Thank you @Writin_Reg the switch from online to offline was probably what I was thinking of!
That was actually the smallest of the layoff from my understanding that less than 10 was involved and only 2 of 4 (the online engine devs) were completely let go with that change over which again was in late 2012/ early 2013. But the closure of the Sims store which affected 40 members was bigger. Not all 40 were let go, as some did opt to go back to Redwood City.
Keep in mind The Sims Division is really big - according to Wall St. Review of top tier companies on Wall Street - as of June 22 of this year they are listed as having 1500 employees just in the Sims Division alone, with EA itself listing 8400 employees - it was not specified but I assume that 8400 include the 1500 for Maxis as well as all of EA's other studios as well. That is really huge growth for a studio seeing when Sims 2 was in production - well actually right about the time they started up working on Sims 3 (which was right after Sims 2 OFB was about to come out) - Maxis were listed as having 638 employees. So they have grown a lot.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Thank you @Writin_Reg the switch from online to offline was probably what I was thinking of!
That was actually the smallest of the layoff from my understanding that less than 10 was involved and only 4 were completely let go with that change over which again was in late 2012/ early 2013. But the closure of the Sims store which affected 40 members was bigger. Not all 40 were let go, as some did opt to go back to Redwood City.
They did lose some awesome people with the store closure.
Exactly @bekkasan any loss from Olympus was the responsibility of EA. Their mistake, their loss to make up. It's not reasonable to give us an inferior product or experience because of the mistakes made in development.
@Writin_Reg am I right in remembering they let go of staff from TS4 while in development?
@Pary and @Corey785 I know it's just interesting watch the defence bar move whatever is said.
Actually they let go of staff at the end of Sims 3 to do with the store as all the store was done at the Salt lake city studios and they had to move out all the Sims 3 studio people from there to remade the studios into a state of the art mobile studio. It was not due to the Sims 3 or the Sims 4 - and just 40 employees were affected - the 40 on the sims 3 store team. BUt they did offer to place many of the store team at the Redwood CA studios who wanted to work there. Those that didn't they helped with getting new jobs and such. BUt there was also some loses of personel from both studios also between that time and the actual end days of the Sims 3 too - but less to do with EA - it was people moving on to other jobs or family situations that forced them to move elsewhere. Like Smitty left because her hubby's job had him moved to another part of the country - so naturally she went with him. I know there was another person who had been with EA for many years that was going into business for himself to do with Art - and who was also moving else where. Another left to make their own games with a new start up company.
Oh there were a lot of shuffling around that actually started when the Sims 4 development went from online to offline back in 2012 as well. Like all the online production team were removed from the Sims 4 when it was decided in 2012 they were not happy with the online version (which actually came about before SC2013 came out to be honest - because they had already scrapped the online game engine and let go a handfull of online game /engine development people - but at the same time replaced them with offline engine people to newly build another game engine to go back to the normal offline Sims series type game. All the fiasco with SC 2013 did was confirm what the games developers had already concluded, but of course by the time Sims City came out and failed - they already were salvaging what they could from the offline and adding/developing all the new to the brand new game engine. Several of the people laid off from the online posted much of this info themselves online on their own webpages way back in 2012 -
The next big layoff was when Sims City proved to be a failure - and the decision came to close Emeryville - but again like the move of people from the Salt Lake City studios - many were offered positions at the main EA campus and a few other EA owned studios - and others got some temp work to finish helping get Sims 4 out as well. I know very few were just plain let go - most that were let go had new positions to go to or came back to the Main EA campus.
I know that is the official reasoning for the layoffs, but I don't understand why they didn't just move them to TS4 content. Maxis used to keep their staff through multiple projects, so it doesn't make sense why they would lay them off.
The writing on the wall suggests that they are shrinking the size of the studio because they are no longer willing to invest in the franchise. At this point, I doubt we'll ever get a game with as much depth as TS2 or TS3.
@Erpe the point people are making is if they made a sufficient base they would continue to roll in profits as they always have. They've essentially sabotaged themselves and the game by releasing the game unfinished-even when EA CEO himself says EA shouldn't do that!
Exactly. It was complete self-sabotage on their part.
Yes. They should have postponed TS4 a year and used another $50 million to add toddlers without raising the price for the game. They we all would have been a little more happy and the sales numbers would have been about the same
@sparkfairy1 You don't seem to be able to see the problem or the difference from earlier Sims games. But the way that I see it is:
Sims 1: A completely new concept. The game had primitive graphics and not much content. So it was cheap to make. But the supprisingly high sales numbers then caused EA to make a lot of expansions which hadn't been planned. They were not easy to make for that reason and they were therefore also difficult to install. They had to be installed in the correct order and sometimes even this didn't work in the first attempt.
