My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Maybe. But we don't really have any information on Olympus from EA. Therefore I think that we can believe almost anything - and half of it may not be true.
The best choice I can see right now is to make TS5 into a 64 bit only game and let the open world return. But this will only result in the game being very similar to TS3 - and I don't think that TS5 will sell very well if it only is announced as a "64 bit version of TS3".
I'd buy it!
Me too NZsimm3r. The big mistake Maxis made to start with is staying 32 bit. 32 bit is not the way new games are going. If people are still running a 32 bit pc - they have no business playing PC games. That is a lame excuse. I have been running 64 bit computers since even before Sims 2 BV came out, and so was many people I know. This is a totally lame choice seeing EA has 64 bit games - and is an example of another lame decision out of Maxis. Shoot my 5 year old grandson has a 64 bit computer and 64 bit operating system for a kids learning center game. I mean if kindergarteners are using 64 bits and Maxis still enforces 32 bit - it is beyond lame.
Post edited by Writin_Reg on
"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.....
My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Maybe. But we don't really have any information on Olympus from EA. Therefore I think that we can believe almost anything - and half of it may not be true.
The best choice I can see right now is to make TS5 into a 64 bit only game and let the open world return. But this will only result in the game being very similar to TS3 - and I don't think that TS5 will sell very well if it only is announced as a "64 bit version of TS3".
I'd buy it!
Me too. The big mistake Maxis made to start with is staying 32 bit. 32 bit is not the way new games are going. If people are still running a 32 bit pc - they have no business playing PC games. That is a lame excuse. I have been running 64 bit computers since right before Sims 2 BV came out. This is a totally lame choice seeing EA has 64 bit games - and is an example of another lame decision out of Maxis. Shoot my 5 year old grandson has a 64 bit computer and 64 bit operating system for a kids learning center game. I mean if kindergarteners are using 64 bits and Maxis still enforces 32 bit - it is beyond lame.
Those games are probably M rated games?
I agree completely that if we only look around in this forum then TS4 should be a 64 bit game and EA shouldn't care if the ESRB decided to change the game's rating from T to M or not. But the problem is that there are a huge number of young teens who also buy the game. Most of those young teens only play the game shortly and many of them only have cheap computers. This is EA's reason for caring so much about the T rating and I am sure that it is also the reason why EA still released the game as a 32 bit game.
My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Maybe. But we don't really have any information on Olympus from EA. Therefore I think that we can believe almost anything - and half of it may not be true.
Just because EA has zipped their lips on Olympus doesn't make most of the information bogus, EA is trying to act like that early design never existed.
I highly doubt that the disgruntled former employee faked a lot of those screenshots and lied about the information. After the SimCity tragedy, I find it easy to believe that they dropped everything and rushed to make the game offline, no open world was already axed so..they couldn't get the fans any angrier.
Not that it matters anymore anyways, TS4's current game engine is incompatible with Open world and dozens of other features from previous sime games. I guess all you can do is just accept what little has been given to us.
I'm sorry, but you're mistaken, The Sims core audience has always been women. The only reason The Sims ever became a success was because women embraced the game with a passion. Teens don't have the money to spend 100s of dollars a year on EPs, SPs and GPs.
If you look at who is invited to EA sponsored Sims events, you'll see the majority are women in their 20s and older with a few men in the same age groups sprinkled in.
This is why TS1, TS2, and TS3 were marketed the way they were in order to appeal to women. Somewhere down the line EA/Maxis decided to branch out to a different demographic, and that's part of the reason TS4 is in the mess it is in right now. You can't neglect your core audience as badly as EA has and expect everything to be ok.
Last thought, the T rating is probably more to avoid negative press than anything. An M rated Sims game would be fine with me, and my guess is there may be other simmers who agree.
The best choice I can see right now is to make TS5 into a 64 bit only game and let the open world return. But this will only result in the game being very similar to TS3 - and I don't think that TS5 will sell very well if it only is announced as a "64 bit version of TS3".
I'd buy it!
Me too. The big mistake Maxis made to start with is staying 32 bit. 32 bit is not the way new games are going. If people are still running a 32 bit pc - they have no business playing PC games. That is a lame excuse. I have been running 64 bit computers since right before Sims 2 BV came out. This is a totally lame choice seeing EA has 64 bit games - and is an example of another lame decision out of Maxis. Shoot my 5 year old grandson has a 64 bit computer and 64 bit operating system for a kids learning center game. I mean if kindergarteners are using 64 bits and Maxis still enforces 32 bit - it is beyond lame.
Those games are probably M rated games?
I agree completely that if we only look around in this forum then TS4 should be a 64 bit game and EA shouldn't care if the ESRB decided to change the game's rating from T to M or not. But the problem is that there are a huge number of young teens who also buy the game. Most of those young teens only play the game shortly and many of them only have cheap computers. This is EA's reason for caring so much about the T rating and I am sure that it is also the reason why EA still released the game as a 32 bit game.
