I don't count minecraft tbh. It cost around 27 dollars and all the updates to it are free. There is no dlc to be purchased and tons of free mods that staright up change gameplay.
They of course make their money in other ways, no doubt about that, but when it comes to the main game itself, it's no where near the cost of the sims. (from a players perspective). Now this is assuming you're playing alone, with family only without buying a server, or actually running a server/ a member of any service that charges extra.
As far as steam goes, I guess it depends on which games you're talking about.
They can afford to do that because Minecraft is still selling as well as the day it came out, it costs next to nothing to develop and had sold 70 million copies. The franchise is worth billions with a game that was developed by a small indie company with a tiny budget.
Just what if Toddlers will be available on console only, that will peeve a lot of Simmers including me! EA should seriously put them in, the majority have waited since base game launched!
You should've seen what happened when toddlers became available on Freeplay. Never in one place (not here) have I seen so much cursing.
In all fairness, all they did was transfer the Toddlers from The Sims 3 Ambitions app to Freeplay.
Toddlers aren't made in a day, they'll be put in (imo) eventually.
They aren't made in a year and a half either- apparently- LOL!
Sims 4 development started in 2013 so almost 3 years still isn't enough time either lol
It started in 2010 lol.
The online game started development in 2010. The Sims 4 started development in April 2013.
All that remained the same was the CAS and Build Mode and the Art Style (with some furniture designs). The rest of the game had to be introduced, and they only had Young Adults in the original version.
I don't count minecraft tbh. It cost around 27 dollars and all the updates to it are free. There is no dlc to be purchased and tons of free mods that staright up change gameplay.
They of course make their money in other ways, no doubt about that, but when it comes to the main game itself, it's no where near the cost of the sims. (from a players perspective). Now this is assuming you're playing alone, with family only without buying a server, or actually running a server/ a member of any service that charges extra.
As far as steam goes, I guess it depends on which games you're talking about.
They can afford to do that because Minecraft is still selling as well as the day it came out, it costs next to nothing to develop and had sold 70 million copies. The franchise is worth billions with a game that was developed by a small indie company with a tiny budget.
To me then it's all the more reason not to compare it. What they offer and how much they offer it for is just different. Though so many people do buy it because of the ease of playing it and all the tapped in potential it has. It's an affordable game, constantly being upgraded, and full of possibilities for game play. I can see why they make so much money.
Great for kids, fun for adults too, accessible, open ended. Great for them.
That said i feel like the sims franchise and fans could benefit from healthy competition from another more detailed, life sim. I don't feel like ea/maxis is going all out with their creativity and without anything to compare it to (other than itself) it's hurting it's own innovation.
They can absolutely afford to charge more for less when there's no alternative.
Now what i want to happen and what will happen are two different things.
Toddlers aren't made in a day, they'll be put in (imo) eventually.
If they put toddlers in the game from the beginning, this wouldn't be a problem. Don't even try to make excuses for their laziness. The developers originally even said that toddlers were gonna be included in the base game, but took them out pretty much at last minute because it was "too hard".
Suggesting that "toddlers aren't made in a day" as a reason for them not being in the game is just a lazy excuse for them. The Sims 2 and Sims 3 had them in the base game from day one. There are no valid excuses for them not being in The Sims 4 other than the fact that the developers are just lazy and don't care.
Wrong. Oh so ignorant and wrong.
The original game that EA wanted them to develop was an online game with Young Adults, that meant you could hang out with people online and chat to them, via the Sims.
When SimCity got a bad rep for being online, EA changed the development into The Sims 4, and gave devs a YEAR and two months to change it into a full Sims game. The devs wanted to add Toddlers, but didn't have time to add them before the deadline.
The CEO of EA also said he would not green light any games unless they were online, and Maxis had no choice but to make an online social if they wanted the green light to start development.
It's not laziness at all by the devs. It's EA giving them a year to turn a game into something it was never supposed to be in less than half the time that the Devs had to work on Sims 2 and Sims 3.
And they do care. If you didn't know, EA decide the "concept" of what content they should add to the game, because Devs only develop what EA green lights. Which is why EA sends out the Survey's to fans of what they want to see in the game, not the Developers.
----
These are the same (for the most part) devs who always took feedback and tried their best to please fans during the Sims 2 and Sims 3 (even if the Sims 3 was a technical mess). To even think they suddenly stopped caring is ignorance at best. Look at the full picture. We even know half of this information straight from people who worked on the game and are no longer working on it.
I don't count minecraft tbh. It cost around 27 dollars and all the updates to it are free. There is no dlc to be purchased and tons of free mods that staright up change gameplay.
They of course make their money in other ways, no doubt about that, but when it comes to the main game itself, it's no where near the cost of the sims. (from a players perspective). Now this is assuming you're playing alone, with family only without buying a server, or actually running a server/ a member of any service that charges extra.
As far as steam goes, I guess it depends on which games you're talking about.
They can afford to do that because Minecraft is still selling as well as the day it came out, it costs next to nothing to develop and had sold 70 million copies. The franchise is worth billions with a game that was developed by a small indie company with a tiny budget.