Sims 2: The extremely high sales number for TS1 caused EA to make a much bigger game with advanced graphics. This time the game was prepared for expansions and they therefore also became much easier to make and install. Many simmers hated that TS2 was released anyway though because they had used so much money on TS1. So a lot of people hesitated to buy TS2. But the much more advanced graphics and the much more advanced gameplay finally convinced also the remaining simmers to buy the game.
Sims 3: EA knew the problem with a lot of simmers hesitating to buy a new game from TS2. So they included the open world to convince people - even though the technology wasn't really ready for that step. The open world limited the number of sims in each game and it made subhoods almost impossible. Most of the EPs were therefore released with new buildings which couldn't really be placed in the world where people already played. So usually people had to start a new game for each EP.
Sims 4: The problem about including something new which could convince people to buy the game early and for the full price had become bigger than ever before. There were no longer really any opportunity to just add hugely improved graphics, aging, a more open world or something like that. They just had to find something new - but what should it be?
I don't really know what they should have done. My best proposal would have been gradually increased heights as the children grow up and a possibility to make Sims of different heights as adults. But I think that this would have been nearly impossible to make for technological reasons. At least unless EA would make a game with much higher minimum requirements which probably would cost EA a lot of customers.
So they consider to make it as an online multiplayer game. But ended with emotions, multitasking and an improved build mode instead. How would you have made the game if it still should have enough convincing new content for EA to use in their PR campaigns?
This is way off base.
This game had a winning formula when it had producers that understood the draw to it. TS2 made the game a juggernaut and TS3 sold even more. So how is it that you think they thought they couldn't get people to buy the upgrade? Most simmers made the jump willingly. As much as I loved TS2, I jumped immediately to TS3 and only looked back when I realized that the simulations were subpar compared to TS2. But you know what kept me playing TS3? The open world. Despite the fact that I didn't like the actual game as much as TS2, that open world upgrade kept me playing the upgrade. And it did that for countless others, too. The problem now is that TS4 didn't offer any upgrades. In fact, it regressed to the standards of TS1 and why would any of us feel compelled to make the jump and stick with it? I pre-ordered TS4 the day it was announced. They didn't show me anything about the game, but I knew that I couldn't go wrong with it. It wasn't until they revealed the lack of features, features that had become staples of the game, that I cancelled my pre-order. And I'm not talking about hot tubs and objects, but things that you would expect to make you want to upgrade. The open world, toddlers, CASt, actual travel on the map, not being able to add lots or add decorations to the neighborhood. Then on top of that, everything else.
There was a lot that they could have done to make the jump worthwhile. For starters, include the basic features that made the previous games sell and then add something new. It's not rocket science. I, too, thought it would be height. It could have been a physics engine. It could have been a lot of things. But they failed. It's as simple as that. They tried to sell me a rotten lemon after they already sold me the best tasting lemonade ever. I'm not buying it.
Thank you @Writin_Reg the switch from online to offline was probably what I was thinking of!
That was actually the smallest of the layoff from my understanding that less than 10 was involved and only 4 were completely let go with that change over which again was in late 2012/ early 2013. But the closure of the Sims store which affected 40 members was bigger. Not all 40 were let go, as some did opt to go back to Redwood City.
They did lose some awesome people with the store closure.
Yes - as not every one was in position to want to leave Salt Lake City and go to California. I can understand that. I have tried to follow up on many that left and so far I don't see anyone jobless - lol. Plus when they finally had Salt Lake city back in full operation a few did get into there - so it seems like most are happy and content on how it all worked out.
The last one to leave to do with the store was Alan Copeland and he is now in New York working for a (much smaller) game company doing pretty much the same thing he did and more - plus he is working on games he really seems to love. Many of these people have their own websites so it hasn't been too hard seeing how many are doing. Some of the others also belong to the same online Business service I belong to, so I at least see where they are working now and what they are working on. Many are on my list of people I know or know of - and I inadvertedly see what they are up to every time I go to my own page.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
@Erpe the point people are making is if they made a sufficient base they would continue to roll in profits as they always have. They've essentially sabotaged themselves and the game by releasing the game unfinished-even when EA CEO himself says EA shouldn't do that!
Exactly. It was complete self-sabotage on their part.
