I haven't exactly finished your post however, I hadn't thought about if toddlers would actually be a good thing or bad thing if it were just DLC. But an EP is plausible since the TS2 team created YAs for that University EP and they were able to use and participate in all other EPs that came later (even go on vacations) though they had to live in the University hoods. So, I know those people were capable of making it all correlate. Not so sure about this team with the many complaints I have concerning how things don't correlate where I think they should in this game.
Paying is a different argument. I absolutely agree for those who paid $60 -$80 for the base, no they have already paid for 'toddlers' imho. But I didn't pay that much wasn't about to be hood winked like that barely paid half of $60 so the cost of paying for Generations EP wouldn't bother me as much because I wouldn't give them $60 for a shell of a base game.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
@nanashi-sims for me the promises inferred that base would be finished. The game I bought on preorder was absolutely not worth the price tag-there was zero mitigation of the mess they made releasing the vase unfinished.
Yes they don't *have* to offer them free. But if they want to keep succeeding in the long term they need to very carefully decide how to address this elephant in the room. It could absolutely turn the poor PR on a dime to 'wow they came through' if they showed good faith in patching toddlers and the basics into the base for free. Or if they choose to charge? They'll be knowingly turning away a lot of potential continued investment from people on principle and in the future it will require a lot more convincing to make their customers buy. I'm pretty sure they know that.
I'd hope they have the sense to show good faith and at least *attempt* to heal the damage caused by rushing an unfinished game out and subjecting this game to terrible PR. Not that I have much faith in EA, or any for that matter-but I'm pretty sure this community has made sure they know exactly how much this matters to them. I'd hope someone at EA has the sense to recognise the opportunity to turn the poor reputation around and the profits from doing so being higher than if this poor reputation follows TS4 through its complete development cycle.
I'm much more interested in quality and innovative toddlers, rather than their good faith. I won't play with "good faith", I'll play with toddlers, and their content and gameplay will matter a lot more to me than the way they are released. I don't care about PR, I care about the quality of the product.
@nanashi-sims for me the promises inferred that base would be finished. The game I bought on preorder was absolutely not worth the price tag-there was zero mitigation of the mess they made releasing the vase unfinished.
Yes they don't *have* to offer them free. But if they want to keep succeeding in the long term they need to very carefully decide how to address this elephant in the room. It could absolutely turn the poor PR on a dime to 'wow they came through' if they showed good faith in patching toddlers and the basics into the base for free. Or if they choose to charge? They'll be knowingly turning away a lot of potential continued investment from people on principle and in the future it will require a lot more convincing to make their customers buy. I'm pretty sure they know that.
I'd hope they have the sense to show good faith and at least *attempt* to heal the damage caused by rushing an unfinished game out and subjecting this game to terrible PR. Not that I have much faith in EA, or any for that matter-but I'm pretty sure this community has made sure they know exactly how much this matters to them. I'd hope someone at EA has the sense to recognise the opportunity to turn the poor reputation around and the profits from doing so being higher than if this poor reputation follows TS4 through its complete development cycle.
Meh, they've already turned away a lot of potential continued investment. A lot of the players who signed the boycott did so on the way out and stated so. I don't think giving away toddlers or selling them matters--EA blazing vision shot out and burnt those bridges a while back. I have no idea what they are going to do judging from the way they've handled this game from the start.
And thank you for acknowledging my point (I bolded your statement). That is the only contention I had with the title of this thread--I too would prefer it if toddlers were patched in rather than sold
@nanashi-sims for me the promises inferred that base would be finished. The game I bought on preorder was absolutely not worth the price tag-there was zero mitigation of the mess they made releasing the vase unfinished.
Yes they don't *have* to offer them free. But if they want to keep succeeding in the long term they need to very carefully decide how to address this elephant in the room. It could absolutely turn the poor PR on a dime to 'wow they came through' if they showed good faith in patching toddlers and the basics into the base for free. Or if they choose to charge? They'll be knowingly turning away a lot of potential continued investment from people on principle and in the future it will require a lot more convincing to make their customers buy. I'm pretty sure they know that.
I'd hope they have the sense to show good faith and at least *attempt* to heal the damage caused by rushing an unfinished game out and subjecting this game to terrible PR. Not that I have much faith in EA, or any for that matter-but I'm pretty sure this community has made sure they know exactly how much this matters to them. I'd hope someone at EA has the sense to recognise the opportunity to turn the poor reputation around and the profits from doing so being higher than if this poor reputation follows TS4 through its complete development cycle.
I'm much more interested in quality and innovative toddlers, rather than their good faith. I won't play with "good faith", I'll play with toddlers, and their content and gameplay will matter a lot more to me than the way they are released. I don't care about PR, I care about the quality of the product.
Your argument infers that the only possible answer is to buy or it means zero quality. Not necessarily. Did you not get the point I was making at all? By patching well done toddlers (yes it would be a big patch but sI have others) the allure of a more in depth game will encourage people to return and spend a lot more on related DLC. Spending money to make money if you will.
Plenty of people have said they have no issue buying DLC over and above toddlers-me included. Actually the tots have huge potential for DLC sales of cute clothes, furniture etc etc etc. That won't be lost on EA.
Yeah, and you're exactly the kind of person who keeps making game companies think it's actually 'okay' to release incomplete games and make the fans pay extra for the missing content later on.
I already gave them my money for toddlers when I bought the base game. I do NOT and should NOT need to pay extra for toddlers... especially when the base game itself was $60+ at launch. They should have been included to begin with. You're probably just another EA fanboy/fangirl who can't stand the idea of their beloved company being called out for the greedy money grabbers they are.
There was no toddlers in the base game, nor were there supposed to be. EA has creative freedom over the game. Don't like the direction, don't give them money.
