget (which they have already said to be the case) for.. no reason? the genre simply isn't as popular as it used to be. it's not as groundbreaking as it was in the early-mid 2000s.
I just think it's a bit naïve to assume we know enough to make claims like that, disagreeing with probably dozens, or hundreds of business professionals.
If they have stated that they are operating with a lower budget- which I in no way remembered reading and I don't consider information to be fact until I see corroborating evidence to support it- then it also in no way changes my opinion that the move is unreasonable. That's my personal feeling on the subject and if you should consider that naive then so be it. That is your personal feeling regarding my feeling. However, dozens and even hundreds of people all working together have made the wrong decision in the past and they will again in the future. If someone(s) within EA/Maxis made that decision to lower the budget on a supposed AAA title then I find it unreasonable, despite what you may or may not think of my (someone who you do not know) qualifications as a "business professional" or lack thereof.
I guess I worded myself poorly. It's not about you (or me) not being business professionals. It's that we don't have the numbers or the statistics laid out in front of us. The people who made the decision do. They might not be right all the time (this is obvious, insert toddler story, bla bla bla), but their opinion is weighed on a lot more than mine is. So for me to go and say "the budget should have been higher!" , just kind of goes unsupported. It isn't about feelings, or anything like that.
It's about my first statement above perception- that's what I mean by "feeling". Not emotions but how I and others perceive it. Consumer perception is higher than reality when it comes to purchasing a a product. My perception is that it's a bad move to cut the budget and if they have publicly stated that they did then that makes the perception even worse. It colors everything the consumer, myself in this case, sees from that point on in a shade of "cheaper" quality due to cheaper production. I'm going to automatically be searching for where the cut was made and what was left out because the statement that the company is trying to produce the same product at a cheaper price has formed that image in my head. That may not be fact. The product, in fact, may be quite good but it is perception that counts- not fact and perception is what corporations should most concern themselves with. That's why I think it's an unreasonable decision to cut the budget and even more unreasonable to announce it. It ignores perception. And yes, no matter what facts and figures I may have been presented with I would have bristled at cutting the budget. In fact I did at a recent board meeting where cutting the budget of a program was suggested- you can believe that or not. To my thinking losing consumer base is not a result of spending too much money and regaining or retaining base is not a result of spending less. Shrug- it's a point of view, mine and I'm not apt to change it with any amount of arguing nor you yours I think so here I'll bow out. Feel free to deliver your final argument or not, as you wish.
jeeze, who's arguing? it's like there's no such thing as simple discussion anymore. i'm not closed off to your opinions (although you apparently are ), I simply wanted to know more about them. It sounds like you're saying you prefer when companies withhold information from you for the sake of making themselves and their product look good, which is interesting to say the least.
But since you've "bowed out" I guess I won't be getting any kind of explanation on that.
Comments
It is influenced by saves aging. But it is legitimately the only sims game to have or ever had this issue and it's taking them a very long while to fix it.
well 60% of the pack is running your own restaurant and it's practically impossible to ever get 5 start due to the issues.
Now that would be very silly here, watch your sim sleep for 10 IRL minutes because you hired a buttler?
to give an example:
http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/825104/deliver-baby-task-doctor-career-issue/p1
in detective career, sometimes a sim that you're supposed to detain simply does not exist, or the description will be contradicting itself.
I don't think my meaning is entirely clear. I meant that if the Butler is not sleeping, it's probably not supposed to allow speed 4 because of issues with going at speed 4 and trying to process the actions properly. If the Butler is sleeping, I would think it's supposed to allow that (and I thought it did? Or does it not?)
Ah ok. I don't remember if I ever encountered those.
I have several things to say about this. Incoming book.