To me then it's all the more reason not to compare it. What they offer and how much they offer it for is just different. Though so many people do buy it because of the ease of playing it and all the tapped in potential it has. It's an affordable game, constantly being upgraded, and full of possibilities for game play. I can see why they make so much money.
Great for kids, fun for adults too, accessible, open ended. Great for them.
That said i feel like the sims franchise and fans could benefit from healthy competition from another more detailed, life sim. I don't feel like ea/maxis is going all out with their creativity and without anything to compare it to (other than itself) it's hurting it's own innovation.
They can absolutely afford to charge more for less when there's no alternative.
Now what i want to happen and what will happen are two different things.
I think the Maxis team is super creative, and when given the proper amount of time to work on something, they do amazing stuff.
The issue is EA and deadlines, and the way devs sound annoyed on Twitter when they have to "stay hush" about future content, and SimGuruGraham even made a public tweet expressing he dislikes not getting feedback during development.
I know from several other games that EA in forces deadlines with different games a lot, and their business structure often didn't care as long as the game sounded good on paper.
I think if Maxis was owned by a different Publisher, we wouldn't be seeing such typical ideas and rushed development.
Toddlers aren't made in a day, they'll be put in (imo) eventually.
If they put toddlers in the game from the beginning, this wouldn't be a problem. Don't even try to make excuses for their laziness. The developers originally even said that toddlers were gonna be included in the base game, but took them out pretty much at last minute because it was "too hard".
Suggesting that "toddlers aren't made in a day" as a reason for them not being in the game is just a lazy excuse for them. The Sims 2 and Sims 3 had them in the base game from day one. There are no valid excuses for them not being in The Sims 4 other than the fact that the developers are just lazy and don't care.
Wrong. Oh so ignorant and wrong.
The original game that EA wanted them to develop was an online game with Young Adults, that meant you could hang out with people online and chat to them, via the Sims.
When SimCity got a bad rep for being online, EA changed the development into The Sims 4, and gave devs a YEAR and two months to change it into a full Sims game. The devs wanted to add Toddlers, but didn't have time to add them before the deadline.
The CEO of EA also said he would not green light any games unless they were online, and Maxis had no choice but to make an online social if they wanted the green light to start development.
It's not laziness at all by the devs. It's EA giving them a year to turn a game into something it was never supposed to be in less than half the time that the Devs had to work on Sims 2 and Sims 3.
And they do care. If you didn't know, EA decide the "concept" of what content they should add to the game, because Devs only develop what EA green lights. Which is why EA sends out the Survey's to fans of what they want to see in the game, not the Developers.
----
These are the same (for the most part) devs who always took feedback and tried their best to please fans during the Sims 2 and Sims 3 (even if the Sims 3 was a technical mess). To even think they suddenly stopped caring is ignorance at best. Look at the full picture. We even know half of this information straight from people who worked on the game and are no longer working on it.
Trust me, I know about the whole thing with EA deciding to make a spin off title into a main Sims game. They knew it would make a lot more money if they slapped "The Sims 4" on there instead. That's probably what they did with SimCity too. This is how EA works. I know this already.
I disagree with your idea that the developers even wanted toddlers in the first place. If that was true, then how come we still haven't gotten them? You would think they'd be on their priority list if they truly "wanted to add toddlers" before the 'deadline'. I just think they wanted to completely skip that life stage all along. Rachel Franklin herself even admitted that removing them was "the best idea for the game yet". That certainly doesn't make it sound like they actually WANTED toddlers. I think that's enough proof that they probably purposely skipped toddlers.
Also, Sims 3 wasn't a "technical mess" at all. It depends on your PC. But, that's not the point here, so I won't spend time to argue about that.
I don't count minecraft tbh. It cost around 27 dollars and all the updates to it are free. There is no dlc to be purchased and tons of free mods that staright up change gameplay.
They of course make their money in other ways, no doubt about that, but when it comes to the main game itself, it's no where near the cost of the sims. (from a players perspective). Now this is assuming you're playing alone, with family only without buying a server, or actually running a server/ a member of any service that charges extra.
As far as steam goes, I guess it depends on which games you're talking about.
They can afford to do that because Minecraft is still selling as well as the day it came out, it costs next to nothing to develop and had sold 70 million copies. The franchise is worth billions with a game that was developed by a small indie company with a tiny budget.
To me then it's all the more reason not to compare it. What they offer and how much they offer it for is just different. Though so many people do buy it because of the ease of playing it and all the tapped in potential it has. It's an affordable game, constantly being upgraded, and full of possibilities for game play. I can see why they make so much money.
Great for kids, fun for adults too, accessible, open ended. Great for them.
That said i feel like the sims franchise and fans could benefit from healthy competition from another more detailed, life sim. I don't feel like ea/maxis is going all out with their creativity and without anything to compare it to (other than itself) it's hurting it's own innovation.
They can absolutely afford to charge more for less when there's no alternative.
Now what i want to happen and what will happen are two different things.
I think the Maxis team is super creative, and when given the proper amount of time to work on something, they do amazing stuff.