My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Maybe. But we don't really have any information on Olympus from EA. Therefore I think that we can believe almost anything - and half of it may not be true.
Just because EA has zipped their lips on Olympus doesn't make most of the information bogus, EA is trying to act like that early design never existed.
I highly doubt that the disgruntled former employee faked a lot of those screenshots and lied about the information. After the SimCity tragedy, I find it easy to believe that they dropped everything and rushed to make the game offline, no open world was already axed so..they couldn't get the fans any angrier.
Not that it matters anymore anyways, TS4's current game engine is incompatible with Open world and dozens of other features from previous sime games. I guess all you can do is just accept what little has been given to us.
EA has zipped their lips. But why? If Olympus didn't matter anymore then EA could just give us the remaining information.
But my feeling is that EA still considers a new version of the Sims Online for PC. It would also be quite foolish to use much time on Olympus and then throw it all away for good. So Olympus could actually be planned as the basis for a future game which EA just not want to release or announce yet. But then it makes sense that EA won't tell us anything yet.
My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Maybe. But we don't really have any information on Olympus from EA. Therefore I think that we can believe almost anything - and half of it may not be true.
Just because EA has zipped their lips on Olympus doesn't make most of the information bogus, EA is trying to act like that early design never existed.
I highly doubt that the disgruntled former employee faked a lot of those screenshots and lied about the information. After the SimCity tragedy, I find it easy to believe that they dropped everything and rushed to make the game offline, no open world was already axed so..they couldn't get the fans any angrier.
Not that it matters anymore anyways, TS4's current game engine is incompatible with Open world and dozens of other features from previous sime games. I guess all you can do is just accept what little has been given to us.
If you look at Honeywell's News comprehensive look at the story you will see that it wasn't just this employee that mentions TS4 being an online game switched to offline. Along with lots of other background information and screenshots.
My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Maybe. But we don't really have any information on Olympus from EA. Therefore I think that we can believe almost anything - and half of it may not be true.
Just because EA has zipped their lips on Olympus doesn't make most of the information bogus, EA is trying to act like that early design never existed.
I highly doubt that the disgruntled former employee faked a lot of those screenshots and lied about the information. After the SimCity tragedy, I find it easy to believe that they dropped everything and rushed to make the game offline, no open world was already axed so..they couldn't get the fans any angrier.
Not that it matters anymore anyways, TS4's current game engine is incompatible with Open world and dozens of other features from previous sime games. I guess all you can do is just accept what little has been given to us.
EA has zipped their lips. But why? If Olympus didn't matter anymore then EA could just give us the remaining information.
But my feeling is that EA still considers a new version of the Sims Online for PC. It would also be quite foolish to use much time on Olympus and then throw it all away for good. So Olympus could actually be planned as the basis for a future game which EA just not want to release or announce yet. But then it makes sense that EA won't tell us anything yet.
Because it goes against the excuses they made as to why the game is in this state, and a lot of people would be angry at being expected to fund their disregarded project by being given an inferior product as a result.
EA has zipped their lips. But why? If Olympus didn't matter anymore then EA could just give us the remaining information.
But my feeling is that EA still considers a new version of the Sims Online for PC. It would also be quite foolish to use much time on Olympus and then throw it all away for good. So Olympus could actually be planned as the basis for a future game which EA just not want to release or announce yet. But then it makes sense that EA won't tell us anything yet.
My guess it because they wanted to sell TS4 as a "whole" game that they had been working on (wink wink) for years and years. Rather than admit that its the remnants of a failed venture as well as being a product that was 'tossed' together in order to meet a deadline.
If you insist enough that 'it was always meant to be like this!' maybe enough people believe you. There is enough for people to complain about with the base game, let alone for the company to admit that they want premium pricing for a game that was NOT well thought out or well planned for what it was meant to be.
I agree that if they wanted an online platform it should have been released as an app or a spinoff, like Freeplay. Not sold under the guise of being a true Sims game.
Yep call it potato budget. But the problem is not just the base game. The packs they are releasing have very low budget as well. They are cutting animation for the "Too expensive excuse" in everything. Even the patched dishwasher suffered from this, they cut the animation where the sim opens it!
There are tons and tons of stuff they did this. Why for example they did not make a baby sitter? the baby just disappears by itself when parents go to work. It is so bad.
I agree. The baby teleporting away every time their parent(s) went to work was bizarre. And don't forget artist sims. In The Sims 3 the sims grab their paintings and toss them into the air. In The Sims 4 the sims make a swooping animation with their hand and that's it.
Since I can't trust EA to make basic, fleshed out animations like they did in the previous iterations I have little to no hope for what's in store when pets arrive. Wouldn't surprise me if they say horses are too hard and only go back to cats and dogs. Heck, they might sell one GP for cats and another for dogs. I like B movies and all, but watching The Sims 4 unfold feels lower than low budget (how is that possible?).