First and foremost, you're mostly discussing the least consequential points I've raised. There's no mention of why press copies were withheld. There's no mention why it's always been radio silence on the Sims 4 and Olympus/online topic, when this thread is clear proof people would care to hear about that; that's the entire subject matter of this thread yet you've omitted any commentary on that subject. There's a very strange implication that we've never noticed a change until a SimGuru mentioned it, which is either blatantly false (yes, I would say we've all absolutely noticed the EP production speed of Sims 4 is the slowest of the franchise) or misunderstands the purpose of that observation of mine. I didn't highlight workers being moved in an attempt to state this has definitively harmed the game, but rather to highlight that nothing about that news implies anything good from our perspective (best case it's neutral and we feel no meaningful difference, worst case it harms production or acts as an example of moves to come), yet we have users around here who would rather cling to the idea those workers are being replaced by Jesus himself and this is great news. The complaint was more geared towards those people and the community, not outrage with EA/Maxis for having the audacity to move some workers. (lolz)
Point is though, once again you've glossed over my biggest concerns. I'm not exactly blaming you for it, because if you were to tell me "I cannot discuss that," well, I'd expect that answer. However, regardless of intention, it's clear we cannot always rely on you to give us all the information we seek, especially when it might be bad or private information about the product. Logical, rational and completely expected, but as we can see in this thread, some people are still surprised and feel misled in past events. For me this is not about blame or attempting to demonize you or any one person from the Sims team, but rather an attempt to tell people they cannot just rely on what the Sims team says (or doesn't say) to try and get a feel for the direction of the game or definitive answers on some of the more controversial topics.
Moreover, I find any statements such as "anything else is just speculation on your part" to be rather worthless to the discussion. You're right; I can't know some of the stuff you listed off....precisely because your company purposefully withholds that exact information from me lolololol. What do you expect? Am I supposed to never speculate because I cannot know definitively without a shadow of a doubt? If that were the case, then EA/Maxis simply needs to withhold information and lord that fact over their fans to "win" a discussion.
You're basically holding a new type of candy bar right in front of my face, I'm asking if I can have a taste, and then you refuse and comment that I have no idea what it tastes like while implying you do....well, yeah. I know. I'd like to change that. I'd like to be better informed and I'd like more transparent information about Sims 4, including the less-than-stellar news about Sims 4 that may harm people's outlook of it, because to me even bad news can be traded for greater consumer trust in a team. But that's not in my hands. That's in your hands and the hands of EA/Maxis. Given the track record though, information deemed bad for Sims 4's reputation always goes mysteriously undiscussed by EA/Maxis. Even now, as I said, you glossed over my bigger points (and the bigger point of the thread) and instead chose to tackle smaller ones.
About the only portions of your post that inform me of anything are that Bowling and the new GP haven't had their releases moved or delayed, and that's because of the definitive fashion in which you confirm these things. Everything else is either untouched entirely or just has statements that don't confirm, deny or really change anything. Perhaps they're meant to imply I'm wrong or be perceived as such, but it's difficult for me to just take them as such when again, this company has made moves I've found misleading in the past. It's a request for blind faith (since I cannot obtain the proper information), but faith needs trust, and I don't really have trust in this company, precisely for some of those past events. If it's not a request for blind faith, then the other interpretation is it's more or less a statement saying "you might be wrong." Not even a "you're wrong," but a "you might be wrong." I know that, and restating it adds nothing to the discussion. There's no new revelations here, except the above....so what's your point?
Two things: why wouldn't you discuss this or other issues such as withholding press release copies or Sims 4 and Olympus?
And the second point, how am I supposed to know if I've noticed a change or not? I'm not disagreeing with you here, but rather just want to highlight that that isn't really something you nor I can even really comment on or know for sure. For example, one of the two that got moved seemed to be on the EP team. There's videos of her discussing both Get to Work and Get Together. There's no such footage for City Living, and I personally consider City Living the worst one thusfar. For all I know, that could in some way be related to a loss in this person or others. Quite frankly though, I don't know when they left or the extent of their impact. As such, to state I haven't noticed is not really something any of us can say for certain, because for all we know I did, I just don't know to connect newfound problems or lost content to this move. Even if I did and even if I were to hear they did leave before City Living was developed, then I wouldn't know what kind of content they typically produced, so I wouldn't know to what extent I feel a difference. If I stated I did notice the loss, my claim would be equally ridiculous and unfounded. I don't see your point.