Yes. They should have postponed TS4 a year and used another $50 million to add toddlers without raising the price for the game. They we all would have been a little more happy and the sales numbers would have been about the same
Why do you think sales numbers would be the same? Do you think all the bad press and reviews had no negative impact on sales?
Your argument is what I would call a "race to the bottom" mentality. Cut funding to "maximize profit", which leads to a decline in quality, which hurts long-term sales, which leads to another cut in funding. Rinse and repeat.
@Erpe the point people are making is if they made a sufficient base they would continue to roll in profits as they always have. They've essentially sabotaged themselves and the game by releasing the game unfinished-even when EA CEO himself says EA shouldn't do that!
I know that you would prefer that EA just made the basegame bigger and bigger for each version by adding new stuff without removing anything and without raising the price for the game. But even though I can follow the dream I also know that it can't ever be anything but a dream.
I have also observed the following difference between EA and nearly all other game companies though:
1. Other game companies often go on releasing the same game again and again in new versions which only differ slightly from the previous version. I have often felt that I get too little for my money by buying such games in each version though and the series usually stops after a few versions because sales numbers go down. Sometimes the falling sales numbers have caused the game company to go bankruptcy too. But the advantage is that you always get the same game again every time you buy it.
2. Different versions of EA's games often differ much more than games from other companies. The disadvantage in this obviously is that you can get a very different game than you thought that you bought. But the advantage is that you really get a new game every time and not just the same game again and again with only small changes. But you shouldn't preorder EA's games but instead always read reviews about each game before you buy them.
You keep claiming that a Sims game without toddlers isn't finished. But then a lot of earlier Sims games weren't finished either because only TS2 and TS3 had toddlers. TS1 didn't have them and neither did the Sims games for consoles and mobiles. So why do you think that EA broke some kind of law by including other things instead of toddlers in TS4?
@Erpe the point people are making is if they made a sufficient base they would continue to roll in profits as they always have. They've essentially sabotaged themselves and the game by releasing the game unfinished-even when EA CEO himself says EA shouldn't do that!
Exactly. It was complete self-sabotage on their part.
Yes. They should have postponed TS4 a year and used another $50 million to add toddlers without raising the price for the game. They we all would have been a little more happy and the sales numbers would have been about the same
Why do you think sales numbers would be the same? Do you think all the bad press and reviews had no negative impact on sales?
Your argument is what I would call a "race to the bottom" mentality. Cut funding to "maximize profit", which leads to a decline in quality, which hurts long-term sales, which leads to another cut in funding. Rinse and repeat.
That's how companies get run into the ground
Exactly right. I have no doubt the poor reputation and experience of many loyal fans has led to much smaller retention rate than before. Especially given the poor release of the game not leading to much better post release to make up for those issues!
That's exactly what I see too right now. A race to the bottom, taking the whole future of the sims with it. Rather than admitting they've made mistakes and resolving to do better they are ignoring the issues and making out its everyone and everything but themselves responsible.
I know that you would prefer that EA just made the basegame bigger and bigger for each version by adding new stuff without removing anything and without raising the price for the game. But even though I can follow the dream I also know that it can't ever be anything but a dream.
I have also observed the following difference between EA and nearly all other game companies though:
1. Other game companies often go on releasing the same game again and again in new versions which only differ slightly from the previous version. I have often felt that I get too little for my money by buying such games in each version though and the series usually stops after a few versions because sales numbers go down. Sometimes the falling sales numbers have caused the game company to go bankruptcy too. But the advantage is that you always get the same game again every time you buy it.
But EA is one of the worst offenders for this business practice, with their sports games.
I think everyone understands that base games will lose many features that were introduced in expansions. The difference with TS4 is that we lost tons of features from other BASE games. Then EA's PR strategy is to trash prior installments while simultaneously saying that its "too hard" to replicate features that were included in the past.
The problems with TS4's development are fairly simple:
1. Mismanagement of revenue from past games
2. Unwillingness to invest in future games
3. A weak and limiting game engine.
The business model of the Sims was to get players hooked, so they buy expansions and DLC. That model is now compromised IMO.
Like I said before, it's a race-to-the-bottom mentality.
I know that you would prefer that EA just made the basegame bigger and bigger for each version by adding new stuff without removing anything and without raising the price for the game. But even though I can follow the dream I also know that it can't ever be anything but a dream.
I have also observed the following difference between EA and nearly all other game companies though:
1. Other game companies often go on releasing the same game again and again in new versions which only differ slightly from the previous version. I have often felt that I get too little for my money by buying such games in each version though and the series usually stops after a few versions because sales numbers go down. Sometimes the falling sales numbers have caused the game company to go bankruptcy too. But the advantage is that you always get the same game again every time you buy it.