My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Maybe. But we don't really have any information on Olympus from EA. Therefore I think that we can believe almost anything - and half of it may not be true.
EA has zipped their lips. But why? If Olympus didn't matter anymore then EA could just give us the remaining information.
But my feeling is that EA still considers a new version of the Sims Online for PC. It would also be quite foolish to use much time on Olympus and then throw it all away for good. So Olympus could actually be planned as the basis for a future game which EA just not want to release or announce yet. But then it makes sense that EA won't tell us anything yet.
My guess it because they wanted to sell TS4 as a "whole" game that they had been working on (wink wink) for years and years. Rather than admit that its the remnants of a failed venture as well as being a product that was 'tossed' together in order to meet a deadline.
If you insist enough that 'it was always meant to be like this!' maybe enough people believe you. There is enough for people to complain about with the base game, let alone for the company to admit that they want premium pricing for a game that was NOT well thought out or well planned for what it was meant to be.
I agree that if they wanted an online platform it should have been released as an app or a spinoff, like Freeplay. Not sold under the guise of being a true Sims game.
I don't insist on anything because I just don't know. It is easy to assume the worst about EA's intentions and fewer people assume the best. But this doesn't prove anything whether you like EA or not.
My point only is that I haven't seen the proof that Olympus took all the time from the development of TS4 so they didn't have any time to make the game when Olympus finally was dropped completely after about 3 year of hard work. But I need proof because throwing money away like this isn't at all EA's style and there are still other possible explanations which I therefore feel to be more likely than EA accepting a huge loss of money like this.
I'm sorry, but you're mistaken, The Sims core audience has always been women. The only reason The Sims ever became a success was because women embraced the game with a passion. Teens don't have the money to spend 100s of dollars a year on EPs, SPs and GPs.
I disagree. Claiming that a specific gender is responsible for the success of a game is a mistake.
The best choice I can see right now is to make TS5 into a 64 bit only game and let the open world return. But this will only result in the game being very similar to TS3 - and I don't think that TS5 will sell very well if it only is announced as a "64 bit version of TS3".
I'd buy it!
Add to it the features I like from Sims 2, and I'd definitely buy it. Someone once mentioned taking the point system for personalities in Sims 2, and combine it with the traits in Sims 3. I think that would make for some fascinating and very individual sims. Perhaps also include the Sims 4 CAS, that is one feature I really like about that version.
EA has zipped their lips. But why? If Olympus didn't matter anymore then EA could just give us the remaining information.
But my feeling is that EA still considers a new version of the Sims Online for PC. It would also be quite foolish to use much time on Olympus and then throw it all away for good. So Olympus could actually be planned as the basis for a future game which EA just not want to release or announce yet. But then it makes sense that EA won't tell us anything yet.
My guess it because they wanted to sell TS4 as a "whole" game that they had been working on (wink wink) for years and years. Rather than admit that its the remnants of a failed venture as well as being a product that was 'tossed' together in order to meet a deadline.
If you insist enough that 'it was always meant to be like this!' maybe enough people believe you. There is enough for people to complain about with the base game, let alone for the company to admit that they want premium pricing for a game that was NOT well thought out or well planned for what it was meant to be.
I agree that if they wanted an online platform it should have been released as an app or a spinoff, like Freeplay. Not sold under the guise of being a true Sims game.
I don't insist on anything because I just don't know. It is easy to assume the worst about EA's intentions and fewer people assume the best. But this doesn't prove anything whether you like EA or not.
My point only is that I haven't seen the proof that Olympus took all the time from the development of TS4 so they didn't have any time to make the game when Olympus finally was dropped completely after about 3 year of hard work. But I need proof because throwing money away like this isn't at all EA's style and there are still other possible explanations which I therefore feel to be more likely than EA accepting a huge loss of money like this.
I didn't specifically mean "you" I meant the company. I don't dislike "them" as an entity specifically. I like TS3 just fine, lag and all, I don't MIND TS4... but it definitely isn't the leaps and bounds that seemed to be promised. I'm disappointed in the company for the game that they produced, it isn't up to their standards of pushing forward (where life simulation is concerned).
I can't imagine they had the BEST if intentions because this isn't the best work they've come out with. I'm sorry, but I don't need someone to link me to proof because I bought the game and that's proof enough. Its not complete and its galling to have to buy further expansions in order to complete or flesh out a game that should have been finished when it was released.
I don't hate the game, but I hate the fact that I paid full price for it.
I'm sorry, but you're mistaken, The Sims core audience has always been women. The only reason The Sims ever became a success was because women embraced the game with a passion. Teens don't have the money to spend 100s of dollars a year on EPs, SPs and GPs.
I disagree. Claiming that a specific gender is responsible for the success of a game is a mistake.
