Apparently the Gurus are all working weekends and late nights at the moment (just check Twitter) ... apparently they all read the forums and see what we are saying, and yet I do not feel like we are seeing the results at all. (Yet?)
Everything they DO release seems shallow and light not just on the gameplay side, but on the stuff side as well! Stuff packs have very little in them - do you remember how many clothes we got in TS2 H&M clothing stuff? How much there was in Teen Style Stuff? Ikea Stuff? It seems like we're getting less and less every time - let alone that the content being released is not addressing the requests on the forums.
Shallow gameplay (i.e. questing, unlocking, and gameplay without actual real consequence, no chance of failure, no personality, and all the other stuff simmers are mentioning) and endless party life have been the legacy of TS4 so far. I'm not sure there will be enough for TS5 off the back of that. But I suppose we *still* just have to wait and see
Edit - Imagine the hullabaloo on the forums if they released just a single concept render of a toddler.... *sighs wistfully*
One thing I would like to add is that it feels as though the EA team has not kept us in the loop. They ignore us for the most part when it comes to what we are asking for and never provide us with teasers or plans for the future of the game. Sims 4 has been a very different experience when it comes to interaction with the fans. We are the ones who play the game it would be nice if they let us in on their mindset...where they are taking us in the future. I for one like anticipating future releases and knowing what direction we might be headed in. As a player part of the experience of the Sims is knowing that our voices and opinion matter and that the developers are actually listening. So tired of the half baked ideas that end up being our expansion packs. The depth is gone from the Sims and they just won't address that with us.
They were here earlier and wanted to talk about the game and how they made it. But instead people wanted to talk about future content and what to expect. They explained that they couldn't talk about that because EA doesn't allow it. But people became angry at the gurus because the gurus wouldn't break EA's rules (and maybe then lose their jobs). So the gurus had to leave the forum. I actually can't blame them.
One thing I would like to add is that it feels as though the EA team has not kept us in the loop. They ignore us for the most part when it comes to what we are asking for and never provide us with teasers or plans for the future of the game. Sims 4 has been a very different experience when it comes to interaction with the fans. We are the ones who play the game it would be nice if they let us in on their mindset...where they are taking us in the future. I for one like anticipating future releases and knowing what direction we might be headed in. As a player part of the experience of the Sims is knowing that our voices and opinion matter and that the developers are actually listening. So tired of the half baked ideas that end up being our expansion packs. The depth is gone from the Sims and they just won't address that with us.
They were here earlier and wanted to talk about the game and how they made it. But instead people wanted to talk about future content and what to expect. They explained that they couldn't talk about that because EA doesn't allow it. But people became angry at the gurus because the gurus wouldn't break EA's rules (and maybe then lose their jobs). So the gurus had to leave the forum. I actually can't blame them.
People are getting fed up with all the secrecy in general I think, and the fact the game apparently is still lacking vital things. I'm not under the impression people are mean to gurus; every time I see gurus showing up people clearly appreciate that and express that too. But maybe I missed the topics you are referring to.
Sims 4 is meant to be just a path opener for Sims 5 aka Olympus. I don't think they scraped that project at all.
I don't think that EA has decided anything about the Sims 5 yet.
They apparently considered an online game named Olympos earlier. But why did they change their mind? My guess would be that downloadable stuff and stuff packs had shown so amazingly good sales numbers that EA wanted that even more for the Sims 4. But such things don't work nearly as well in an online game where everything has to be coordinated much more between a huge number of players. So maybe this was the reason why EA decided that the Sims 4 should be an offline game with even more focus on stuff and stuff packs and less focus on gameplay than the previous games.
My guess about the Sims 5 is different because I believe that it will be a bigger 64 bit game with a bigger (more or less open) world. It could be an online game. But I would think that it is at least equal likely that it still will be an offline game because the number of expansions and possible downloads will still be a little hard to implement in an online game.
One thing I would like to add is that it feels as though the EA team has not kept us in the loop. They ignore us for the most part when it comes to what we are asking for and never provide us with teasers or plans for the future of the game. Sims 4 has been a very different experience when it comes to interaction with the fans. We are the ones who play the game it would be nice if they let us in on their mindset...where they are taking us in the future. I for one like anticipating future releases and knowing what direction we might be headed in. As a player part of the experience of the Sims is knowing that our voices and opinion matter and that the developers are actually listening. So tired of the half baked ideas that end up being our expansion packs. The depth is gone from the Sims and they just won't address that with us.
They were here earlier and wanted to talk about the game and how they made it. But instead people wanted to talk about future content and what to expect. They explained that they couldn't talk about that because EA doesn't allow it. But people became angry at the gurus because the gurus wouldn't break EA's rules (and maybe then lose their jobs). So the gurus had to leave the forum. I actually can't blame them.