You're exactly right about EA having creative freedom over the game. But, that's exactly the scary part. Ever since Will Wright left, this game has been going downhill in terms of content and features. Sims 1 and Sims 2 base games were actually complete. Nobody complained about the lack of content. Even the expansion packs and stuff packs contained A LOT more content and features than the future games did... and they were even less expensive too (at least in the US). When Sims 3 was released, the prices were a lot more expensive and the quality of packs downgraded... but, in their defense, the open world, story progression, and create a style features made up for most of that.
For every step forward The Sims 4 made, it took two steps back. That's just pathetic. There is nothing in The Sims 4 that makes it worth paying $40 for expansion packs, $20 for game packs, and $10 for stuff packs altogether. Especially if it's base game content.
Ghosts, pools, athletic & business careers, family trees, Star Wars content, a new world, dishwashers, and even more things have been added to the game for free since launch. Most of these are things that should've been in the base game to begin with. Toddlers should be included in a free patch.
Stop giving EA excuses for ruining this franchise.
@nanashi-sims for me the promises inferred that base would be finished. The game I bought on preorder was absolutely not worth the price tag-there was zero mitigation of the mess they made releasing the vase unfinished.
Yes they don't *have* to offer them free. But if they want to keep succeeding in the long term they need to very carefully decide how to address this elephant in the room. It could absolutely turn the poor PR on a dime to 'wow they came through' if they showed good faith in patching toddlers and the basics into the base for free. Or if they choose to charge? They'll be knowingly turning away a lot of potential continued investment from people on principle and in the future it will require a lot more convincing to make their customers buy. I'm pretty sure they know that.
I'd hope they have the sense to show good faith and at least *attempt* to heal the damage caused by rushing an unfinished game out and subjecting this game to terrible PR. Not that I have much faith in EA, or any for that matter-but I'm pretty sure this community has made sure they know exactly how much this matters to them. I'd hope someone at EA has the sense to recognise the opportunity to turn the poor reputation around and the profits from doing so being higher than if this poor reputation follows TS4 through its complete development cycle.
I'm much more interested in quality and innovative toddlers, rather than their good faith. I won't play with "good faith", I'll play with toddlers, and their content and gameplay will matter a lot more to me than the way they are released. I don't care about PR, I care about the quality of the product.
Your argument infers that the only possible answer is to buy or it means zero quality. Not necessarily. Did you not get the point I was making at all? By patching well done toddlers (yes it would be a big patch but sI have others) the allure of a more in depth game will encourage people to return and spend a lot more on related DLC. Spending money to make money if you will.
Plenty of people have said they have no issue buying DLC over and above toddlers-me included. Actually the tots have huge potential for DLC sales of cute clothes, furniture etc etc etc. That won't be lost on EA.
Spending money to make money like you say imply taking a far bigger risk and suppose that there would be enough extra sales on DLC to make up for the cost of the EP/toddler pack (and don't forget the DLC have a budget too), which means the quality of the free content is highly likely to be lower if it's free.
I think the higher the price, the bigger the budget, and thus the more ressources would be allocated to them. They don't work for free, I'm ok to pay for what I want, as long as I'm satisfied with the product.
You're free to do whatever you want with your money though, I'm just saying what I care about.
@nanashi-sims for me the promises inferred that base would be finished. The game I bought on preorder was absolutely not worth the price tag-there was zero mitigation of the mess they made releasing the vase unfinished.
Yes they don't *have* to offer them free. But if they want to keep succeeding in the long term they need to very carefully decide how to address this elephant in the room. It could absolutely turn the poor PR on a dime to 'wow they came through' if they showed good faith in patching toddlers and the basics into the base for free. Or if they choose to charge? They'll be knowingly turning away a lot of potential continued investment from people on principle and in the future it will require a lot more convincing to make their customers buy. I'm pretty sure they know that.
I'd hope they have the sense to show good faith and at least *attempt* to heal the damage caused by rushing an unfinished game out and subjecting this game to terrible PR. Not that I have much faith in EA, or any for that matter-but I'm pretty sure this community has made sure they know exactly how much this matters to them. I'd hope someone at EA has the sense to recognise the opportunity to turn the poor reputation around and the profits from doing so being higher than if this poor reputation follows TS4 through its complete development cycle.
I'm much more interested in quality and innovative toddlers, rather than their good faith. I won't play with "good faith", I'll play with toddlers, and their content and gameplay will matter a lot more to me than the way they are released. I don't care about PR, I care about the quality of the product.
Your argument infers that the only possible answer is to buy or it means zero quality. Not necessarily. Did you not get the point I was making at all? By patching well done toddlers (yes it would be a big patch but sI have others) the allure of a more in depth game will encourage people to return and spend a lot more on related DLC. Spending money to make money if you will.
Plenty of people have said they have no issue buying DLC over and above toddlers-me included. Actually the tots have huge potential for DLC sales of cute clothes, furniture etc etc etc. That won't be lost on EA.
I assume a patch works the same as EP animations (new ones) added to a game. But honestly I don't know if patching actually adds new animations or if they are just tweaking animations (like bug fixing and or adding a new object with animations) that are already in game. So, I don't know. I get confused on the subject. If patches only tweak what already exist how can they actually patch in Sims bending over to pick and carry a toddler? I admit I don't understand many things. But then I think well it's no different than downloading an actual GP or EP with new animations. Right? So, I guess it's possible and I hope they patch because to me that is the 'right thing' to do. But I would consider a really, really good Generations EP.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
Ummm.... no they don't. While it would be appreciated, it's in no way mandatory. EA is a business. You bought the game knowing that toddlers were going to come in the future, and you knew how most future content is added to the game--in the form of EPs. EA never said they would give us toddlers for free. If they are bundled in a Generations pack and they are awesome, that is sufficient. Of course free is better, but DLC is fine. Maybe if toddlers are not vital for your gameplay you can sit them out if they are DLC. I can't and won't. I'll pay for tots and better family play because my game is useless otherwise.