Especially since in the last interview I saw regarding this, Rachel Franklin said the Sims players were pretty much evenly split in gender.
Take a look at well known modders and such and you will see this reflected as well. Lots of men play the Sims. From hard core to casual gamers, Sims players are a diverse bunch. Focus exclusively on one demographic for whatever reason, you stand to lose a lot of your audience.
Edit: Focusing on the part of your market which has the least disposable income seems a bit counter intuitive.
I'm sorry, but you're mistaken, The Sims core audience has always been women. The only reason The Sims ever became a success was because women embraced the game with a passion. Teens don't have the money to spend 100s of dollars a year on EPs, SPs and GPs.
If you look at who is invited to EA sponsored Sims events, you'll see the majority are women in their 20s and older with a few men in the same age groups sprinkled in.
This is why TS1, TS2, and TS3 were marketed the way they were in order to appeal to women. Somewhere down the line EA/Maxis decided to branch out to a different demographic, and that's part of the reason TS4 is in the mess it is in right now. You can't neglect your core audience as badly as EA has and expect everything to be ok.
Last thought, the T rating is probably more to avoid negative press than anything. An M rated Sims game would be fine with me, and my guess is there may be other simmers who agree.
The best choice I can see right now is to make TS5 into a 64 bit only game and let the open world return. But this will only result in the game being very similar to TS3 - and I don't think that TS5 will sell very well if it only is announced as a "64 bit version of TS3".
I'd buy it!
Me too. The big mistake Maxis made to start with is staying 32 bit. 32 bit is not the way new games are going. If people are still running a 32 bit pc - they have no business playing PC games. That is a lame excuse. I have been running 64 bit computers since right before Sims 2 BV came out. This is a totally lame choice seeing EA has 64 bit games - and is an example of another lame decision out of Maxis. Shoot my 5 year old grandson has a 64 bit computer and 64 bit operating system for a kids learning center game. I mean if kindergarteners are using 64 bits and Maxis still enforces 32 bit - it is beyond lame.
Those games are probably M rated games?
I agree completely that if we only look around in this forum then TS4 should be a 64 bit game and EA shouldn't care if the ESRB decided to change the game's rating from T to M or not. But the problem is that there are a huge number of young teens who also buy the game. Most of those young teens only play the game shortly and many of them only have cheap computers. This is EA's reason for caring so much about the T rating and I am sure that it is also the reason why EA still released the game as a 32 bit game.
I don't know if there is a difference between the countries. But here in Denmark even 11 years old pre-teens play the game. This probably isn't the case in Australia.
But I know that TS1 and TS2 were primarily played by teens and pre-teens in Denmark. There is also a little difference in the ratings because our rating is 12+ from PEGI and earlier TS1 and the TS2 were actually 7+ games. The 7+ rating was changed to 12+ after an EP for TS2 and my question about it was answered by our local people associated with PEGI who said that the chance from 7+ to 12+ was wanted by the UK members of PEGI. But in the US the rating was T and in Australia it was M.
I know that very young teen girls (and a few pre-teens too) dominated our Danish Sims 2 forum and also our Sims 1 sub-forum. I could also see that this age group bought a lot of the games when I visited our game stores shortly after a new TS2 EP had been released. In the Danish Sims 2 forum I could see that they didn't always have the money though. But then they planned to get the new EP for their birthday or Christmas. If those events were too far away then they considered other ways to make their parents pay for their game and they asked each other for advice about the best way to do it
My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Not really true if what I heard was true - from one of the game engine developers (all I know is he was the Senior Engineer according to his profile) that worked on the Olympus game engine stated on one of the game developers forums that the engine was designed for open world, and was the same engine they were using for Sim City 2013. That was several years ago - maybe late 2011 or real early 2012 - when he was let go - seeing they were not using that engine anymore. Also he never called the game Sims 4 - just said it was a Maxis project he was working on that he called Olympus and Icarus. All I could think of at the time was Maxis was making a Greek Mythology kind of game or something.
As we all know this engine is no longer the Glass Box engine - Unfortunately that fellow never mention the engine they went with for the offline version - other than it was built just for the game. I am guessing off of a Unity engine like Sims 1 had but for 3 d instead of 2 d. Mainly because it seems so limited like Unity's are in this day and age.
From those pics SparkFairy put up - the first one was not from the same former employee as the other two. That was from Chi Chan who was a Senior Art Director and he was still working for EA in 2013. He had lots of early concept drawing and the earlier versions of the world on his own web page as he is their creator. He also was not let go, but left on his own as he had another job doing what he does best - art. LOL. He definitely was not disgruntle and spoke highly of his time at EA. You are confusing Chi with PK that worked on the online game engine - that was let go when the game went offline or the other guy they let go also due to the game changes.
I can't find the articles at the moment, but there were a few in the early 2000s praising EA for capturing the adult females audience with The Sims. Capturing that demographic is what made The Sims the success it was and such a novel concept.