People are getting fed up with all the secrecy in general I think, and the fact the game apparently is still lacking vital things. I'm not under the impression people are mean to gurus; every time I see gurus showing up people clearly appreciate that and express that too. But maybe I missed the topics you are referring to.
I know. But the secrecy is about EA's policy and not something the gurus can change. EA's policy clearly seems to be that only EA's board members are allowed to talk about the future content in EA's games. The only exception apparently is when some of the developers are asked by EA to give a presentation of an already announced upcoming game. Otherwise the developers clearly can't talk about such things at all.
Sims 4 is meant to be just a path opener for Sims 5 aka Olympus. I don't think they scraped that project at all.
I don't think that EA has decided anything about the Sims 5 yet.
They apparently considered an online game named Olympos earlier. But why did they change their mind? My guess would be that downloadable stuff and stuff packs had shown so amazingly good sales numbers that EA wanted that even more for the Sims 4. But such things don't work nearly as well in an online game where everything has to be coordinated much more between a huge number of players. So maybe this was the reason why EA decided that the Sims 4 should be an offline game with even more focus on stuff and stuff packs and less focus on gameplay than the previous games.
My guess about the Sims 5 is different because I believe that it will be a bigger 64 bit game with a bigger (more or less open) world. It could be an online game. But I would think that it is at least equal likely that it still will be an offline game because the number of expansions and possible downloads will still be a little hard to implement in an online game.
Or maybe it's that Sim City 2013 bombed really badly because they messed up their online function by forcing it on every player and then tried to claim offline play was 'impossible' until modders showed that was entirely inaccurate and people lost trust in what Maxis was saying causing issues with the long term effects from such a poor start.
It's quite likely they saw that if forcing SC2013 customers to be online was not working-and in fact causing more trouble than they had realised that it was likely the sims customers would react in a similar fashion. They then had to repurpose what they already made for the online only game in a rush and that's why they couldn't get it done in time. Clearly something huge happened to prevent the team from finishing the base in time for release.
Sims 4 is meant to be just a path opener for Sims 5 aka Olympus. I don't think they scraped that project at all.
I don't think that EA has decided anything about the Sims 5 yet.
They apparently considered an online game named Olympos earlier. But why did they change their mind? My guess would be that downloadable stuff and stuff packs had shown so amazingly good sales numbers that EA wanted that even more for the Sims 4. But such things don't work nearly as well in an online game where everything has to be coordinated much more between a huge number of players. So maybe this was the reason why EA decided that the Sims 4 should be an offline game with even more focus on stuff and stuff packs and less focus on gameplay than the previous games.
My guess about the Sims 5 is different because I believe that it will be a bigger 64 bit game with a bigger (more or less open) world. It could be an online game. But I would think that it is at least equal likely that it still will be an offline game because the number of expansions and possible downloads will still be a little hard to implement in an online game.
Or maybe it's that Sim City 2013 bombed really badly because they messed up their online function by forcing it on every player and then tried to claim offline play was 'impossible' until modders showed that was entirely inaccurate and people lost trust in what Maxis was saying causing issues with the long term effects from such a poor start.
It's quite likely they saw that if forcing SC2013 customers to be online was not working-and in fact causing more trouble than they had realised that it was likely the sims customers would react in a similar fashion. They then had to repurpose what they already made for the online only game in a rush and that's why they couldn't get it done in time. Clearly something huge happened to prevent the team from finishing the base in time for release.
It just doesn't make sense to me that the most successful game company in the world from an economical viewpoint should act so unprofessional and foolish to not give more time and resources for the remaining development if EA really ordered Maxis to make such huge changes and thereby having wasted a lot of time. Therefore I still highly suspect that the explanation is different and about some things which couldn't really be used by Maxis to ask EA for more time and resources without consequences for Maxis.
As long as the SPs sell extremely well you will have a very hard job to convince EA to make much bigger and much more expensive EPs instead!
But are EPs selling that well? on sale within a week.
Nice try, but Get Together and Get To Work are still selling a lot more than major games on Origin.
Of course Get Together was on sale within a week. It was released two weeks before Christmas. Most games go on sale during Christmas. Star Wars went on sale (and still is on sale), and it had already sold millions. Companies won't put games that haven't earned back the investment on sale so quick, because if it's not selling well they need to make the money back. Going on sale only works once a fair time period has passed, and it's established that the main audience has stopped buying. A company putting their game on sale within a week shows confidence they'll make back the investment.
If EA were scared it wasn't going to sell, they would have kept it at full price during Christmas rush.
EA have already said The Sims 4's been doing really well, and the strength of the Expansions has exceeded expectations.