The issue is EA and deadlines, and the way devs sound annoyed on Twitter when they have to "stay hush" about future content, and SimGuruGraham even made a public tweet expressing he dislikes not getting feedback during development.
I know from several other games that EA in forces deadlines with different games a lot, and their business structure often didn't care as long as the game sounded good on paper.
I think if Maxis was owned by a different Publisher, we wouldn't be seeing such typical ideas and rushed development.
Wasn't attempting to imply they weren't creative (in case you thought that, sorry for the confusion), just don't feel like they're using all of the creativity they have and that's for what ever reason there is. That's why I feel like competition would force them to improve upon what they have going on.
I think you're correct in EA needing to give them more freedom/time, but I don't think it's all EAs fault either. Think it's a combination of things.
It's really hard to tell what would happen if there was competition as there is no real competition to compare it to.
All that said, I am quite fond of the work I've seen from Graham, or at least from what I can tell anyway. I think it's a shame he just works on sps now, because I think he does a nice job and actually cares about seeing what the community is talking about. The sps are improving for sure, at least imo, but I'd like that talent working on the gps. Then again maybe he wouldn't be allowed to have as much input there (idk), which would be a shame if that's the case. Not even an attempt to take away from the work of any other guru, but out of the ones who are more "public" he sure does seem to care about his job and about the community in a way that shows. It's appreciated.
Toddlers will take months, if not years to complete. Yes, if the devs had nothing to do but make toddlers, we'd probably already have them. However, that is not the case. The devs have a lot on their plates. They are probably working on like 2-3 packs at a time. Honestly I think that telemetry of past games has told them that toddlers were low priority compared to some other features, and that is why they put them off for a bit. I think that they believe toddler players are a very vocal minority. I would like to see more family play, and toddlers, but the idea that single-sim households are what the majority of players are doing wouldn't not surprise me one bit. Having said that, I do believe that family players will (and should) get more of what they want this year though.
Toddlers will take months, if not years to complete. Yes, if the devs had nothing to do but make toddlers, we'd probably already have them. However, that is not the case. The devs have a lot on their plates. They are probably working on like 2-3 packs at a time. Honestly I think that telemetry of past games has told them that toddlers were low priority compared to some other features, and that is why they put them off for a bit. I think that they believe toddler players are a very vocal minority. I would like to see more family play, and toddlers, but the idea that single-sim households are what the majority of players are doing wouldn't not surprise me one bit. Having said that, I do believe that family players will (and should) get more of what they want this year though.
I'd say Movie Hangout Stuff provides some more incentive for some Simmers to play with families more, could be a good sign of what's to come this year.
Live your life to the fullest, don't wait for a miracle to happen, be the miracle to make things happen.
Sometimes your creativity is limited where you use it most, but you can use those limitations to inspire new forms of creativity you may never have thought of beforehand.
Toddlers aren't made in a day, they'll be put in (imo) eventually.
If they put toddlers in the game from the beginning, this wouldn't be a problem. Don't even try to make excuses for their laziness. The developers originally even said that toddlers were gonna be included in the base game, but took them out pretty much at last minute because it was "too hard".
Suggesting that "toddlers aren't made in a day" as a reason for them not being in the game is just a lazy excuse for them. The Sims 2 and Sims 3 had them in the base game from day one. There are no valid excuses for them not being in The Sims 4 other than the fact that the developers are just lazy and don't care.
Wrong. Oh so ignorant and wrong.
The original game that EA wanted them to develop was an online game with Young Adults, that meant you could hang out with people online and chat to them, via the Sims.
When SimCity got a bad rep for being online, EA changed the development into The Sims 4, and gave devs a YEAR and two months to change it into a full Sims game. The devs wanted to add Toddlers, but didn't have time to add them before the deadline.
The CEO of EA also said he would not green light any games unless they were online, and Maxis had no choice but to make an online social if they wanted the green light to start development.
It's not laziness at all by the devs. It's EA giving them a year to turn a game into something it was never supposed to be in less than half the time that the Devs had to work on Sims 2 and Sims 3.
And they do care. If you didn't know, EA decide the "concept" of what content they should add to the game, because Devs only develop what EA green lights. Which is why EA sends out the Survey's to fans of what they want to see in the game, not the Developers.
----
These are the same (for the most part) devs who always took feedback and tried their best to please fans during the Sims 2 and Sims 3 (even if the Sims 3 was a technical mess). To even think they suddenly stopped caring is ignorance at best. Look at the full picture. We even know half of this information straight from people who worked on the game and are no longer working on it.
Trust me, I know about the whole thing with EA deciding to make a spin off title into a main Sims game. They knew it would make a lot more money if they slapped "The Sims 4" on there instead. That's probably what they did with SimCity too. This is how EA works. I know this already.
I disagree with your idea that the developers even wanted toddlers in the first place. If that was true, then how come we still haven't gotten them? You would think they'd be on their priority list if they truly "wanted to add toddlers" before the 'deadline'. I just think they wanted to completely skip that life stage all along. Rachel Franklin herself even admitted that removing them was "the best idea for the game yet". That certainly doesn't make it sound like they actually WANTED toddlers. I think that's enough proof that they probably purposely skipped toddlers.