You clearly didn't read the entire post... all you read was "toddlers need to be given to us for free" and decided to comment. Also, people like you only prove my point even further. It's people like you who make game companies actually believe it's 'okay' to release incomplete games and then make their fans pay extra money later on for the missing content. People like you are the problem with the gaming industry.
You're right, got totally put off by the title. For the record, I haven't put a penny into the store, and I have not bought any GPs or SPs and boycotted GT (and will continue to do so). I do not think that it's OK to release an incomplete game and I do not support microtransacations. That said, EA said from the start that they would not deliver toddlers in the base game but that they would deliver it later. I never assumed it would be for free--although I would prefer it to be free (of course), if they deliver a superior toddler experience that couldn't have been done if they shoehorned tots into the base game, then I don't mind paying. If they fix my game for $40, then I didn't lose $80... if everything works out and I like the game afterwards, then lesson learnt: in the future I won't be early adopting any more Sims products.
Anyway, EA hasn't even announced toddlers yet, and lately there has been a really antagonistic, demanding, and negative tone towards the company without them even doing anything! Maybe because I only play the sims and I'm not playing TS4 because I'm still waiting for my tots, I don't understand how a company can release a highly praised EP followed shortly by a seeming popular SP and one month later people are demanding new content already and hyped--but in no way guaranteed content--be given to them for free. It's not even a "I'd appreciate it if..." it's just "EA NEEDS to do whatever..." I seriously don't get it
I just hope if this is even in the works at all, that EA is focusing on making an amazing in-depth Generations EP with toddlers. I don't want freebie tots tossed in like these bassinet babies
Your comment makes no sense. You claim that if EA decided to create a $40 expansion pack that includes toddlers, then you wouldn't have lost any money. But, you would have... you paid $80 for the base game alone. Then you're going to basically pay another $40 just for toddlers... because, let's face it, the main reason most will even buy a 'Generations' expansion pack would be for toddlers (just like how the main reason people bought 'Perfect Patio' was for hot tubs). You would have technically paid $120 for the base game alone. You are losing money this way.
My negative tones toward EA is due to the fact that they've been greedy and selfish for a long time. They're well deserving of my (and many other people's) negativity toward them. They've literally been declared the 'worst company' for years now by many people. They release incomplete games and then expect their fans to pay extra money for the missing content later on. I also have negativity toward other players who are willing to follow EA's greediness and actually pay for the missing content because they're the ones who make EA actually think this is okay to keep doing.
Don't complain about people being demanding toward EA to release a feature that should've been included in the base game to begin with. I have no sympathy for them after all the greed they've shown over the years. They're lucky to even have most of the fans they do. Like I've said several times on this forum, this fanbase (The Sims) is one of the MOST loyal fanbases in the video game world. Even after years of EA sucking money out of us for their beloved cash cow (yes, The Sims), many fans (including myself) still stay with them. It's getting tiring to constantly purchase incomplete games and then have to pay extra money for the missing content.
If toddlers are currently being worked on, they need to be released in a free patch with basic content for them. It's EA's fault that this entire toddlers controversy is going on in the first place. Prior to this game's release, fans all over were demanding for EA to delay this game to improve on it, but (like always), EA decided that money was more important and released the game unfinished. If you feel sorry for them, that's your own issue. I, however, don't have any sympathy for their greed. Either toddlers are released for free (with basic content) and then further expanded in a 'Generations' pack or don't give us toddlers at all. I refuse to pay money for base game content when I already did.
@nanashi-sims for me the promises inferred that base would be finished. The game I bought on preorder was absolutely not worth the price tag-there was zero mitigation of the mess they made releasing the vase unfinished.
Yes they don't *have* to offer them free. But if they want to keep succeeding in the long term they need to very carefully decide how to address this elephant in the room. It could absolutely turn the poor PR on a dime to 'wow they came through' if they showed good faith in patching toddlers and the basics into the base for free. Or if they choose to charge? They'll be knowingly turning away a lot of potential continued investment from people on principle and in the future it will require a lot more convincing to make their customers buy. I'm pretty sure they know that.
I'd hope they have the sense to show good faith and at least *attempt* to heal the damage caused by rushing an unfinished game out and subjecting this game to terrible PR. Not that I have much faith in EA, or any for that matter-but I'm pretty sure this community has made sure they know exactly how much this matters to them. I'd hope someone at EA has the sense to recognise the opportunity to turn the poor reputation around and the profits from doing so being higher than if this poor reputation follows TS4 through its complete development cycle.
I'm much more interested in quality and innovative toddlers, rather than their good faith. I won't play with "good faith", I'll play with toddlers, and their content and gameplay will matter a lot more to me than the way they are released. I don't care about PR, I care about the quality of the product.
Your argument infers that the only possible answer is to buy or it means zero quality. Not necessarily. Did you not get the point I was making at all? By patching well done toddlers (yes it would be a big patch but sI have others) the allure of a more in depth game will encourage people to return and spend a lot more on related DLC. Spending money to make money if you will.
Plenty of people have said they have no issue buying DLC over and above toddlers-me included. Actually the tots have huge potential for DLC sales of cute clothes, furniture etc etc etc. That won't be lost on EA.
I assume a patch works the same as EP animations (new ones) added to a game. But honestly I don't know if patching actually adds new animations or if they are just tweaking animations (like bug fixing and or adding a new object with animations) that are already in game. So, I don't know. I get confused on the subject. If patches only tweak what already exist how can they actually patch in Sims bending over to pick and carry a toddler? I admit I don't understand many things. But then I think well it's no different than downloading an actual GP or EP with new animations. Right? So, I guess it's possible and I hope they patch because to me that is the 'right thing' to do. But I would consider a really, really good Generations EP.
I don't know either. But there is precedent for larger patches and as most delivery is digital now it seems that it *must* be a possibility.