It's not wrong to credit a gender with being a prime demographic for a game. Every company or ad firm worth its salt know their product's prime demographic.
I can speak on this with such certainty because I hold a degree in advertising and have seen and used the massive books used in the industry that catalog prime demographics for even mundane items like ice cream bars.
Edited I found a few articles from 2007/8 though I can't find the ones from the very early 2000s The formatting on them are horrendous, but they state that the Sims success is due to a 60% core female demographic. There are also 2 articles from 2015 stating the the franchise's core demographic is still in fact female/women.
I'm sorry, but you're mistaken, The Sims core audience has always been women. The only reason The Sims ever became a success was because women embraced the game with a passion. Teens don't have the money to spend 100s of dollars a year on EPs, SPs and GPs.
I disagree. Claiming that a specific gender is responsible for the success of a game is a mistake.
That may be due to marketing in your country. Here in The USA it was definitely market to young adults (women) and up in the first 3 iterations.
This ad is completely inappropriate for teens and pre-teens, (its a parody on an ad for a male "dysfunction" pharmaceutical here in the States) and there were many more ads in a similar vein.
I'm sorry, but you're mistaken, The Sims core audience has always been women. The only reason The Sims ever became a success was because women embraced the game with a passion. Teens don't have the money to spend 100s of dollars a year on EPs, SPs and GPs.
If you look at who is invited to EA sponsored Sims events, you'll see the majority are women in their 20s and older with a few men in the same age groups sprinkled in.
This is why TS1, TS2, and TS3 were marketed the way they were in order to appeal to women. Somewhere down the line EA/Maxis decided to branch out to a different demographic, and that's part of the reason TS4 is in the mess it is in right now. You can't neglect your core audience as badly as EA has and expect everything to be ok.
Last thought, the T rating is probably more to avoid negative press than anything. An M rated Sims game would be fine with me, and my guess is there may be other simmers who agree.
The best choice I can see right now is to make TS5 into a 64 bit only game and let the open world return. But this will only result in the game being very similar to TS3 - and I don't think that TS5 will sell very well if it only is announced as a "64 bit version of TS3".
I'd buy it!
Me too. The big mistake Maxis made to start with is staying 32 bit. 32 bit is not the way new games are going. If people are still running a 32 bit pc - they have no business playing PC games. That is a lame excuse. I have been running 64 bit computers since right before Sims 2 BV came out. This is a totally lame choice seeing EA has 64 bit games - and is an example of another lame decision out of Maxis. Shoot my 5 year old grandson has a 64 bit computer and 64 bit operating system for a kids learning center game. I mean if kindergarteners are using 64 bits and Maxis still enforces 32 bit - it is beyond lame.
Those games are probably M rated games?
I agree completely that if we only look around in this forum then TS4 should be a 64 bit game and EA shouldn't care if the ESRB decided to change the game's rating from T to M or not. But the problem is that there are a huge number of young teens who also buy the game. Most of those young teens only play the game shortly and many of them only have cheap computers. This is EA's reason for caring so much about the T rating and I am sure that it is also the reason why EA still released the game as a 32 bit game.
I don't know if there is a difference between the countries. But here in Denmark even 11 years old pre-teens play the game. This probably isn't the case in Australia.
But I know that TS1 and TS2 were primarily played by teens and pre-teens in Denmark. There is also a little difference in the ratings because our rating is 12+ from PEGI and earlier TS1 and the TS2 were actually 7+ games. The 7+ rating was changed to 12+ after an EP for TS2 and my question about it was answered by our local people associated with PEGI who said that the chance from 7+ to 12+ was wanted by the UK members of PEGI. But in the US the rating was T and in Australia it was M.
I know that very young teen girls (and a few pre-teens too) dominated our Danish Sims 2 forum and also our Sims 1 sub-forum. I could also see that this age group bought a lot of the games when I visited our game stores shortly after a new TS2 EP had been released. In the Danish Sims 2 forum I could see that they didn't always have the money though. But then they planned to get the new EP for their birthday or Christmas. If those events were too far away then they considered other ways to make their parents pay for their game and they asked each other for advice about the best way to do it
My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Maybe. But we don't really have any information on Olympus from EA. Therefore I think that we can believe almost anything - and half of it may not be true.
EA doesn't talk to the customers, but people who worked for them are more than willing to spill. I'd be willing to bet the main elements are truthful.The fact that the game was online tells me all I need to know. There are very few, true, open world online games, most are carved into tiny bits to improve performance on computers that should be gracing the landfill.
My husband accuses me of being a walking encyclopedia - as at least 80 percent of every thing I have in my head so it takes me seconds to find the link. I seem to store keywords in my head or something. LOL.
LOL it's great and google makes it so easy to find anything. This is pretty interesting too how it takes an average of two hours to understand basics of a game. I guess that helps with the Game Time trials.