Also, Sims 3 wasn't a "technical mess" at all. It depends on your PC. But, that's not the point here, so I won't spend time to argue about that.
There is absolutely no proof that shows whether or not Maxis wanted to add Toddlers into the game, as for Rachel Franklin's interview about Toddlers, she never said it was the best idea for the game yet, she said "I feel like it's the best decision for the game to date" that means it's her own personal opinion that not adding Toddlers at the time was the best decision to date, and she follows up by saying "I'm not talking about future stuff" which could mean there's still a possibility for Toddlers.
Live your life to the fullest, don't wait for a miracle to happen, be the miracle to make things happen.
Sometimes your creativity is limited where you use it most, but you can use those limitations to inspire new forms of creativity you may never have thought of beforehand.
Toddlers will take months, if not years to complete. Yes, if the devs had nothing to do but make toddlers, we'd probably already have them. However, that is not the case. The devs have a lot on their plates. They are probably working on like 2-3 packs at a time. Honestly I think that telemetry of past games has told them that toddlers were low priority compared to some other features, and that is why they put them off for a bit. I think that they believe toddler players are a very vocal minority. I would like to see more family play, and toddlers, but the idea that single-sim households are what the majority of players are doing wouldn't not surprise me one bit. Having said that, I do believe that family players will (and should) get more of what they want this year though.
I'd say Movie Hangout Stuff provides some more incentive for some Simmers to play with families more, could be a good sign of what's to come this year.
I definitely agree. A guru said on twitter that it was important to include children in get together and movie hangout, so it seems they so have family players in mind.
Toddlers aren't made in a day, they'll be put in (imo) eventually.
If they put toddlers in the game from the beginning, this wouldn't be a problem. Don't even try to make excuses for their laziness. The developers originally even said that toddlers were gonna be included in the base game, but took them out pretty much at last minute because it was "too hard".
Suggesting that "toddlers aren't made in a day" as a reason for them not being in the game is just a lazy excuse for them. The Sims 2 and Sims 3 had them in the base game from day one. There are no valid excuses for them not being in The Sims 4 other than the fact that the developers are just lazy and don't care.
Wrong. Oh so ignorant and wrong.
The original game that EA wanted them to develop was an online game with Young Adults, that meant you could hang out with people online and chat to them, via the Sims.
When SimCity got a bad rep for being online, EA changed the development into The Sims 4, and gave devs a YEAR and two months to change it into a full Sims game. The devs wanted to add Toddlers, but didn't have time to add them before the deadline.
The CEO of EA also said he would not green light any games unless they were online, and Maxis had no choice but to make an online social if they wanted the green light to start development.
It's not laziness at all by the devs. It's EA giving them a year to turn a game into something it was never supposed to be in less than half the time that the Devs had to work on Sims 2 and Sims 3.
And they do care. If you didn't know, EA decide the "concept" of what content they should add to the game, because Devs only develop what EA green lights. Which is why EA sends out the Survey's to fans of what they want to see in the game, not the Developers.
----
These are the same (for the most part) devs who always took feedback and tried their best to please fans during the Sims 2 and Sims 3 (even if the Sims 3 was a technical mess). To even think they suddenly stopped caring is ignorance at best. Look at the full picture. We even know half of this information straight from people who worked on the game and are no longer working on it.
Trust me, I know about the whole thing with EA deciding to make a spin off title into a main Sims game. They knew it would make a lot more money if they slapped "The Sims 4" on there instead. That's probably what they did with SimCity too. This is how EA works. I know this already.
I disagree with your idea that the developers even wanted toddlers in the first place. If that was true, then how come we still haven't gotten them? You would think they'd be on their priority list if they truly "wanted to add toddlers" before the 'deadline'. I just think they wanted to completely skip that life stage all along. Rachel Franklin herself even admitted that removing them was "the best idea for the game yet". That certainly doesn't make it sound like they actually WANTED toddlers. I think that's enough proof that they probably purposely skipped toddlers.
Also, Sims 3 wasn't a "technical mess" at all. It depends on your PC. But, that's not the point here, so I won't spend time to argue about that.
There is absolutely no proof that shows whether or not Maxis wanted to add Toddlers into the game, as for Rachel Franklin's interview about Toddlers, she never said it was the best idea for the game yet, she said "I feel like it's the best decision for the game to date" that means it's her own personal opinion that not adding Toddlers at the time was the best decision to date, and she follows up by saying "I'm not talking about future stuff" which could mean there's still a possibility for Toddlers.
What's the difference between what I quoted from the interview and what you quoted? It's basically the same thing. She still believes taking out toddlers was the "best decision to date". That literally implies that she's happy about the removal of toddlers. That's certainly NOT the kind of person I want being the executive producer for this game. If she actually likes the fact that toddlers aren't in The Sims 4, then that's just scary for the future fate of the toddler life stage in general. Based on that alone, it's going to be extremely safe to assume that toddlers may not even come back.
She's ruining this once great franchise. End of story.
I don't want to anger people want now, but Maxis, just put toddlers back in. I'm getting sick of people begging for them constantly. (No offense to anyone. Not trying to start a fight.)