But EA is one of the worst offenders for this business practice, with their sports games.
I think everyone understands that base games will lose many features that were introduced in expansions. The difference with TS4 is that we lost tons of features from other BASE games. Then EA's PR strategy is to trash prior installments while simultaneously saying that its "too hard" to replicate features that were included in the past.
The problems with TS4's development are fairly simple:
1. Mismanagement of revenue from past games
2. Unwillingness to invest in future games
3. A weak and limiting game engine.
The business model of the Sims was to get players hooked, so they buy expansions and DLC. That model is now compromised IMO.
Like I said before, it's a race-to-the-bottom mentality.
This is how I see it too. Those EA sports games are just a rehash of the same thing with updated team roosters/graphics. People who play those games know it and are willing to upgrade just to get new stats, they would never in a million years buy the game if it didn't literally follow the rules of baseball or some dev decided it was more fun to play tennis with a flaming duck sword instead of a racket. Amazingly, there's not one thing wrong with that from the player perspective. You hear a lot of sports game fans complain about prices or DLC, but no one is saying that they wished EA would start getting creative with the rules of golf in the name of change.
It's always funny hearing players say the Sims needs to drastically change between versions. Anytime you press them on what exactly they mean by change, it always turns out to be something about how they wanted more Amusement Parks or woohoo barns or some other arbitrary thing that really doesn't have anything to do with the game basics. Even the family/no family play type arguments boil down to players that essentially want the same thing, they just want small things implemented in a different manner.
*sigh*
Still people miss how those less than enthused about Sims 4. It's more than toddlers or even missing game play that use to be base game. Sure we want them and speaking for myself the want may have more to do with trying to satisfy something that will make me play more. I miss being excited for a new EP, new content, something that will make me have PEPs (pre-expansion pack syndrome). Yeah, I did enjoy The Sims for it's charm and dark humor, but Sims 2 did bring in generational game play and I am spoiled. Never in my life would I believe the sims team would delete an age stage, let alone make the game just go through motions. I see the charm in how sims cook, tend the garden, interact with children but after a year that is growing old and not enough to sustain my desire to sim. Thinking back to the base game of Sims 2 and 3, there was chock full of interactions that rounded out the life stages and it was so charming, couldn't help seeing how it would play out in a new game session. Genetics was my guilty pleasure and I don't think Sims 3 or 4 live up to it.
It's more than what you all think it is and the more I play Sims 4, I can see how the missing elements is impacting my enjoyment. So I will just sit back with what I have and find other ways to enjoy what I spent money on, like creating and playing around with meshes, or model my sims. This is the only video game that has ever interest me and I still haven't found anything else to sate my palate. That is the worst for simmers like me.
Nothing to see. I don't even care about the forums.
I know that you would prefer that EA just made the basegame bigger and bigger for each version by adding new stuff without removing anything and without raising the price for the game. But even though I can follow the dream I also know that it can't ever be anything but a dream.
I have also observed the following difference between EA and nearly all other game companies though:
1. Other game companies often go on releasing the same game again and again in new versions which only differ slightly from the previous version. I have often felt that I get too little for my money by buying such games in each version though and the series usually stops after a few versions because sales numbers go down. Sometimes the falling sales numbers have caused the game company to go bankruptcy too. But the advantage is that you always get the same game again every time you buy it.
But EA is one of the worst offenders for this business practice, with their sports games.
I think everyone understands that base games will lose many features that were introduced in expansions. The difference with TS4 is that we lost tons of features from other BASE games. Then EA's PR strategy is to trash prior installments while simultaneously saying that its "too hard" to replicate features that were included in the past.
The problems with TS4's development are fairly simple:
1. Mismanagement of revenue from past games
2. Unwillingness to invest in future games
3. A weak and limiting game engine.
The business model of the Sims was to get players hooked, so they buy expansions and DLC. That model is now compromised IMO.
Like I said before, it's a race-to-the-bottom mentality.
This is how I see it too. Those EA sports games are just a rehash of the same thing with updated team roosters/graphics. People who play those games know it and are willing to upgrade just to get new stats, they would never in a million years buy the game if it didn't literally follow the rules of baseball or some dev decided it was more fun to play tennis with a flaming duck sword instead of a racket. Amazingly, there's not one thing wrong with that from the player perspective. You hear a lot of sports game fans complain about prices or DLC, but no one is saying that they wished EA would start getting creative with the rules of golf in the name of change.