Same question, really. To what extent is it not my concern? Clearly this news of Sims mobile has me quite shaken up and all around concerned, for a number of reasons. To see commentary on workers leaving but no statement on why or who joined on etc of course doesn't help. Thus, I'm concerned and would like to know if possible. If it's company policy to never share such information, that's perfectly reasonable and understandable 100% of the way; I'm not asking "why" to try and coax an answer out of you, I'm asking why because I truly want to know why I won't get that answer, as "none of your concern" tells me nothing. And again that's my whole point: it is probably not within the best interest of the company to announce "BY THE WAY WE FIRED LIKE 40 PEOPLE LOL OMG WUT R WE GONNA DO LOL" or "LOL WE'RE ENDING SIMS 4 DEVELOPMENT IN AUGUST LOL" (yes I know we have statements confirming this false; merely an absurd example) so as a general rule you'd want to keep all such info under wraps. Completely logical and understandable, but the end point stands: people should understand they won't always be able to rely on EA/Maxis for transparency.
There's no animosity here, nothing personal and no annoyance of mine with you or anyone else at EA/Maxis, just wanna make that clear. I am not saying I don't understand that certain questions will not be answered, but rather my point is that there are certain questions that will not be answered, and it would seem other members of this community don't seem to understand that. The result is always the same: optimism about less-than-stellar issues surrounding Sims 4, until one day we get confirmation of something that's bad news for us and some members of this community sit in shock and feel misled, others refuse to accept that this company would ever mislead them or withhold info....for whatever reason. My first post in this thread was a response to exactly such a user who felt misled.
Really my point is just logical here. We have some less discussed blemishes on Sims 4's track record where EA/Maxis makes little to no comment, and they're not discussed by EA/Maxis precisely because it's unwise to discuss those. Perfectly understandable on behalf of the company and it's workers, the only lesson being for users to understand to have some skepticism about what they're told. You once made a statement "we'll keep updating Sims 4 as long as it makes sense to," but with all due respect, this is again a rather empty statement with zero substance, as it makes no assertion of what qualifies as the conditions of "makes sense to." It does get people optimistic and thinking wishfully that Sims 4 will last longer, and beg your pardon, but you profit from optimistic customers, so yes I'll question the motivation of wording that statement in that exact fashion. I mean, that's twice now you've popped up in a thread I've commented on and made little commentary clarifications that say nothing much definitively. (this time it has two regarding pack delays) What's the purpose in that? Because quite frankly I have to question if it's not to give others the impression I'm wrong while never outright stating that much.
And on that note I don't see much purpose to you and I having a discussion. Again I say that respectfully; nothing personal and no ill will or any crap like that intended, because you have a rather clear motivation to tell people the positive things, and I find the constant optimism from the community a tad out-of-touch given past circumstances and given some current reactions, thus I advise caution to them. I'm not trying to shame EA or you or any company policy, merely to advise skepticism and show that we do have tangible evidence of hard-to-tackle issues for the Sims 4 that have been either ignored entirely and not commented on, or given only very vague and rather inconsequential answers. I can never hope to definitively prove my point, whilst you and the whole of EA/Maxis likewise refuse (or at the very least, heavily avoid) to provide info or evidence about the main concerns I've raised. We're at an impasse, and I don't see that changing, so I have to ask what the purpose is to this discussion unless something about that were to change, so here I am just questioning the purpose of your post.
I wholeheartedly second this. I've heard this exact argument regarding other games as well (Fallout 4, if I'm remembering correct...?), and I view such statements as a blatant deflection. It's perfectly rational for people to consider Sims 4 to be like the other 3, yet we've often gotten response akin to "we have a different vision now." Well, clearly that vision is quite controversial, because at the very least we know Sims 4 isn't doing as well as Sims 3 did. Yeah yeah, we don't know definitively, but I imagine they'd want to tell the press if 4 outpaced 3.
People have complaints and concerns about Sims 4. To simply respond to those with "this is a different game" does nothing to actually tackle and address any of those complaints. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we've still been given zero reasoning or rationale as to why we lack:
Cops and Burglars
Firefighters
Doorbells
Carpools
Cars
Etc etc. If I asked "why are there no firefighters" and heard "this is a different game" as an answer, then it's quite understandable why I'd feel unsatisfied with that answer.