Huh this was interesting too: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
"The latter group was highlighted both by a strong new Dragon Age installment and the brand-new IP Titanfall, though the latter scored a lot better with critics than with Metacritic's users, and it is unclear whether it was the huge financial hit EA was hoping for. One definite disappointment—at least from a quality standpoint—was The Sims 4, which turned out to be the lowest-scoring major game in The Sims series to date (scoring 16 points lower than The Sims 3)."
Ok I must stop. I could talk about business things all night if I wanted. XD
It is very understandable that simmers who have been used to fantastic improvements for each version of the Sims game were disappointed because their expectations were rocket high. In the same way Apple's customers have been disappointed with the most recent models of iPhones and iPads because they didn't get the same fantastic new progress as earlier.
But I doubt that EA and Apple also were disappointed because people were less exited than earlier because the companies of course knew that they hadn't been able to make the same fantastic progress as earlier. EA know that it isn't easy to find ways to make such fantastic progress until the general technological progress makes it possible.
The new emotions, the multitasking and the new build mode weren't ideal. But they were still the best progress which the current technology allowed.
Removing the open world can't have been an easy decision. But if it wasn't done then all the problems from TS3 would also have been in TS4 and the options for making TS4 different would be limited. But EA knew that this would have given lower sales numbers for TS4 too. So they chose to remove the open world to have a chance that other things (especially in the expansions) would give the game acceptable sales numbers anyway.
An alternative probably was to turn TS4 into a 64 bit game because this would allow TS4 to both have an open world and connected worlds with many Sims in them. But I am sure that EA also knows that a lot of Sims games are bought as presents for very young teens who don't really play many other games. Such young teens usually only have cheap computers which they use for their schoolwork. Therefore it was important to allow the game to still run on such computers.
EA evaluated that the new multitasking and the new build mode were necessary improvements even though they weren't ideal. But the time they demanded obviously proved to be exceeding all expectations. Therefore EA just had to simplify other things to keep expenses low enough to give the game a chance to make profit because EA just couldn't raise the price for the game instead for obvious reasons.
I agree that EA probably should have done something different. I just don't know what it should have been. Maybe just postponed the game a few years until all people (even schoolchildren) had powerful 64 bit computers?
Open world was gone the moment the started on Olympus.
Not really true if what I heard was true - from one of the game engine developers (all I know is he was the Senior Engineer according to his profile) that worked on the Olympus game engine stated on one of the game developers forums that the engine was designed for open world, and was the same engine they were using for Sim City 2013. That was several years ago - maybe late 2011 or real early 2012 - when he was let go - seeing they were not using that engine anymore. Also he never called the game Sims 4 - just said it was a Maxis project he was working on that he called Olympus and Icarus. All I could think of at the time was Maxis was making a Greek Mythology kind of game or something.
As we all know this engine is no longer the Glass Box engine - Unfortunately that fellow never mention the engine they went with for the offline version - other than it was built just for the game. I am guessing off of a Unity engine like Sims 1 had but for 3 d instead of 2 d. Mainly because it seems so limited like Unity's are in this day and age.
From those pics SparkFairy put up - the first one was not from the same former employee as the other two. That was from Chi Chan who was a Senior Art Director and he was still working for EA in 2013. He had lots of early concept drawing and the earlier versions of the world on his own web page as he is their creator. He also was not let go, but left on his own as he had another job doing what he does best - art. LOL. He definitely was not disgruntle and spoke highly of his time at EA. You are confusing Chi with PK that worked on the online game engine - that was let go when the game went offline or the other guy they let go also due to the game changes.
Sims online had '' had a single map, with all the server lots visible (if I remember right). But you could only load one at a time. I'm willing to bet that's what Olympus was going to do. If they can't do open world in the offline version, I can't imagine them pulling it off with potentially hundreds of sims (from different computers) clogging up your screen. If that youtube is what you're referring to as 'open world', I have to say it looks like nothing more than an interactive map. Reminds me a lot of Sims 4, actually.
Comments
Have the videos been confirmed by other from EA?
How much time did they use on project Olympus?
As far as I know we haven't got any answers to those questions?
Me too NZsimm3r. The big mistake Maxis made to start with is staying 32 bit. 32 bit is not the way new games are going. If people are still running a 32 bit pc - they have no business playing PC games. That is a lame excuse. I have been running 64 bit computers since even before Sims 2 BV came out, and so was many people I know. This is a totally lame choice seeing EA has 64 bit games - and is an example of another lame decision out of Maxis. Shoot my 5 year old grandson has a 64 bit computer and 64 bit operating system for a kids learning center game. I mean if kindergarteners are using 64 bits and Maxis still enforces 32 bit - it is beyond lame.
"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.....
Don't forget the advertising boards and the logo they placed in the Sims 3 University world as a teaser...