I don't mind paying for a generations as long as toddlers are considered base content. I'm not into the only getting content once idea.
Yes @Neia and I'm sure the risk is worth it because I do see a lot of potential for a lot more content. If they scrimp they know the follow up DLC will suffer-same as it has releasing an unfinished base and annoying a lot of guaranteed preorder/buying customers such as myself. Hopefully they've learnt that simmers font just buy *anything* with the sims name stamped on it willingly. I think this situation may have been a lesson in regards to that already.
You do as you wish, and I'll do as I wish too. That's how it works! We just have different ways of looking at the long term consequences resting on this decision.
@Lustianicia
Well personally, I bought Perfect Patio for the patio furniture that goes so well with the gardening stuff I have in TS4 (and that I had to pay for in TS2)
@sparkfairy1
I think paid toddlers and paid DLCs to expand them has even more potential
You would have technically paid $120 for the base game alone.
Not quite. You see the game never meant to have toddlers. And performed just as well without toddlers. If you personally want toddlers, then you should appreciate the time that it would take for the developers to develop them.
That being said, if you look back at Generations expansion pack for The Sims 3, you could make the exact same statement, because generations was an expansion on base game interactions.
You would have technically paid $120 for the base game alone.
Not quite. You see the game never meant to have toddlers. And performed just as well without toddlers. If you personally want toddlers, then you should appreciate the time that it would take for the developers to develop them.
That being said, if you look back at Generations expansion pack for The Sims 3, you could make the exact same statement, because generations was an expansion on base game interactions.
I don't know about your statement this game performs just as well without toddlers. Maybe not in the pocket book. I mean The Sims didn't have toddlers. But by (a year later) 2002 (early that year) The Sims (just the base game) had sold 6.5 Million copies. I bet TS4 hasn't sold that many in the past year (for some reason).
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
You would have technically paid $120 for the base game alone.
Not quite. You see the game never meant to have toddlers. And performed just as well without toddlers. If you personally want toddlers, then you should appreciate the time that it would take for the developers to develop them.
That being said, if you look back at Generations expansion pack for The Sims 3, you could make the exact same statement, because generations was an expansion on base game interactions.
You clearly lack information about this game. Toddlers actually were originally supposed to be included in the base game. They were confirmed during the beta stages. All life stages from Sims 3 were meant to be carried over to Sims 4. But, they decided to remove toddlers at last minute. Also, the game most certainly did NOT perform well in the beginning. Not only is it the lowest rated game in the franchise, but one of the biggest reasons most Sims fans didn't buy it was because it lacked toddlers. Stop talking and acting like you know things when you clearly don't.
The 'Generations' pack for Sims 3 didn't reintroduce toddlers into the game. There's no comparison. None of the content or features in that expansion pack were base game. Everything was new.
I don't know about your statement this game performs just as well without toddlers. Maybe not in the pocket book. I mean The Sims didn't have toddlers. But by (a year later) 2002 (early that year) The Sims (just the base game) had sold 6.5 Million copies. I bet TS4 hasn't sold that many in the past year (for some reason).
2.6 million sales in hard copies alone. Primary distribution method is digital. EA said that it exceeded expectations.
You clearly lack information about this game. Toddlers actually were originally supposed to be included in the base game. They were confirmed during the beta stages. All life stages from Sims 3 were meant to be carried over to Sims 4. But, they decided to remove toddlers at last minute. Also, the game most certainly did NOT perform well in the beginning. Not only is it the lowest rated game in the franchise, but one of the biggest reasons most Sims fans didn't buy it was because it lacked toddlers. Stop talking and acting like you know things when you clearly don't.
The 'Generations' pack for Sims 3 didn't reintroduce toddlers into the game. There's no comparison. None of the content or features in that expansion pack were base game. Everything was new.
there has been a very prolonged argument about this. They weren't in gamescom showcase which was what? A year before the games release? There was no mention of toddlers actually being in the game either. They simply stated that there won't be any NEW lifestages. They said nothing about the past ones.
I can expect to sell ten cupcakes and if I sell eleven..then I can brag right? As long as I don't tell anyone the last time I sold cupcakes with a different formula I sold fifty. It's a matter of illusion.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
I can expect to sell ten cupcakes and if I sell eleven..then I can brag right? As long as I don't tell anyone the last time I sold cupcakes with a different formula I sold fifty. It's a matter of illusion.
yet when The Sims 4 released EA said something along the lines of "we might not make another sims game, because this one isn't selling". With the improvements and bug fixes and good practices of free monthly updates and cheaper DLC they're more than satisfied with units sold merely a year and a half after that statement was made.
So no, if sales were disappointing, they would still be fear mongering us.
I can expect to sell ten cupcakes and if I sell eleven..then I can brag right? As long as I don't tell anyone the last time I sold cupcakes with a different formula I sold fifty. It's a matter of illusion.
yet when The Sims 4 released EA said something along the lines of "we might not make another sims game, because this one isn't selling". With the improvements and bug fixes and good practices of free monthly updates and cheaper DLC they're more than satisfied with units sold merely a year and a half after that statement was made.
So no, if sales were disappointing, they would still be fear mongering us.
I don't know about you or anyone else who buys games. And people can say it's par for the coursed these days..to be a service game..which has to patch bugs every month, after month, after month. If I was a gaming company I would ask before hiring..on your last job how many times did your team have to correct your sloppy mistakes? Then I would decide if that is a good developer or not. I would be looking at EA's reputation for buggy games and vetting developers with a fine tooth comb if they worked for me. But that's just me. Excellence comes cheap these days.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
As long as they are selling me content I like, I'll be happy to give them money. And that includes toddlers, or any further content that expand toddlers.
Yeah, and you're exactly the kind of person who keeps making game companies think it's actually 'okay' to release incomplete games and make the fans pay extra for the missing content later on.