I'm getting sick of people begging for toddlers because they get sick of people begging for toddlers :rolleye:
(no, not really, I couldn't care less, but it makes a funny line)
Word of advice: stay out of feedback when feedback annoys you. Because that's where the toddlers topics are. Or just don't open those topics. They are quite recognizable; the title often contains the word 'toddler'.
There is absolutely no proof that shows whether or not Maxis wanted to add Toddlers into the game, as for Rachel Franklin's interview about Toddlers, she never said it was the best idea for the game yet, she said "I feel like it's the best decision for the game to date" that means it's her own personal opinion that not adding Toddlers at the time was the best decision to date, and she follows up by saying "I'm not talking about future stuff" which could mean there's still a possibility for Toddlers.
We also have to take into account that it's a producer saying those words and in her world, "best decision" most likely hinges on a lot of juggled factors, like time constraints, budgeting, available employees, and overall meeting the expectations of the publisher and investors with initial game sales, all on top of doing a good job of meeting the expectations of a large and varied fanbase.
Toddlers may very well have been high on the list of features they planned to add, but were cut due to time constraints and that quote is simply her saying that she's glad she didn't push for them and sacrifice other key features that turned out to do very well.
Mind you, I'm not saying there's any more "proof" of such an interpretation as there is any other, but it's another reason to be mindful of what we don't know.
The information she has and the information we have makes for quite a difference in perspective. Also important to note is that a person in her position needs to look confident and together. Even if she thinks it was a terrible decision for the game (I'm not saying she does, but supposing she did) it would look bad on both her and the company to say "it was a bad idea and we messed up." It would look bad to investors and it would make her look unfit for the job. That's just part of the politics of leadership. And while there are those rare times when it can be helpful to admit to mistakes in a position such as hers, an interview is usually not the way to do it because you don't control the publishing process.
Toddlers aren't made in a day, they'll be put in (imo) eventually.
If they put toddlers in the game from the beginning, this wouldn't be a problem. Don't even try to make excuses for their laziness. The developers originally even said that toddlers were gonna be included in the base game, but took them out pretty much at last minute because it was "too hard".
Suggesting that "toddlers aren't made in a day" as a reason for them not being in the game is just a lazy excuse for them. The Sims 2 and Sims 3 had them in the base game from day one. There are no valid excuses for them not being in The Sims 4 other than the fact that the developers are just lazy and don't care.
Wrong. Oh so ignorant and wrong.
The original game that EA wanted them to develop was an online game with Young Adults, that meant you could hang out with people online and chat to them, via the Sims.
When SimCity got a bad rep for being online, EA changed the development into The Sims 4, and gave devs a YEAR and two months to change it into a full Sims game. The devs wanted to add Toddlers, but didn't have time to add them before the deadline.
The CEO of EA also said he would not green light any games unless they were online, and Maxis had no choice but to make an online social if they wanted the green light to start development.
It's not laziness at all by the devs. It's EA giving them a year to turn a game into something it was never supposed to be in less than half the time that the Devs had to work on Sims 2 and Sims 3.
And they do care. If you didn't know, EA decide the "concept" of what content they should add to the game, because Devs only develop what EA green lights. Which is why EA sends out the Survey's to fans of what they want to see in the game, not the Developers.
----
These are the same (for the most part) devs who always took feedback and tried their best to please fans during the Sims 2 and Sims 3 (even if the Sims 3 was a technical mess). To even think they suddenly stopped caring is ignorance at best. Look at the full picture. We even know half of this information straight from people who worked on the game and are no longer working on it.
Trust me, I know about the whole thing with EA deciding to make a spin off title into a main Sims game. They knew it would make a lot more money if they slapped "The Sims 4" on there instead. That's probably what they did with SimCity too. This is how EA works. I know this already.
I disagree with your idea that the developers even wanted toddlers in the first place. If that was true, then how come we still haven't gotten them? You would think they'd be on their priority list if they truly "wanted to add toddlers" before the 'deadline'. I just think they wanted to completely skip that life stage all along. Rachel Franklin herself even admitted that removing them was "the best idea for the game yet". That certainly doesn't make it sound like they actually WANTED toddlers. I think that's enough proof that they probably purposely skipped toddlers.
Also, Sims 3 wasn't a "technical mess" at all. It depends on your PC. But, that's not the point here, so I won't spend time to argue about that.
You do understand gaming development right? Developers only develop what EA gives them the budget for. If EA decides one feature is worth more investing in than another, then guess what? Developers won't get to develop them. Even if they REALLY want to.
EA has decided (and confirmed via Survey) that Toddlers would only be developed alongside a Generations EP (and probably patched in). EA pays their wages, and decides what concepts they go with. Devs work around these concepts and come up with ideas for them.
And once again, someone misquotes Rachel;
So absolutely, I feel like it’s the best decision for the game to date. I’m not talking about future stuff.
So she already says it was the best decision at the time, and she's not talking about future stuff. She also said;
Toddlers are not simply small Sims, they are a completely separate Sim type, deserving of the same level of investment. We want to do it well
Her argument is, it was the best decision not to include them, because they want to do them well, and rushing them for release date would have meant they could have ended up worse than babies.