I wasn't comparing it to the previous iterations, I was only speaking about The Sims 4, the first EP came 7 months after the game release, the second one came 8 months after, and the third one 11 months, and then we was told by Grant (I said Graham earlier, my bad it was Grant) it would be around one per year now on, that's what I mean by we did notice a change, not a change compared to the iterations, but a change during the 2 years and half of The Sims 4.
I do know that it can change, I understand that The Sims 4 isn't the same than the iterations, and wouldn't always be exactly 7-8 months, but passing from 7-8 months to 11-12 months, that's a big difference in production/development, that's 4 months, it's none of my business if The Sims 4 doesn't follow any pattern with the packs, I'm just saying that we did notice a change in the production/development, you don't pass from 7-8 months to 11-12 months without a reason, that you guys couldn't share the why of it isn't the question here, I do understand at 100% that you guys aren't allowed to speak about future projects or how the teams are divided or not between packs or projects, I don't work at EA it's none of my business how the team(s) is/are managed, all I'm saying is we did notice a change, we maybe didn't know what it was exactly, but we noticed.
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe the slow down of EP have nothing to do with it, but whatever the reason is, the production/development of EP slowed down, I'm not saying it's wrong or not saying ''how dare you'', I'm not asking why or how, that's not of my business, but it did slow down, and we did noticed it.
But anyway, have a lovely weekend.
Yes, that I was thinking as well. Sure I'm okay if the game does new things. It is a new game after all, and the previous games weren't exactly the same. Still, the game is a sequel. I will also expect old things back. Also, old things touch upon and made better
you don't think it's at all unreasonable to be asking for every feature from previous games, improvements on those features, and new features added on top of it all?
especially when the budget for the game is lower than before?
When building a sequel I expect them to note what worked, what didn't work, take out what didn't work and try again. The Sims fanbase is already fairly forgiving in the fact that everyone EXPECTS to buy back the expansion content over time.
It's not about wanting every feature. The problem is twofold.
1) Saying "this game is different" is a dismissal of complaints. For example if you complained "this game should be open world," I could reply back and state that with open world come a number of advantages and disadvantages that they felt overall aren't worth it, arguing that they'd rather prioritize rotational play or multiple families per save file even if it comes at the cost of things like story progression. That may not be an answer you like, but it is an answer as to the method that let's you know and understand their reasoning. If you ask that same question and I answer "this game is different," I haven't exactly expounded upon any of my thoughts or reasoning.
2) The method and the purpose in omitting something. If I tell you "this game is different," it's a bit difficult to explain how being "different" means firefighters need to be skipped. Sometimes being different is a good explanation for changes, but other times it isn't, as being different and housing a traditional feature are not mutually exclusive. In this case, stating "it's different" doesn't really explain anything about why Firefighters are gone, nor justify it.
I've been trying to stay out of this fray- lol. Especially since it mostly comes down to consumer perception versus reality in a partial information vacuum and current climate of high corporate distrust BUT I just have to say this in regard to the above- I think it's unreasonable for the budget for the game to be lower than before, that's the unreasonable part. LEGAL DISCLAIMER: My preceding statement is wholly and completely based on the possibility of unknown probability that the budget is in fact lower. A possibility which I have absolutely no evidence to support and in fact did not make but only responded to as though it contained some manner of validity. DISCLAIMER ENDED Now I'll just go and get another drink and bag of kettle corn.
that's a fair expectation, too bad almost no one seems to follow the same logic as features that were considered unsuccessful are still being demanded in the forums
as for the sims community being forgiving, and that being the reason, I would have to disagree. There's plenty of people within the community who are upset that the base game is not a shiny version of TS3 + all expansions. And even if those people didn't exist, plenty of other games follow the expansion pack model and have communities which support it, so I don't know why this community would be any more forgiving than those.
because normally players expect a new game to release with the features that were implemented in expansions in a previous game. Civilization gets really negative reviews often for "not being a complete game".
I understand "the open world did not work" bit, however the exchange was supposed to be stability. And the game is not in a very good shape right now, so I don't feel like that was a fair trade.