It's always funny hearing players say the Sims needs to drastically change between versions. Anytime you press them on what exactly they mean by change, it always turns out to be something about how they wanted more Amusement Parks or woohoo barns or some other arbitrary thing that really doesn't have anything to do with the game basics. Even the family/no family play type arguments boil down to players that essentially want the same thing, they just want small things implemented in a different manner.
It really is a race to the bottom.
I wish I could give you both 100 Awesome's. This is so true! My husband plays the EA sports games and from what I can tell they are all the same with the exception of the team rosters.
*sigh*
Still people miss how those less than enthused about Sims 4. It's more than toddlers or even missing game play that use to be base game. Sure we want them and speaking for myself the want may have more to do with trying to satisfy something that will make me play more. I miss being excited for a new EP, new content, something that will make me have PEPs (pre-expansion pack syndrome). Yeah, I did enjoy The Sims for it's charm and dark humor, but Sims 2 did bring in generational game play and I am spoiled. Never in my life would I believe the sims team would delete an age stage, let alone make the game just go through motions. I see the charm in how sims cook, tend the garden, interact with children but after a year that is growing old and not enough to sustain my desire to sim. Thinking back to the base game of Sims 2 and 3, there was chock full of interactions that rounded out the life stages and it was so charming, couldn't help seeing how it would play out in a new game session. Genetics was my guilty pleasure and I don't think Sims 3 or 4 live up to it.
It's more than what you all think it is and the more I play Sims 4, I can see how the missing elements is impacting my enjoyment. So I will just sit back with what I have and find other ways to enjoy what I spent money on, like creating and playing around with meshes, or model my sims. This is the only video game that has ever interest me and I still haven't found anything else to sate my palate. That is the worst for simmers like me.
@Gthompkins48 exactly. Removed a ton of content and detail from the base and didn't replace with anything new.
@Seamoan flaming duck sword? Oh that's my favourite post of the day! Exactly right
As far as I see it EAs biggest problems with Sims fans is we are a lot more intelligent than they give us credit for. We can see through the spin and ask the questions they want to avoid ever having asked of them.
Maybe some people are getting confused between a "remake" of the game and what I consider to be "core features". If you look at it, most sequels are "remakes" in that there are certain features and themes that are repeated again and again. The Elder Scrolls Series, for example, has magic and creatures that you fight. Skyrim (#5) has many similarities with Oblivion (#4) but Skyrim is not a remake of Oblivion. If Bethesda removed magic and open world, then I would say that the new Skyrim would not be an Elder Scrolls game anymore, just as many think Sims 4 is not a Sims game. You can't remove certain core features that define a series. And yes core features can be added. 3-D Open world was added to Elder Scrolls with Morrowind (#3) and has stayed since. Should that essential feature be removed, Elder Scrolls fans would be outraged, perhaps as much as Sims fans are outraged over Sims 4.
Exactly. Yet Simmers get mad when you call the Sims 4 not a Sims game or a side game yet in the same breath they call it different. It is like with the New Coke. Formula got changed, people didn't like it. Same with the Sims 4, the core formula features got changed, so Simmers don't like it. It would have done much better if they had stuck with the name the Sims Olympus because right now it feels like nothing more than scraps of that online attempt. I wish they had just started fresh and not used the Sims Olympus to develop the Sims 4.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
But EA is one of the worst offenders for this business practice, with their sports games.
I think everyone understands that base games will lose many features that were introduced in expansions. The difference with TS4 is that we lost tons of features from other BASE games. Then EA's PR strategy is to trash prior installments while simultaneously saying that its "too hard" to replicate features that were included in the past.
The problems with TS4's development are fairly simple:
1. Mismanagement of revenue from past games
2. Unwillingness to invest in future games
3. A weak and limiting game engine.
The business model of the Sims was to get players hooked, so they buy expansions and DLC. That model is now compromised IMO.
Like I said before, it's a race-to-the-bottom mentality.