Not that they are happy the lifestage isn't in the game. It's all about quoting everything or not at all.
---
And the Sims 3 IS a technical mess. It only works on a select few video cards, and nearly all new Mac's can't run the game, and nearly all new video cards are unrecognized by newer PC's and run terribly (even LifeSimmer who has a really good PC, just had to edit half her files just to get the game to RUN and even then it's on a lower setting). Because the game doesn't recognize hardware on nearly every card older than 2012.
And trust me, EA would not release an emergency patch due to the recent backlash of the game not working on new PC's and Mac's, and advise to only select "a few packs at a time" if it ran like a IT dream. It just doesn't and only a few video cards still run the game properly.
I'm not going to argue the point, because EA have admitted it themselves and are trying to do damage control so they can still sell it.
Toddlers will take months, if not years to complete. Yes, if the devs had nothing to do but make toddlers, we'd probably already have them. However, that is not the case. The devs have a lot on their plates. They are probably working on like 2-3 packs at a time. Honestly I think that telemetry of past games has told them that toddlers were low priority compared to some other features, and that is why they put them off for a bit. I think that they believe toddler players are a very vocal minority. I would like to see more family play, and toddlers, but the idea that single-sim households are what the majority of players are doing wouldn't not surprise me one bit. Having said that, I do believe that family players will (and should) get more of what they want this year though.
Considering that Toddlers got nothing in Generations, except a pusher that was made for Babies too, I'd say it's been that way for a while.
If heaps of people played with them, EA would have tried to attract players with new gameplay.
Funny.. toddler fans and now a non toddlers fan is asking for toddlers. See what you get EA for not putting them in a game?
No one is happy without those tiny, winy things
Funny.. toddler fans and now a non toddlers fan is asking for toddlers. See what you get EA for not putting them in a game?
No one is happy without those tiny, winy things
I just want everyone to get what they want before the Sims 5 rocks up and we start again. I don't play with Toddlers ever, but it will be nice to see other playing
Even non Toddler fans want players to be happy with their game. Lol
Toddlers aren't made in a day, they'll be put in (imo) eventually.
If they put toddlers in the game from the beginning, this wouldn't be a problem. Don't even try to make excuses for their laziness. The developers originally even said that toddlers were gonna be included in the base game, but took them out pretty much at last minute because it was "too hard".
Suggesting that "toddlers aren't made in a day" as a reason for them not being in the game is just a lazy excuse for them. The Sims 2 and Sims 3 had them in the base game from day one. There are no valid excuses for them not being in The Sims 4 other than the fact that the developers are just lazy and don't care.
How long did EA take to make ghosts in our game, it came in a patch, if EA can make ghosts, surely they can make toddlers!
Toddlers aren't made in a day, they'll be put in (imo) eventually.
If they put toddlers in the game from the beginning, this wouldn't be a problem. Don't even try to make excuses for their laziness. The developers originally even said that toddlers were gonna be included in the base game, but took them out pretty much at last minute because it was "too hard".
Suggesting that "toddlers aren't made in a day" as a reason for them not being in the game is just a lazy excuse for them. The Sims 2 and Sims 3 had them in the base game from day one. There are no valid excuses for them not being in The Sims 4 other than the fact that the developers are just lazy and don't care.
How long did EA take to make ghosts in our game, it came in a patch, if EA can make ghosts, surely they can make toddlers!
Toddlers will take months, if not years to complete. Yes, if the devs had nothing to do but make toddlers, we'd probably already have them. However, that is not the case. The devs have a lot on their plates. They are probably working on like 2-3 packs at a time. Honestly I think that telemetry of past games has told them that toddlers were low priority compared to some other features, and that is why they put them off for a bit. I think that they believe toddler players are a very vocal minority. I would like to see more family play, and toddlers, but the idea that single-sim households are what the majority of players are doing wouldn't not surprise me one bit. Having said that, I do believe that family players will (and should) get more of what they want this year though.
Considering that Toddlers got nothing in Generations, except a pusher that was made for Babies too, I'd say it's been that way for a while.
If heaps of people played with them, EA would have tried to attract players with new gameplay.
I often don't know what feature came with what EP, but didn't Generations come with the spring riders and reading to kids (including toddlers) and the ability for toddlers to cuddle with their older siblings? And the toddler stage is essential for the IF. If they don't play with the darn thing in that stage, it will never be alive. Leaving out of the conversation for a moment that is exactly what many simmers are aiming for of course
Toddlers will take months, if not years to complete. Yes, if the devs had nothing to do but make toddlers, we'd probably already have them. However, that is not the case. The devs have a lot on their plates. They are probably working on like 2-3 packs at a time. Honestly I think that telemetry of past games has told them that toddlers were low priority compared to some other features, and that is why they put them off for a bit. I think that they believe toddler players are a very vocal minority. I would like to see more family play, and toddlers, but the idea that single-sim households are what the majority of players are doing wouldn't not surprise me one bit. Having said that, I do believe that family players will (and should) get more of what they want this year though.