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
I agree completely that if we only look around in this forum then TS4 should be a 64 bit game and EA shouldn't care if the ESRB decided to change the game's rating from T to M or not. But the problem is that there are a huge number of young teens who also buy the game. Most of those young teens only play the game shortly and many of them only have cheap computers. This is EA's reason for caring so much about the T rating and I am sure that it is also the reason why EA still released the game as a 32 bit game.
Just because EA has zipped their lips on Olympus doesn't make most of the information bogus, EA is trying to act like that early design never existed.
I highly doubt that the disgruntled former employee faked a lot of those screenshots and lied about the information. After the SimCity tragedy, I find it easy to believe that they dropped everything and rushed to make the game offline, no open world was already axed so..they couldn't get the fans any angrier.
Not that it matters anymore anyways, TS4's current game engine is incompatible with Open world and dozens of other features from previous sime games. I guess all you can do is just accept what little has been given to us.
If you look at who is invited to EA sponsored Sims events, you'll see the majority are women in their 20s and older with a few men in the same age groups sprinkled in.
This is why TS1, TS2, and TS3 were marketed the way they were in order to appeal to women. Somewhere down the line EA/Maxis decided to branch out to a different demographic, and that's part of the reason TS4 is in the mess it is in right now. You can't neglect your core audience as badly as EA has and expect everything to be ok.
Last thought, the T rating is probably more to avoid negative press than anything. An M rated Sims game would be fine with me, and my guess is there may be other simmers who agree.
Edited: added thoughts
But my feeling is that EA still considers a new version of the Sims Online for PC. It would also be quite foolish to use much time on Olympus and then throw it all away for good. So Olympus could actually be planned as the basis for a future game which EA just not want to release or announce yet. But then it makes sense that EA won't tell us anything yet.
If you look at Honeywell's News comprehensive look at the story you will see that it wasn't just this employee that mentions TS4 being an online game switched to offline. Along with lots of other background information and screenshots.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Because it goes against the excuses they made as to why the game is in this state, and a lot of people would be angry at being expected to fund their disregarded project by being given an inferior product as a result.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
My guess it because they wanted to sell TS4 as a "whole" game that they had been working on (wink wink) for years and years. Rather than admit that its the remnants of a failed venture as well as being a product that was 'tossed' together in order to meet a deadline.
If you insist enough that 'it was always meant to be like this!' maybe enough people believe you. There is enough for people to complain about with the base game, let alone for the company to admit that they want premium pricing for a game that was NOT well thought out or well planned for what it was meant to be.
I agree that if they wanted an online platform it should have been released as an app or a spinoff, like Freeplay. Not sold under the guise of being a true Sims game.
Look What We Started- Simblr (MATURE CONTENT)
ISLAND END- Simblr (MATURE CONTENT, link is for scene list on sims.com)
Studio
I agree. The baby teleporting away every time their parent(s) went to work was bizarre. And don't forget artist sims. In The Sims 3 the sims grab their paintings and toss them into the air. In The Sims 4 the sims make a swooping animation with their hand and that's it.
Since I can't trust EA to make basic, fleshed out animations like they did in the previous iterations I have little to no hope for what's in store when pets arrive. Wouldn't surprise me if they say horses are too hard and only go back to cats and dogs. Heck, they might sell one GP for cats and another for dogs. I like B movies and all, but watching The Sims 4 unfold feels lower than low budget (how is that possible?).
http://simscommunity.info/2015/01/18/sims-4-multiplayer-brand-development-art-direction/
Another post of concept art of the advertising for online TS4.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
I havent played uni in the sims 3, is there a pic of it?
My point only is that I haven't seen the proof that Olympus took all the time from the development of TS4 so they didn't have any time to make the game when Olympus finally was dropped completely after about 3 year of hard work. But I need proof because throwing money away like this isn't at all EA's style and there are still other possible explanations which I therefore feel to be more likely than EA accepting a huge loss of money like this.
I disagree. Claiming that a specific gender is responsible for the success of a game is a mistake.
Add to it the features I like from Sims 2, and I'd definitely buy it. Someone once mentioned taking the point system for personalities in Sims 2, and combine it with the traits in Sims 3. I think that would make for some fascinating and very individual sims. Perhaps also include the Sims 4 CAS, that is one feature I really like about that version.
Daily Deals Rotation Thread
Love kids stuff? Check this out!
Cascades & Daily Deals-Get the best bang for your simpoints
I didn't specifically mean "you"
I can't imagine they had the BEST if intentions because this isn't the best work they've come out with. I'm sorry, but I don't need someone to link me to proof because I bought the game and that's proof enough. Its not complete and its galling to have to buy further expansions in order to complete or flesh out a game that should have been finished when it was released.
I don't hate the game, but I hate the fact that I paid full price for it.