Also, The Sims 4 is still the second best selling game on Origin only behind Star Wars. Even the new Plants VS Zombies can't overtake it and it's an Origin exclusive. It's doing really well.
Also, Origin has a lot of games from other companies outside EA now, like Watch Dogs, The Witcher 3 and many more. The Sims 4's still selling better.
What people usually miss is the difference between:
1. Traditional sales which are about permanently lowering the prices for older products which don't sell much anymore. This is the only way to still sell them because everybody who were willing to pay the full original price have already bought the product/game.
2. The new form of sales where products (such as games, books, movies etc.) have lower prices only for very short limited periods. This is done because some people always seem to become tempted when they see something which can be bought for a reduced price. But it is most favorably done in periods where normal customers only buy very little because of course the companies prefer to sell their products for their full price.
Apparently EA only use the limited periods sales. But as explained this indicates nothing about the sales numbers. Only if the lower prices become permanent they would indicate that the games probably don't sell very well anymore.
Sims 4 is meant to be just a path opener for Sims 5 aka Olympus. I don't think they scraped that project at all.
I don't think that EA has decided anything about the Sims 5 yet.
They apparently considered an online game named Olympos earlier. But why did they change their mind? My guess would be that downloadable stuff and stuff packs had shown so amazingly good sales numbers that EA wanted that even more for the Sims 4. But such things don't work nearly as well in an online game where everything has to be coordinated much more between a huge number of players. So maybe this was the reason why EA decided that the Sims 4 should be an offline game with even more focus on stuff and stuff packs and less focus on gameplay than the previous games.
My guess about the Sims 5 is different because I believe that it will be a bigger 64 bit game with a bigger (more or less open) world. It could be an online game. But I would think that it is at least equal likely that it still will be an offline game because the number of expansions and possible downloads will still be a little hard to implement in an online game.
Or maybe it's that Sim City 2013 bombed really badly because they messed up their online function by forcing it on every player and then tried to claim offline play was 'impossible' until modders showed that was entirely inaccurate and people lost trust in what Maxis was saying causing issues with the long term effects from such a poor start.
It's quite likely they saw that if forcing SC2013 customers to be online was not working-and in fact causing more trouble than they had realised that it was likely the sims customers would react in a similar fashion. They then had to repurpose what they already made for the online only game in a rush and that's why they couldn't get it done in time. Clearly something huge happened to prevent the team from finishing the base in time for release.
It just doesn't make sense to me that the most successful game company in the world from an economical viewpoint should act so unprofessional and foolish to not give more time and resources for the remaining development if EA really ordered Maxis to make such huge changes and thereby having wasted a lot of time. Therefore I still highly suspect that the explanation is different and about some things which couldn't really be used by Maxis to ask EA for more time and resources without consequences for Maxis.
But you seem to have this (largely unfounded IMO) unshakable faith that EA and their marketing department would never, ever, ever, make a mistake. Ever. Which I find quite interesting since it's certainly possible to list a number of games (including SC '13) which did not last long and faced innumerable criticisms from gamers and reviewers alike.
What makes no sense to me is your insistence that EA executives always make wise and unassailable decisions. I highly doubt that this is the case.
The Sims
Where are we going, and why am I in this hand basket?!
Sims 4 is meant to be just a path opener for Sims 5 aka Olympus. I don't think they scraped that project at all.
I don't think that EA has decided anything about the Sims 5 yet.
They apparently considered an online game named Olympos earlier. But why did they change their mind? My guess would be that downloadable stuff and stuff packs had shown so amazingly good sales numbers that EA wanted that even more for the Sims 4. But such things don't work nearly as well in an online game where everything has to be coordinated much more between a huge number of players. So maybe this was the reason why EA decided that the Sims 4 should be an offline game with even more focus on stuff and stuff packs and less focus on gameplay than the previous games.
My guess about the Sims 5 is different because I believe that it will be a bigger 64 bit game with a bigger (more or less open) world. It could be an online game. But I would think that it is at least equal likely that it still will be an offline game because the number of expansions and possible downloads will still be a little hard to implement in an online game.
Or maybe it's that Sim City 2013 bombed really badly because they messed up their online function by forcing it on every player and then tried to claim offline play was 'impossible' until modders showed that was entirely inaccurate and people lost trust in what Maxis was saying causing issues with the long term effects from such a poor start.
It's quite likely they saw that if forcing SC2013 customers to be online was not working-and in fact causing more trouble than they had realised that it was likely the sims customers would react in a similar fashion. They then had to repurpose what they already made for the online only game in a rush and that's why they couldn't get it done in time. Clearly something huge happened to prevent the team from finishing the base in time for release.