I already gave them my money for toddlers when I bought the base game. I do NOT and should NOT need to pay extra for toddlers... especially when the base game itself was $60+ at launch. They should have been included to begin with. You're probably just another EA fanboy/fangirl who can't stand the idea of their beloved company being called out for the greedy money grabbers they are.
You really are hilarious. They are an EA fanboy/girl because they spend money on things they like? Just because you don't like certain things people send their money on doesn't mean they are "fanboys". And just because the game is incomplete to you doesn't mean it is to others. I actually think the game is incomplete as well, but considering I got it on sale im happy with it and find the gameplay and style satisfying.
I was well aware (and disappointed) that toddlers were cut, but I knew that before I bought the game. So if you bought the game expecting toddlers then that's on you.
Stop going around calling people fanboys/fangirls just because they have different interests and play styles to you. Although the lack of toddlers is bemusing and to us simmers makes no sense, it's not our right to have them in the game
Ummm.... no they don't. While it would be appreciated, it's in no way mandatory. EA is a business. You bought the game knowing that toddlers were going to come in the future, and you knew how most future content is added to the game--in the form of EPs. EA never said they would give us toddlers for free. If they are bundled in a Generations pack and they are awesome, that is sufficient. Of course free is better, but DLC is fine. Maybe if toddlers are not vital for your gameplay you can sit them out if they are DLC. I can't and won't. I'll pay for tots and better family play because my game is useless otherwise.
You clearly didn't read the entire post... all you read was "toddlers need to be given to us for free" and decided to comment. Also, people like you only prove my point even further. It's people like you who make game companies actually believe it's 'okay' to release incomplete games and then make their fans pay extra money later on for the missing content. People like you are the problem with the gaming industry.
You're right, got totally put off by the title. For the record, I haven't put a penny into the store, and I have not bought any GPs or SPs and boycotted GT (and will continue to do so). I do not think that it's OK to release an incomplete game and I do not support microtransacations. That said, EA said from the start that they would not deliver toddlers in the base game but that they would deliver it later. I never assumed it would be for free--although I would prefer it to be free (of course), if they deliver a superior toddler experience that couldn't have been done if they shoehorned tots into the base game, then I don't mind paying. If they fix my game for $40, then I didn't lose $80... if everything works out and I like the game afterwards, then lesson learnt: in the future I won't be early adopting any more Sims products.
Anyway, EA hasn't even announced toddlers yet, and lately there has been a really antagonistic, demanding, and negative tone towards the company without them even doing anything! Maybe because I only play the sims and I'm not playing TS4 because I'm still waiting for my tots, I don't understand how a company can release a highly praised EP followed shortly by a seeming popular SP and one month later people are demanding new content already and hyped--but in no way guaranteed content--be given to them for free. It's not even a "I'd appreciate it if..." it's just "EA NEEDS to do whatever..." I seriously don't get it
I just hope if this is even in the works at all, that EA is focusing on making an amazing in-depth Generations EP with toddlers. I don't want freebie tots tossed in like these bassinet babies
Your comment makes no sense. You claim that if EA decided to create a $40 expansion pack that includes toddlers, then you wouldn't have lost any money. But, you would have... you paid $80 for the base game alone. Then you're going to basically pay another $40 just for toddlers... because, let's face it, the main reason most will even buy a 'Generations' expansion pack would be for toddlers (just like how the main reason people bought 'Perfect Patio' was for hot tubs). You would have technically paid $120 for the base game alone. You are losing money this way.
My negative tones toward EA is due to the fact that they've been greedy and selfish for a long time. They're well deserving of my (and many other people's) negativity toward them. They've literally been declared the 'worst company' for years now by many people. They release incomplete games and then expect their fans to pay extra money for the missing content later on. I also have negativity toward other players who are willing to follow EA's greediness and actually pay for the missing content because they're the ones who make EA actually think this is okay to keep doing.
Don't complain about people being demanding toward EA to release a feature that should've been included in the base game to begin with. I have no sympathy for them after all the greed they've shown over the years. They're lucky to even have most of the fans they do. Like I've said several times on this forum, this fanbase (The Sims) is one of the MOST loyal fanbases in the video game world. Even after years of EA sucking money out of us for their beloved cash cow (yes, The Sims), many fans (including myself) still stay with them. It's getting tiring to constantly purchase incomplete games and then have to pay extra money for the missing content.
If toddlers are currently being worked on, they need to be released in a free patch with basic content for them. It's EA's fault that this entire toddlers controversy is going on in the first place. Prior to this game's release, fans all over were demanding for EA to delay this game to improve on it, but (like always), EA decided that money was more important and released the game unfinished. If you feel sorry for them, that's your own issue. I, however, don't have any sympathy for their greed. Either toddlers are released for free (with basic content) and then further expanded in a 'Generations' pack or don't give us toddlers at all. I refuse to pay money for base game content when I already did.
It makes perfect sense, you just don't understand it. As it stands now TS4 is nothing but a sunk cost. I do not play it and don't feel the urge to convince myself that I can get $80 worth out of what I have. It is nothing right now but money lost.
If an decent Generations EP comes out for $40 and I pay that $40 dollars and that makes my game fun and engaging, then it IS worth the purchase because that $80 becomes $80 invested in a game that--if it could ever attain the entertainment value of TS2 will provide me with many years of amusement. Had TS4 been great from the start, then I'd still be dumping money in it. So $120 means nothing IFF the game is awesome as I'm willing to pay $1000+ for a game that will entertain me for more than decade... $120 is peanuts.
No patch or a lousy patch and no Generations EP has me back at square one: TS4 is a sunk cost.