Your posts actually make sense to me, so thank you for sharing them. I work in accounting, so yes I fully agree with your points. It does feel like Sims 4 could be another failed project like SimCity 2013. If customers are unhappy and are being treated poorly, they will stop buying the products. That is how businesses work. Unpopular products on grocery store shelved get shelved and removed if they aren't selling well. It is no different for games. I honestly don't know why anyone would defend EA especially after their Golden Poo awards and their reputation. I am actually curious if they will get it again. Pretty interesting mentioning that award to an EA employee though. They get upset and say it was biased. But makes me really want a golden toilet for the Sims 4 game.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
Goes to prove it is not just us or a small handfull of players as it is voted one of the 12 worst games of 2014 - and why mainly? For the missing stuff like "TODDLERS" -
Goes to prove it is not just us or a small handfull of players as it is voted one of the 12 worst games of 2014 - and why mainly? For the missing stuff like "TODDLERS" -
Most of the players that were disappointed have moved on and stopped talking about it. So I would guess it is a small handful, but same could be said for those who are happy about it too. Not all the players post about their games.
Dissatisfied with Sims 4 and hoping for a better Sims 5
I feel like effort goes a long way, as does listening, communicating, and addressing issues as soon as possible. EA doesn't really do the best job on those things and that's the problem. they make the game they wanna make instead of really listening to what their costumers want. and isn't that how it should be? happy customers = good profit, and we all know EA loves money. it's just weird that they're so detached from their customers, yet they love making money (like any company). wouldn't they make more if they were more intimate and open with their customers? their silence is getting old.
I wish I could give you both 100 Awesome's. This is so true! My husband plays the EA sports games and from what I can tell they are all the same with the exception of the team rosters.
He does ?!?!
He just made my "List"
..........................................................
I feel like effort goes a long way, as does listening, communicating, and addressing issues as soon as possible. EA doesn't really do the best job on those things and that's the problem. they make the game they wanna make instead of really listening to what their costumers want. and isn't that how it should be? happy customers = good profit, and we all know EA loves money. it's just weird that they're so detached from their customers, yet they love making money (like any company). wouldn't they make more if they were more intimate and open with their customers? their silence is getting old.
I feel like effort goes a long way, as does listening, communicating, and addressing issues as soon as possible. EA doesn't really do the best job on those things and that's the problem. they make the game they wanna make instead of really listening to what their costumers want. and isn't that how it should be? happy customers = good profit, and we all know EA loves money. it's just weird that they're so detached from their customers, yet they love making money (like any company). wouldn't they make more if they were more intimate and open with their customers? their silence is getting old.
I certainly have. As someone who has worked in both promotion and customer service my experience is that one is no good without the other (because they start to cancel the benefits of the other out), and if both are great people will happily throw money your way!
I feel like effort goes a long way, as does listening, communicating, and addressing issues as soon as possible. EA doesn't really do the best job on those things and that's the problem. they make the game they wanna make instead of really listening to what their costumers want. and isn't that how it should be? happy customers = good profit, and we all know EA loves money. it's just weird that they're so detached from their customers, yet they love making money (like any company). wouldn't they make more if they were more intimate and open with their customers? their silence is getting old.
I certainly have. As someone who has worked in both promotion and customer service my experience is that one is no good without the other (because they start to cancel the benefits of the other out), and if both are great people will happily throw money your way!
Very true. Having worked in similar fields myself, I've seen the damage bad PR can do (not just by words, but by actions or lack of actions), and I've seen the rewards of the hard work thereafter to bring back lost customers that were once loyal.
It can be done, but one has to ask themself, 'Why isn't this formula working and what can we do to make it work?' They need to take it further than that though. They need to ask their customers and their employees. Surveys are superficial unless a company actually pays attention to them, and telemetary can be more damaging than good if words aren't included to explain why those answers were given—a side-effect to surveys in case anyone didn't know.
The answer is to re-evaluate your current standards and take a risk by changing them.
Dissatisfied with Sims 4 and hoping for a better Sims 5
Goes to prove it is not just us or a small handfull of players as it is voted one of the 12 worst games of 2014 - and why mainly? For the missing stuff like "TODDLERS" -
Most of the players that were disappointed have moved on and stopped talking about it. So I would guess it is a small handful, but same could be said for those who are happy about it too. Not all the players post about their games.
Oh, so the Simmers who left due to the disappointment don't count anymore in your opinion?
Comments
That was actually the smallest of the layoff from my understanding that less than 10 was involved and only 2 of 4 (the online engine devs) were completely let go with that change over which again was in late 2012/ early 2013. But the closure of the Sims store which affected 40 members was bigger. Not all 40 were let go, as some did opt to go back to Redwood City.