Considering that Toddlers got nothing in Generations, except a pusher that was made for Babies too, I'd say it's been that way for a while.
If heaps of people played with them, EA would have tried to attract players with new gameplay.
Toddlers got a boat load of new interactions, the spring riders, sandboxes, and strollers. So yeah, they did get a moderate amount of new stuff in the Generations EP. That EP as a whole was skimpy on content, but toddlers were given just as much attention as children were.
I don't think toddlers are ever coming for TS4 and EA won't say so for fear of alienating players and thereby stopping the ol' cash cow. I hope I'm wrong, though, since so many people want them.
Comments
They can afford to do that because Minecraft is still selling as well as the day it came out, it costs next to nothing to develop and had sold 70 million copies. The franchise is worth billions with a game that was developed by a small indie company with a tiny budget.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
In all fairness, all they did was transfer the Toddlers from The Sims 3 Ambitions app to Freeplay.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
The online game started development in 2010. The Sims 4 started development in April 2013.
All that remained the same was the CAS and Build Mode and the Art Style (with some furniture designs). The rest of the game had to be introduced, and they only had Young Adults in the original version.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
To me then it's all the more reason not to compare it. What they offer and how much they offer it for is just different. Though so many people do buy it because of the ease of playing it and all the tapped in potential it has. It's an affordable game, constantly being upgraded, and full of possibilities for game play. I can see why they make so much money.
Great for kids, fun for adults too, accessible, open ended. Great for them.
That said i feel like the sims franchise and fans could benefit from healthy competition from another more detailed, life sim. I don't feel like ea/maxis is going all out with their creativity and without anything to compare it to (other than itself) it's hurting it's own innovation.
They can absolutely afford to charge more for less when there's no alternative.
Now what i want to happen and what will happen are two different things.
*There's nothing wrong with loving the Sims 4, there's also nothing wrong with seeking improvements.
A list of Mods I use.|My Sims 4 Mod and CC "Master" post. Helpful Links included.
Wrong. Oh so ignorant and wrong.
The original game that EA wanted them to develop was an online game with Young Adults, that meant you could hang out with people online and chat to them, via the Sims.
When SimCity got a bad rep for being online, EA changed the development into The Sims 4, and gave devs a YEAR and two months to change it into a full Sims game. The devs wanted to add Toddlers, but didn't have time to add them before the deadline.
The CEO of EA also said he would not green light any games unless they were online, and Maxis had no choice but to make an online social if they wanted the green light to start development.
It's not laziness at all by the devs. It's EA giving them a year to turn a game into something it was never supposed to be in less than half the time that the Devs had to work on Sims 2 and Sims 3.
And they do care. If you didn't know, EA decide the "concept" of what content they should add to the game, because Devs only develop what EA green lights. Which is why EA sends out the Survey's to fans of what they want to see in the game, not the Developers.
----
These are the same (for the most part) devs who always took feedback and tried their best to please fans during the Sims 2 and Sims 3 (even if the Sims 3 was a technical mess). To even think they suddenly stopped caring is ignorance at best. Look at the full picture. We even know half of this information straight from people who worked on the game and are no longer working on it.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
I think the Maxis team is super creative, and when given the proper amount of time to work on something, they do amazing stuff.
The issue is EA and deadlines, and the way devs sound annoyed on Twitter when they have to "stay hush" about future content, and SimGuruGraham even made a public tweet expressing he dislikes not getting feedback during development.
I know from several other games that EA in forces deadlines with different games a lot, and their business structure often didn't care as long as the game sounded good on paper.
I think if Maxis was owned by a different Publisher, we wouldn't be seeing such typical ideas and rushed development.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
Trust me, I know about the whole thing with EA deciding to make a spin off title into a main Sims game. They knew it would make a lot more money if they slapped "The Sims 4" on there instead. That's probably what they did with SimCity too. This is how EA works. I know this already.
I disagree with your idea that the developers even wanted toddlers in the first place. If that was true, then how come we still haven't gotten them? You would think they'd be on their priority list if they truly "wanted to add toddlers" before the 'deadline'. I just think they wanted to completely skip that life stage all along. Rachel Franklin herself even admitted that removing them was "the best idea for the game yet". That certainly doesn't make it sound like they actually WANTED toddlers. I think that's enough proof that they probably purposely skipped toddlers.
Also, Sims 3 wasn't a "technical mess" at all. It depends on your PC. But, that's not the point here, so I won't spend time to argue about that.
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
Wasn't attempting to imply they weren't creative (in case you thought that, sorry for the confusion), just don't feel like they're using all of the creativity they have and that's for what ever reason there is. That's why I feel like competition would force them to improve upon what they have going on.
I think you're correct in EA needing to give them more freedom/time, but I don't think it's all EAs fault either. Think it's a combination of things.
It's really hard to tell what would happen if there was competition as there is no real competition to compare it to.