And on another point you make: sure it may be EA's 'fault' that there is a controversy over toddlers, but it's not their problem--and if sales are currently OK and players who are buying the game are happy, then it's 'the best decision they made to date'
EA doesn't need to do anything for you. They owe you nothing, the same way you are not compelled to buy any EA products. You don't have to pay money if they bundle tots in an EP. I will pay for them and do so unabashedly... and if they're awesome, it will be worth every penny. If someone sells something that I want to buy and I want to buy something they have to sell, who are you to say that this is a bad transaction?! If you don't want to buy it--fine. That's how capitalism works.
If you pay $50 for a horrible haircut and then you are asked pay $30 to fix it, you would be upset that you wasted the $50, but you'd be glad that you spent $80 overall to be able to feel comfortable going outside without a hat on for the next several weeks--especially if the 'fix' is better than the original style you had wanted. It's the same thing. Sure you could demand that the stylist do it for free, but if the stylist refused then you'd be SOL. Everyone knows the risk that they might not love their new look when they go under the shears, yes?
And to who posted that "you're exactly the kind of person" comment: everyone knows that EA milks this game... don't blame me for limited content that's on the TS3 players who were more than happy getting a lot of nothing for a lot. The precedent was set years ago, don't act surprised now
You would have technically paid $120 for the base game alone.
Not quite. You see the game never meant to have toddlers. And performed just as well without toddlers. If you personally want toddlers, then you should appreciate the time that it would take for the developers to develop them.
That being said, if you look back at Generations expansion pack for The Sims 3, you could make the exact same statement, because generations was an expansion on base game interactions.
You clearly lack information about this game. Toddlers actually were originally supposed to be included in the base game. They were confirmed during the beta stages.
They weren't confirmed. It was said that all life stages would be present in a pre-alpha interview at Sims Camp. Pre-alpha's where nothing about the game is set in stone.
You would have technically paid $120 for the base game alone.
Not quite. You see the game never meant to have toddlers. And performed just as well without toddlers. If you personally want toddlers, then you should appreciate the time that it would take for the developers to develop them.
That being said, if you look back at Generations expansion pack for The Sims 3, you could make the exact same statement, because generations was an expansion on base game interactions.
You clearly lack information about this game. Toddlers actually were originally supposed to be included in the base game. They were confirmed during the beta stages.
They weren't confirmed. It was said that all life stages would be present in a pre-alpha interview at Sims Camp. Pre-alpha's where nothing about the game is set in stone.
Then why bother even giving an interview if nothing seen or told will be in a game. Doesn't that sound like a big fat waste of a guru's time? It was all over the internet all life stages would be in the game. I don't think I would let my guru go out and say such a thing if it wasn't going to be true. But then I'm not EA or Maxis.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
Then why bother even giving an interview if nothing seen or told will be in a game. Doesn't that sound like a big fat waste of a guru's time?
So people will buy it, it's yet another of their carrots on a stick which they use to string players into purchasing ever more content in the hopes of getting back to where they started with the previous game.
It was all over the internet all life stages would be in the game. I don't think I would let my guru go out and say such a thing if it wasn't going to be true. But then I'm not EA or Maxis.
Oh EAxis would only too happily say it, true or not... False Advertising is something of a grey area where games are concerned, as you aren't technically buying the product you have no legal recourse, so they can mis-sell all they want.
You would have technically paid $120 for the base game alone.
Not quite. You see the game never meant to have toddlers. And performed just as well without toddlers. If you personally want toddlers, then you should appreciate the time that it would take for the developers to develop them.
That being said, if you look back at Generations expansion pack for The Sims 3, you could make the exact same statement, because generations was an expansion on base game interactions.
You clearly lack information about this game. Toddlers actually were originally supposed to be included in the base game. They were confirmed during the beta stages.
They weren't confirmed. It was said that all life stages would be present in a pre-alpha interview at Sims Camp. Pre-alpha's where nothing about the game is set in stone.
Then why bother even giving an interview if nothing seen or told will be in a game. Doesn't that sound like a big fat waste of a guru's time? It was all over the internet all life stages would be in the game. I don't think I would let my guru go out and say such a thing if it wasn't going to be true. But then I'm not EA or Maxis.
I am sure that the guru also regretted that he said it. He wasn't allowed to tell much at the time except that the Sims 4 was in development. But when he was asked about its age groups he probably just said that they would be the same because he knew that they weren't considering to add new age groups and couldn't imagine that any age group would be removed. I think that the considerations about omitting toddlers came later. But then he couldn't even attempt to correct his earlier statement because he didn't know if toddlers would be added later anyway and he wasn't allowed to talk about those considerations at all.
I think the current status is that there are no current plan to add toddlers. But as the content of the later EPs still can change they can't say for sure yet that toddlers never will be added anyway. Therefore they don't say anything.
I'm really tired of even seeing the word 'toddler' at this point and they're likely not working on anything which will lead to addition of that life-stage to The Sims 4.
Comments
Paying is a different argument. I absolutely agree for those who paid $60 -$80 for the base, no they have already paid for 'toddlers' imho. But I didn't pay that much wasn't about to be hood winked like that barely paid half of $60 so the cost of paying for Generations EP wouldn't bother me as much because I wouldn't give them $60 for a shell of a base game.
I'm much more interested in quality and innovative toddlers, rather than their good faith. I won't play with "good faith", I'll play with toddlers, and their content and gameplay will matter a lot more to me than the way they are released. I don't care about PR, I care about the quality of the product.
Meh, they've already turned away a lot of potential continued investment. A lot of the players who signed the boycott did so on the way out and stated so. I don't think giving away toddlers or selling them matters--EA blazing vision shot out and burnt those bridges a while back. I have no idea what they are going to do judging from the way they've handled this game from the start.
And thank you for acknowledging my point (I bolded your statement). That is the only contention I had with the title of this thread--I too would prefer it if toddlers were patched in rather than sold
Your argument infers that the only possible answer is to buy or it means zero quality. Not necessarily. Did you not get the point I was making at all? By patching well done toddlers (yes it would be a big patch but sI have others) the allure of a more in depth game will encourage people to return and spend a lot more on related DLC. Spending money to make money if you will.