I don't mean to be the guy that says "ea is always right!" because they obviously aren't. but in respect to major business decisions you think they would allocate the game a lower budget (which they have already said to be the case) for.. no reason? the genre simply isn't as popular as it used to be. it's not as groundbreaking as it was in the early-mid 2000s.
I just think it's a bit naïve to assume we know enough to make claims like that, disagreeing with probably dozens, or hundreds of business professionals.
Who asking for every feature in the previous games. I still expect a good fraction of it to be in this game. Since it is a sequel
that's a completely fair, and reasonable opinion. I don't disagree at all.
they're the only ones in the genre.
As for claims that it isn't popular anymore? They shut down Simcity because of it and look how great Cities: Skylines are doing. If anything simulation is on the rise currently. Many shop/ hospital/ building simulators in the vein of prison architect are coming out to get a chunk of that success, we have Parkitect and Planet coaster both competing side by side by seizing different elements of park simulation, we know that Planet Zoo is in development and Cities: Skylines 2 is likely. Semi life simulators such as Youtuber's Life and Stardew Valley are even managing to steal a bit of The Sims fan-base, if the forums that I visit are anything to go by.
If The Sims is doing worse now than before, they only have themselves to blame.
that's.. one expectation I suppose. It isn't mine. I actually am not one of the people who wanted TS4 to be a pretty version of TS3. To me, repeating the same things over and over again in every iteration 1. gets in the way of new development and 2. is boring, repetitive, and feels like a waste of money.
that's just my opinion though. you don't agree and you don't have to.
And if you've seen these forums, you can find demands for just about every ts3 feature being imported to ts4. Every. Single. One.
If they have stated that they are operating with a lower budget- which I in no way remembered reading and I don't consider information to be fact until I see corroborating evidence to support it- then it also in no way changes my opinion that the move is unreasonable. That's my personal feeling on the subject and if you should consider that naive then so be it. That is your personal feeling regarding my feeling. However, dozens and even hundreds of people all working together have made the wrong decision in the past and they will again in the future. If someone(s) within EA/Maxis made that decision to lower the budget on a supposed AAA title then I find it unreasonable, despite what you may or may not think of my (someone who you do not know) qualifications as a "business professional" or lack thereof.
I guess I worded myself poorly. It's not about you (or me) not being business professionals. It's that we don't have the numbers or the statistics laid out in front of us. The people who made the decision do. They might not be right all the time (this is obvious, insert toddler story, bla bla bla), but their opinion is weighed on a lot more than mine is. So for me to go and say "the budget should have been higher!" , just kind of goes unsupported. It isn't about feelings, or anything like that.
It's about my first statement above perception- that's what I mean by "feeling". Not emotions but how I and others perceive it. Consumer perception is higher than reality when it comes to purchasing a a product. My perception is that it's a bad move to cut the budget and if they have publicly stated that they did then that makes the perception even worse. It colors everything the consumer, myself in this case, sees from that point on in a shade of "cheaper" quality due to cheaper production. I'm going to automatically be searching for where the cut was made and what was left out because the statement that the company is trying to produce the same product at a cheaper price has formed that image in my head. That may not be fact. The product, in fact, may be quite good but it is perception that counts- not fact and perception is what corporations should most concern themselves with. That's why I think it's an unreasonable decision to cut the budget and even more unreasonable to announce it. It ignores perception. And yes, no matter what facts and figures I may have been presented with I would have bristled at cutting the budget. In fact I did at a recent board meeting where cutting the budget of a program was suggested- you can believe that or not. To my thinking losing consumer base is not a result of spending too much money and regaining or retaining base is not a result of spending less. Shrug- it's a point of view, mine and I'm not apt to change it with any amount of arguing nor you yours I think so here I'll bow out. Feel free to deliver your final argument or not, as you wish.
jeeze, who's arguing? it's like there's no such thing as simple discussion anymore. i'm not closed off to your opinions (although you apparently are ), I simply wanted to know more about them. It sounds like you're saying you prefer when companies withhold information from you for the sake of making themselves and their product look good, which is interesting to say the least.
But since you've "bowed out" I guess I won't be getting any kind of explanation on that.
(◡‿◡✿)