All that said, I am quite fond of the work I've seen from Graham, or at least from what I can tell anyway. I think it's a shame he just works on sps now, because I think he does a nice job and actually cares about seeing what the community is talking about. The sps are improving for sure, at least imo, but I'd like that talent working on the gps. Then again maybe he wouldn't be allowed to have as much input there (idk), which would be a shame if that's the case. Not even an attempt to take away from the work of any other guru, but out of the ones who are more "public" he sure does seem to care about his job and about the community in a way that shows. It's appreciated.
*There's nothing wrong with loving the Sims 4, there's also nothing wrong with seeking improvements.
A list of Mods I use.|My Sims 4 Mod and CC "Master" post. Helpful Links included.
I'd say Movie Hangout Stuff provides some more incentive for some Simmers to play with families more, could be a good sign of what's to come this year.
Sometimes your creativity is limited where you use it most, but you can use those limitations to inspire new forms of creativity you may never have thought of beforehand.
There is absolutely no proof that shows whether or not Maxis wanted to add Toddlers into the game, as for Rachel Franklin's interview about Toddlers, she never said it was the best idea for the game yet, she said "I feel like it's the best decision for the game to date" that means it's her own personal opinion that not adding Toddlers at the time was the best decision to date, and she follows up by saying "I'm not talking about future stuff" which could mean there's still a possibility for Toddlers.
Sometimes your creativity is limited where you use it most, but you can use those limitations to inspire new forms of creativity you may never have thought of beforehand.
I definitely agree. A guru said on twitter that it was important to include children in get together and movie hangout, so it seems they so have family players in mind.
What's the difference between what I quoted from the interview and what you quoted? It's basically the same thing. She still believes taking out toddlers was the "best decision to date". That literally implies that she's happy about the removal of toddlers. That's certainly NOT the kind of person I want being the executive producer for this game. If she actually likes the fact that toddlers aren't in The Sims 4, then that's just scary for the future fate of the toddler life stage in general. Based on that alone, it's going to be extremely safe to assume that toddlers may not even come back.
She's ruining this once great franchise. End of story.
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
(no, not really, I couldn't care less, but it makes a funny line)
Word of advice: stay out of feedback when feedback annoys you. Because that's where the toddlers topics are. Or just don't open those topics. They are quite recognizable; the title often contains the word 'toddler'.
Toddlers may very well have been high on the list of features they planned to add, but were cut due to time constraints and that quote is simply her saying that she's glad she didn't push for them and sacrifice other key features that turned out to do very well.
Mind you, I'm not saying there's any more "proof" of such an interpretation as there is any other, but it's another reason to be mindful of what we don't know.
The information she has and the information we have makes for quite a difference in perspective. Also important to note is that a person in her position needs to look confident and together. Even if she thinks it was a terrible decision for the game (I'm not saying she does, but supposing she did) it would look bad on both her and the company to say "it was a bad idea and we messed up." It would look bad to investors and it would make her look unfit for the job. That's just part of the politics of leadership. And while there are those rare times when it can be helpful to admit to mistakes in a position such as hers, an interview is usually not the way to do it because you don't control the publishing process.
You do understand gaming development right? Developers only develop what EA gives them the budget for. If EA decides one feature is worth more investing in than another, then guess what? Developers won't get to develop them. Even if they REALLY want to.
EA has decided (and confirmed via Survey) that Toddlers would only be developed alongside a Generations EP (and probably patched in). EA pays their wages, and decides what concepts they go with. Devs work around these concepts and come up with ideas for them.
And once again, someone misquotes Rachel;
So she already says it was the best decision at the time, and she's not talking about future stuff. She also said;
Her argument is, it was the best decision not to include them, because they want to do them well, and rushing them for release date would have meant they could have ended up worse than babies.
Not that they are happy the lifestage isn't in the game. It's all about quoting everything or not at all.
---
And the Sims 3 IS a technical mess. It only works on a select few video cards, and nearly all new Mac's can't run the game, and nearly all new video cards are unrecognized by newer PC's and run terribly (even LifeSimmer who has a really good PC, just had to edit half her files just to get the game to RUN and even then it's on a lower setting). Because the game doesn't recognize hardware on nearly every card older than 2012.
And trust me, EA would not release an emergency patch due to the recent backlash of the game not working on new PC's and Mac's, and advise to only select "a few packs at a time" if it ran like a IT dream. It just doesn't and only a few video cards still run the game properly.
I'm not going to argue the point, because EA have admitted it themselves and are trying to do damage control so they can still sell it.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
Considering that Toddlers got nothing in Generations, except a pusher that was made for Babies too, I'd say it's been that way for a while.
If heaps of people played with them, EA would have tried to attract players with new gameplay.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
No one is happy without those tiny, winy things
I just want everyone to get what they want before the Sims 5 rocks up and we start again. I don't play with Toddlers ever, but it will be nice to see other playing
Even non Toddler fans want players to be happy with their game. Lol
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
How long did EA take to make ghosts in our game, it came in a patch, if EA can make ghosts, surely they can make toddlers!
Ghosts are just see-through YA sims.
Toddlers got a boat load of new interactions, the spring riders, sandboxes, and strollers. So yeah, they did get a moderate amount of new stuff in the Generations EP. That EP as a whole was skimpy on content, but toddlers were given just as much attention as children were.