Plenty of people have said they have no issue buying DLC over and above toddlers-me included. Actually the tots have huge potential for DLC sales of cute clothes, furniture etc etc etc. That won't be lost on EA.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
You're exactly right about EA having creative freedom over the game. But, that's exactly the scary part. Ever since Will Wright left, this game has been going downhill in terms of content and features. Sims 1 and Sims 2 base games were actually complete. Nobody complained about the lack of content. Even the expansion packs and stuff packs contained A LOT more content and features than the future games did... and they were even less expensive too (at least in the US). When Sims 3 was released, the prices were a lot more expensive and the quality of packs downgraded... but, in their defense, the open world, story progression, and create a style features made up for most of that.
For every step forward The Sims 4 made, it took two steps back. That's just pathetic. There is nothing in The Sims 4 that makes it worth paying $40 for expansion packs, $20 for game packs, and $10 for stuff packs altogether. Especially if it's base game content.
Ghosts, pools, athletic & business careers, family trees, Star Wars content, a new world, dishwashers, and even more things have been added to the game for free since launch. Most of these are things that should've been in the base game to begin with. Toddlers should be included in a free patch.
Stop giving EA excuses for ruining this franchise.
Sims 1: Hot Date
Sims 2: Seasons
Sims 2: Happy Holiday Stuff
Sims 3: Seasons
Sims 3: 70's, 80's, & 90's Stuff
Sims 4: Seasons
Sims 4: Paranormal Stuff
Sims 4: Strangerville Game Pack
Spending money to make money like you say imply taking a far bigger risk and suppose that there would be enough extra sales on DLC to make up for the cost of the EP/toddler pack (and don't forget the DLC have a budget too), which means the quality of the free content is highly likely to be lower if it's free.
I think the higher the price, the bigger the budget, and thus the more ressources would be allocated to them. They don't work for free, I'm ok to pay for what I want, as long as I'm satisfied with the product.
You're free to do whatever you want with your money though, I'm just saying what I care about.
I assume a patch works the same as EP animations (new ones) added to a game. But honestly I don't know if patching actually adds new animations or if they are just tweaking animations (like bug fixing and or adding a new object with animations) that are already in game. So, I don't know. I get confused on the subject. If patches only tweak what already exist how can they actually patch in Sims bending over to pick and carry a toddler? I admit I don't understand many things. But then I think well it's no different than downloading an actual GP or EP with new animations. Right? So, I guess it's possible and I hope they patch because to me that is the 'right thing' to do. But I would consider a really, really good Generations EP.
Your comment makes no sense. You claim that if EA decided to create a $40 expansion pack that includes toddlers, then you wouldn't have lost any money. But, you would have... you paid $80 for the base game alone. Then you're going to basically pay another $40 just for toddlers... because, let's face it, the main reason most will even buy a 'Generations' expansion pack would be for toddlers (just like how the main reason people bought 'Perfect Patio' was for hot tubs). You would have technically paid $120 for the base game alone. You are losing money this way.
My negative tones toward EA is due to the fact that they've been greedy and selfish for a long time. They're well deserving of my (and many other people's) negativity toward them. They've literally been declared the 'worst company' for years now by many people. They release incomplete games and then expect their fans to pay extra money for the missing content later on. I also have negativity toward other players who are willing to follow EA's greediness and actually pay for the missing content because they're the ones who make EA actually think this is okay to keep doing.
Don't complain about people being demanding toward EA to release a feature that should've been included in the base game to begin with. I have no sympathy for them after all the greed they've shown over the years. They're lucky to even have most of the fans they do. Like I've said several times on this forum, this fanbase (The Sims) is one of the MOST loyal fanbases in the video game world. Even after years of EA sucking money out of us for their beloved cash cow (yes, The Sims), many fans (including myself) still stay with them. It's getting tiring to constantly purchase incomplete games and then have to pay extra money for the missing content.
If toddlers are currently being worked on, they need to be released in a free patch with basic content for them. It's EA's fault that this entire toddlers controversy is going on in the first place. Prior to this game's release, fans all over were demanding for EA to delay this game to improve on it, but (like always), EA decided that money was more important and released the game unfinished. If you feel sorry for them, that's your own issue. I, however, don't have any sympathy for their greed. Either toddlers are released for free (with basic content) and then further expanded in a 'Generations' pack or don't give us toddlers at all. I refuse to pay money for base game content when I already did.
Sims 1: Hot Date
Sims 2: Seasons
Sims 2: Happy Holiday Stuff
Sims 3: Seasons
Sims 3: 70's, 80's, & 90's Stuff
Sims 4: Seasons
Sims 4: Paranormal Stuff
Sims 4: Strangerville Game Pack
I don't know either. But there is precedent for larger patches and as most delivery is digital now it seems that it *must* be a possibility.
I don't mind paying for a generations as long as toddlers are considered base content. I'm not into the only getting content once idea.
Yes @Neia and I'm sure the risk is worth it because I do see a lot of potential for a lot more content. If they scrimp they know the follow up DLC will suffer-same as it has releasing an unfinished base and annoying a lot of guaranteed preorder/buying customers such as myself. Hopefully they've learnt that simmers font just buy *anything* with the sims name stamped on it willingly. I think this situation may have been a lesson in regards to that already.
You do as you wish, and I'll do as I wish too. That's how it works!
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Well personally, I bought Perfect Patio for the patio furniture that goes so well with the gardening stuff I have in TS4 (and that I had to pay for in TS2)
@sparkfairy1
I think paid toddlers and paid DLCs to expand them has even more potential
Not quite. You see the game never meant to have toddlers. And performed just as well without toddlers. If you personally want toddlers, then you should appreciate the time that it would take for the developers to develop them.