Keep in mind The Sims Division is really big - according to Wall St. Review of top tier companies on Wall Street - as of June 22 of this year they are listed as having 1500 employees just in the Sims Division alone, with EA itself listing 8400 employees - it was not specified but I assume that 8400 include the 1500 for Maxis as well as all of EA's other studios as well. That is really huge growth for a studio seeing when Sims 2 was in production - well actually right about the time they started up working on Sims 3 (which was right after Sims 2 OFB was about to come out) - Maxis were listed as having 638 employees. So they have grown a lot.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
They did lose some awesome people with the store closure.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
I know that is the official reasoning for the layoffs, but I don't understand why they didn't just move them to TS4 content. Maxis used to keep their staff through multiple projects, so it doesn't make sense why they would lay them off.
The writing on the wall suggests that they are shrinking the size of the studio because they are no longer willing to invest in the franchise. At this point, I doubt we'll ever get a game with as much depth as TS2 or TS3.
This is way off base.
This game had a winning formula when it had producers that understood the draw to it. TS2 made the game a juggernaut and TS3 sold even more. So how is it that you think they thought they couldn't get people to buy the upgrade? Most simmers made the jump willingly. As much as I loved TS2, I jumped immediately to TS3 and only looked back when I realized that the simulations were subpar compared to TS2. But you know what kept me playing TS3? The open world. Despite the fact that I didn't like the actual game as much as TS2, that open world upgrade kept me playing the upgrade. And it did that for countless others, too. The problem now is that TS4 didn't offer any upgrades. In fact, it regressed to the standards of TS1 and why would any of us feel compelled to make the jump and stick with it? I pre-ordered TS4 the day it was announced. They didn't show me anything about the game, but I knew that I couldn't go wrong with it. It wasn't until they revealed the lack of features, features that had become staples of the game, that I cancelled my pre-order. And I'm not talking about hot tubs and objects, but things that you would expect to make you want to upgrade. The open world, toddlers, CASt, actual travel on the map, not being able to add lots or add decorations to the neighborhood. Then on top of that, everything else.
There was a lot that they could have done to make the jump worthwhile. For starters, include the basic features that made the previous games sell and then add something new. It's not rocket science. I, too, thought it would be height. It could have been a physics engine. It could have been a lot of things. But they failed. It's as simple as that. They tried to sell me a rotten lemon after they already sold me the best tasting lemonade ever. I'm not buying it.
Yes - as not every one was in position to want to leave Salt Lake City and go to California. I can understand that. I have tried to follow up on many that left and so far I don't see anyone jobless - lol. Plus when they finally had Salt Lake city back in full operation a few did get into there - so it seems like most are happy and content on how it all worked out.
The last one to leave to do with the store was Alan Copeland and he is now in New York working for a (much smaller) game company doing pretty much the same thing he did and more - plus he is working on games he really seems to love. Many of these people have their own websites so it hasn't been too hard seeing how many are doing. Some of the others also belong to the same online Business service I belong to, so I at least see where they are working now and what they are working on. Many are on my list of people I know or know of - and I inadvertedly see what they are up to every time I go to my own page.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Why do you think sales numbers would be the same? Do you think all the bad press and reviews had no negative impact on sales?
Your argument is what I would call a "race to the bottom" mentality. Cut funding to "maximize profit", which leads to a decline in quality, which hurts long-term sales, which leads to another cut in funding. Rinse and repeat.
That's how companies get run into the ground
I have also observed the following difference between EA and nearly all other game companies though:
1. Other game companies often go on releasing the same game again and again in new versions which only differ slightly from the previous version. I have often felt that I get too little for my money by buying such games in each version though and the series usually stops after a few versions because sales numbers go down. Sometimes the falling sales numbers have caused the game company to go bankruptcy too. But the advantage is that you always get the same game again every time you buy it.
2. Different versions of EA's games often differ much more than games from other companies. The disadvantage in this obviously is that you can get a very different game than you thought that you bought. But the advantage is that you really get a new game every time and not just the same game again and again with only small changes. But you shouldn't preorder EA's games but instead always read reviews about each game before you buy them.
You keep claiming that a Sims game without toddlers isn't finished. But then a lot of earlier Sims games weren't finished either because only TS2 and TS3 had toddlers. TS1 didn't have them and neither did the Sims games for consoles and mobiles. So why do you think that EA broke some kind of law by including other things instead of toddlers in TS4?
Exactly right. I have no doubt the poor reputation and experience of many loyal fans has led to much smaller retention rate than before. Especially given the poor release of the game not leading to much better post release to make up for those issues!
That's exactly what I see too right now. A race to the bottom, taking the whole future of the sims with it. Rather than admitting they've made mistakes and resolving to do better they are ignoring the issues and making out its everyone and everything but themselves responsible.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
But EA is one of the worst offenders for this business practice, with their sports games.