Look What We Started- Simblr (MATURE CONTENT)
ISLAND END- Simblr (MATURE CONTENT, link is for scene list on sims.com)
Studio
Especially since in the last interview I saw regarding this, Rachel Franklin said the Sims players were pretty much evenly split in gender.
Take a look at well known modders and such and you will see this reflected as well. Lots of men play the Sims. From hard core to casual gamers, Sims players are a diverse bunch. Focus exclusively on one demographic for whatever reason, you stand to lose a lot of your audience.
Edit: Focusing on the part of your market which has the least disposable income seems a bit counter intuitive.
But I know that TS1 and TS2 were primarily played by teens and pre-teens in Denmark. There is also a little difference in the ratings because our rating is 12+ from PEGI and earlier TS1 and the TS2 were actually 7+ games. The 7+ rating was changed to 12+ after an EP for TS2 and my question about it was answered by our local people associated with PEGI who said that the chance from 7+ to 12+ was wanted by the UK members of PEGI. But in the US the rating was T and in Australia it was M.
I know that very young teen girls (and a few pre-teens too) dominated our Danish Sims 2 forum and also our Sims 1 sub-forum. I could also see that this age group bought a lot of the games when I visited our game stores shortly after a new TS2 EP had been released. In the Danish Sims 2 forum I could see that they didn't always have the money though. But then they planned to get the new EP for their birthday or Christmas. If those events were too far away then they considered other ways to make their parents pay for their game and they asked each other for advice about the best way to do it
Not really true if what I heard was true - from one of the game engine developers (all I know is he was the Senior Engineer according to his profile) that worked on the Olympus game engine stated on one of the game developers forums that the engine was designed for open world, and was the same engine they were using for Sim City 2013. That was several years ago - maybe late 2011 or real early 2012 - when he was let go - seeing they were not using that engine anymore. Also he never called the game Sims 4 - just said it was a Maxis project he was working on that he called Olympus and Icarus. All I could think of at the time was Maxis was making a Greek Mythology kind of game or something.
As we all know this engine is no longer the Glass Box engine - Unfortunately that fellow never mention the engine they went with for the offline version - other than it was built just for the game. I am guessing off of a Unity engine like Sims 1 had but for 3 d instead of 2 d. Mainly because it seems so limited like Unity's are in this day and age.
From those pics SparkFairy put up - the first one was not from the same former employee as the other two. That was from Chi Chan who was a Senior Art Director and he was still working for EA in 2013. He had lots of early concept drawing and the earlier versions of the world on his own web page as he is their creator. He also was not let go, but left on his own as he had another job doing what he does best - art. LOL. He definitely was not disgruntle and spoke highly of his time at EA. You are confusing Chi with PK that worked on the online game engine - that was let go when the game went offline or the other guy they let go also due to the game changes.
http://simscommunity.info/2015/02/28/sims-4-early-ui-3d-concepts-prototypes-chi-chan/
"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.....
It's not wrong to credit a gender with being a prime demographic for a game. Every company or ad firm worth its salt know their product's prime demographic.
I can speak on this with such certainty because I hold a degree in advertising and have seen and used the massive books used in the industry that catalog prime demographics for even mundane items like ice cream bars.
Edited I found a few articles from 2007/8 though I can't find the ones from the very early 2000s The formatting on them are horrendous, but they state that the Sims success is due to a 60% core female demographic. There are also 2 articles from 2015 stating the the franchise's core demographic is still in fact female/women.
nydailynews.com/life-style/women-click-sims-article-1.283191
gamespot.com/articles/ea-women-too-big-an-audience-to-ignore/1100-6169357/
nbcnews.com/id/24163937/ns/technology_and_science-games/t/sims-sells-million-copies-worldwide/#.Vh7E1uhVhBc
gamesauce.org/news/2015/02/25/the-emergence-of-the-western-core-pc-gamer/
dentonrc.com/entertainment/entertainment-headlines/20150321-gaming-must-evolve-to-woo-more-players.ece
This ad is completely inappropriate for teens and pre-teens, (its a parody on an ad for a male "dysfunction" pharmaceutical here in the States) and there were many more ads in a similar vein.
https://youtu.be/G3puuNxeNnM
The original Sims series had ads that had even more adult themes blatently plastered in them.
Edited added thoughts
EA doesn't talk to the customers, but people who worked for them are more than willing to spill. I'd be willing to bet the main elements are truthful.The fact that the game was online tells me all I need to know. There are very few, true, open world online games, most are carved into tiny bits to improve performance on computers that should be gracing the landfill.
Sims online had '' had a single map, with all the server lots visible (if I remember right). But you could only load one at a time. I'm willing to bet that's what Olympus was going to do. If they can't do open world in the offline version, I can't imagine them pulling it off with potentially hundreds of sims (from different computers) clogging up your screen. If that youtube is what you're referring to as 'open world', I have to say it looks like nothing more than an interactive map. Reminds me a lot of Sims 4, actually.