That being said, if you look back at Generations expansion pack for The Sims 3, you could make the exact same statement, because generations was an expansion on base game interactions.
I don't know about your statement this game performs just as well without toddlers. Maybe not in the pocket book. I mean The Sims didn't have toddlers. But by (a year later) 2002 (early that year) The Sims (just the base game) had sold 6.5 Million copies. I bet TS4 hasn't sold that many in the past year (for some reason).
You clearly lack information about this game. Toddlers actually were originally supposed to be included in the base game. They were confirmed during the beta stages. All life stages from Sims 3 were meant to be carried over to Sims 4. But, they decided to remove toddlers at last minute. Also, the game most certainly did NOT perform well in the beginning. Not only is it the lowest rated game in the franchise, but one of the biggest reasons most Sims fans didn't buy it was because it lacked toddlers. Stop talking and acting like you know things when you clearly don't.
The 'Generations' pack for Sims 3 didn't reintroduce toddlers into the game. There's no comparison. None of the content or features in that expansion pack were base game. Everything was new.
Sims 1: Hot Date
Sims 2: Seasons
Sims 2: Happy Holiday Stuff
Sims 3: Seasons
Sims 3: 70's, 80's, & 90's Stuff
Sims 4: Seasons
Sims 4: Paranormal Stuff
Sims 4: Strangerville Game Pack
2.6 million sales in hard copies alone. Primary distribution method is digital. EA said that it exceeded expectations.
there has been a very prolonged argument about this. They weren't in gamescom showcase which was what? A year before the games release? There was no mention of toddlers actually being in the game either. They simply stated that there won't be any NEW lifestages. They said nothing about the past ones.
yet when The Sims 4 released EA said something along the lines of "we might not make another sims game, because this one isn't selling". With the improvements and bug fixes and good practices of free monthly updates and cheaper DLC they're more than satisfied with units sold merely a year and a half after that statement was made.
So no, if sales were disappointing, they would still be fear mongering us.
I don't know about you or anyone else who buys games. And people can say it's par for the coursed these days..to be a service game..which has to patch bugs every month, after month, after month. If I was a gaming company I would ask before hiring..on your last job how many times did your team have to correct your sloppy mistakes? Then I would decide if that is a good developer or not. I would be looking at EA's reputation for buggy games and vetting developers with a fine tooth comb if they worked for me. But that's just me. Excellence comes cheap these days.
You really are hilarious. They are an EA fanboy/girl because they spend money on things they like? Just because you don't like certain things people send their money on doesn't mean they are "fanboys". And just because the game is incomplete to you doesn't mean it is to others. I actually think the game is incomplete as well, but considering I got it on sale im happy with it and find the gameplay and style satisfying.
I was well aware (and disappointed) that toddlers were cut, but I knew that before I bought the game. So if you bought the game expecting toddlers then that's on you.
Stop going around calling people fanboys/fangirls just because they have different interests and play styles to you. Although the lack of toddlers is bemusing and to us simmers makes no sense, it's not our right to have them in the game
It makes perfect sense, you just don't understand it. As it stands now TS4 is nothing but a sunk cost. I do not play it and don't feel the urge to convince myself that I can get $80 worth out of what I have. It is nothing right now but money lost.
If an decent Generations EP comes out for $40 and I pay that $40 dollars and that makes my game fun and engaging, then it IS worth the purchase because that $80 becomes $80 invested in a game that--if it could ever attain the entertainment value of TS2 will provide me with many years of amusement. Had TS4 been great from the start, then I'd still be dumping money in it. So $120 means nothing IFF the game is awesome as I'm willing to pay $1000+ for a game that will entertain me for more than decade... $120 is peanuts.
No patch or a lousy patch and no Generations EP has me back at square one: TS4 is a sunk cost.
And on another point you make: sure it may be EA's 'fault' that there is a controversy over toddlers, but it's not their problem--and if sales are currently OK and players who are buying the game are happy, then it's 'the best decision they made to date'
EA doesn't need to do anything for you. They owe you nothing, the same way you are not compelled to buy any EA products. You don't have to pay money if they bundle tots in an EP. I will pay for them and do so unabashedly... and if they're awesome, it will be worth every penny. If someone sells something that I want to buy and I want to buy something they have to sell, who are you to say that this is a bad transaction?! If you don't want to buy it--fine. That's how capitalism works.
If you pay $50 for a horrible haircut and then you are asked pay $30 to fix it, you would be upset that you wasted the $50, but you'd be glad that you spent $80 overall to be able to feel comfortable going outside without a hat on for the next several weeks--especially if the 'fix' is better than the original style you had wanted. It's the same thing. Sure you could demand that the stylist do it for free, but if the stylist refused then you'd be SOL. Everyone knows the risk that they might not love their new look when they go under the shears, yes?
And to who posted that "you're exactly the kind of person" comment: everyone knows that EA milks this game... don't blame me for limited content that's on the TS3 players who were more than happy getting a lot of nothing for a lot. The precedent was set years ago, don't act surprised now
They weren't confirmed. It was said that all life stages would be present in a pre-alpha interview at Sims Camp. Pre-alpha's where nothing about the game is set in stone.
Then why bother even giving an interview if nothing seen or told will be in a game. Doesn't that sound like a big fat waste of a guru's time? It was all over the internet all life stages would be in the game. I don't think I would let my guru go out and say such a thing if it wasn't going to be true. But then I'm not EA or Maxis.
So people will buy it, it's yet another of their carrots on a stick which they use to string players into purchasing ever more content in the hopes of getting back to where they started with the previous game.
Oh EAxis would only too happily say it, true or not... False Advertising is something of a grey area where games are concerned, as you aren't technically buying the product you have no legal recourse, so they can mis-sell all they want.
I think the current status is that there are no current plan to add toddlers. But as the content of the later EPs still can change they can't say for sure yet that toddlers never will be added anyway. Therefore they don't say anything.