I think everyone understands that base games will lose many features that were introduced in expansions. The difference with TS4 is that we lost tons of features from other BASE games. Then EA's PR strategy is to trash prior installments while simultaneously saying that its "too hard" to replicate features that were included in the past.
The problems with TS4's development are fairly simple:
1. Mismanagement of revenue from past games
2. Unwillingness to invest in future games
3. A weak and limiting game engine.
The business model of the Sims was to get players hooked, so they buy expansions and DLC. That model is now compromised IMO.
Like I said before, it's a race-to-the-bottom mentality.
This is how I see it too. Those EA sports games are just a rehash of the same thing with updated team roosters/graphics. People who play those games know it and are willing to upgrade just to get new stats, they would never in a million years buy the game if it didn't literally follow the rules of baseball or some dev decided it was more fun to play tennis with a flaming duck sword instead of a racket. Amazingly, there's not one thing wrong with that from the player perspective. You hear a lot of sports game fans complain about prices or DLC, but no one is saying that they wished EA would start getting creative with the rules of golf in the name of change.
It's always funny hearing players say the Sims needs to drastically change between versions. Anytime you press them on what exactly they mean by change, it always turns out to be something about how they wanted more Amusement Parks or woohoo barns or some other arbitrary thing that really doesn't have anything to do with the game basics. Even the family/no family play type arguments boil down to players that essentially want the same thing, they just want small things implemented in a different manner.
It really is a race to the bottom.
Still people miss how those less than enthused about Sims 4. It's more than toddlers or even missing game play that use to be base game. Sure we want them and speaking for myself the want may have more to do with trying to satisfy something that will make me play more. I miss being excited for a new EP, new content, something that will make me have PEPs (pre-expansion pack syndrome). Yeah, I did enjoy The Sims for it's charm and dark humor, but Sims 2 did bring in generational game play and I am spoiled. Never in my life would I believe the sims team would delete an age stage, let alone make the game just go through motions. I see the charm in how sims cook, tend the garden, interact with children but after a year that is growing old and not enough to sustain my desire to sim. Thinking back to the base game of Sims 2 and 3, there was chock full of interactions that rounded out the life stages and it was so charming, couldn't help seeing how it would play out in a new game session. Genetics was my guilty pleasure and I don't think Sims 3 or 4 live up to it.
It's more than what you all think it is and the more I play Sims 4, I can see how the missing elements is impacting my enjoyment. So I will just sit back with what I have and find other ways to enjoy what I spent money on, like creating and playing around with meshes, or model my sims. This is the only video game that has ever interest me and I still haven't found anything else to sate my palate. That is the worst for simmers like me.
I wish I could give you both 100 Awesome's. This is so true! My husband plays the EA sports games and from what I can tell they are all the same with the exception of the team rosters.
That's exactly how I feel @blewis823
@Gthompkins48 exactly. Removed a ton of content and detail from the base and didn't replace with anything new.
@Seamoan flaming duck sword? Oh that's my favourite post of the day! Exactly right
As far as I see it EAs biggest problems with Sims fans is we are a lot more intelligent than they give us credit for. We can see through the spin and ask the questions they want to avoid ever having asked of them.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
http://www.craveonline.com/culture/800573-worst-2014-12-disappointing-games-2014#/slide/9
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Most of the players that were disappointed have moved on and stopped talking about it. So I would guess it is a small handful, but same could be said for those who are happy about it too. Not all the players post about their games.
http://www.craveonline.com/culture/756247-sims-4s-problem-game-built-different-generation
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
He does ?!?!
He just made my "List"
..........................................................
(
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
http://www.helpscout.net/75-customer-service-facts-quotes-statistics/
I certainly have. As someone who has worked in both promotion and customer service my experience is that one is no good without the other (because they start to cancel the benefits of the other out), and if both are great people will happily throw money your way!
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Very true. Having worked in similar fields myself, I've seen the damage bad PR can do (not just by words, but by actions or lack of actions), and I've seen the rewards of the hard work thereafter to bring back lost customers that were once loyal.
It can be done, but one has to ask themself, 'Why isn't this formula working and what can we do to make it work?' They need to take it further than that though. They need to ask their customers and their employees. Surveys are superficial unless a company actually pays attention to them, and telemetary can be more damaging than good if words aren't included to explain why those answers were given—a side-effect to surveys in case anyone didn't know.
The answer is to re-evaluate your current standards and take a risk by changing them.