It just doesn't make sense to me that the most successful game company in the world from an economical viewpoint should act so unprofessional and foolish to not give more time and resources for the remaining development if EA really ordered Maxis to make such huge changes and thereby having wasted a lot of time. Therefore I still highly suspect that the explanation is different and about some things which couldn't really be used by Maxis to ask EA for more time and resources without consequences for Maxis.
But you seem to have this (largely unfounded IMO) unshakable faith that EA and their marketing department would never, ever, ever, make a mistake. Ever. Which I find quite interesting since it's certainly possible to list a number of games (including SC '13) which did not last long and faced innumerable criticisms from gamers and reviewers alike.
What makes no sense to me is your insistence that EA executives always make wise and unassailable decisions. I highly doubt that this is the case.
Exactly.
It's quite likely Maxis were trying to avoid further issues so quickly after SC2013 to try to smooth over the damage done.
The sims 4 is a good game, but lacks depth, being the fourth generation of the sims, the fans expected him to come, innovative but keeping everything and nice to have had in other generations, and the updates, only serve to fix some bugs, bugs, bring some noviade, and not bring things that had to come in base, is adding to the lack of communication gurus and EA. The sims 4 is becoming a problem to continue playing because the interactions becomes repetitive when you complete all the skills level maximum on every row, have enough money to buy everything and paid the bills have a dream house, the game gets boring, I mean those who like the simulation mode, and you create anticipation about a game package, which will bring a difference to the game, new interactions, rather they are clear and speak this month will have no gp only an update, was fed the imagination of people, maybe they announce next week and so on, only to later announce they will have no gP this month.
The patch has just now been released and I have to admit, I am not only extremely disappointed but yet even more really concerned on what is going on with the Sims 4 and the strategy behind it. @SimGuruSarah @SimGuruHydra @EA and others - can you please provide any reply to my OP?
Sims 4 is meant to be just a path opener for Sims 5 aka Olympus. I don't think they scraped that project at all.
I don't think that EA has decided anything about the Sims 5 yet.
They apparently considered an online game named Olympos earlier. But why did they change their mind? My guess would be that downloadable stuff and stuff packs had shown so amazingly good sales numbers that EA wanted that even more for the Sims 4. But such things don't work nearly as well in an online game where everything has to be coordinated much more between a huge number of players. So maybe this was the reason why EA decided that the Sims 4 should be an offline game with even more focus on stuff and stuff packs and less focus on gameplay than the previous games.
My guess about the Sims 5 is different because I believe that it will be a bigger 64 bit game with a bigger (more or less open) world. It could be an online game. But I would think that it is at least equal likely that it still will be an offline game because the number of expansions and possible downloads will still be a little hard to implement in an online game.
Or maybe it's that Sim City 2013 bombed really badly because they messed up their online function by forcing it on every player and then tried to claim offline play was 'impossible' until modders showed that was entirely inaccurate and people lost trust in what Maxis was saying causing issues with the long term effects from such a poor start.
It's quite likely they saw that if forcing SC2013 customers to be online was not working-and in fact causing more trouble than they had realised that it was likely the sims customers would react in a similar fashion. They then had to repurpose what they already made for the online only game in a rush and that's why they couldn't get it done in time. Clearly something huge happened to prevent the team from finishing the base in time for release.
It just doesn't make sense to me that the most successful game company in the world from an economical viewpoint should act so unprofessional and foolish to not give more time and resources for the remaining development if EA really ordered Maxis to make such huge changes and thereby having wasted a lot of time. Therefore I still highly suspect that the explanation is different and about some things which couldn't really be used by Maxis to ask EA for more time and resources without consequences for Maxis.
But you seem to have this (largely unfounded IMO) unshakable faith that EA and their marketing department would never, ever, ever, make a mistake. Ever. Which I find quite interesting since it's certainly possible to list a number of games (including SC '13) which did not last long and faced innumerable criticisms from gamers and reviewers alike.
What makes no sense to me is your insistence that EA executives always make wise and unassailable decisions. I highly doubt that this is the case.
This isn't my point at all. But compare the following:
1. Maxis run into unforeseen trouble with the deadline because things won't work as they had planned or they realize that something must be done differently. In this case Maxis wouldn't want to ask EA for more time because then Maxis would then have to admit that the trouble was Maxis' own fault. Instead Maxis would seek a way to finish the game without having to ask EA for extra time ;and money) because otherwise EA could think that Maxis needed better planning and leadership.
2. EA realizes that making the Sims 4 as an online game could be a mistake because it gave problems with SimCity. Therefore EA orders Maxis to drop the work on Olympus and instead make TS4 as an offline game. In this case Maxis would of course ask for extra time as compensation for the wasted work on Olympus. If EA denied that then EA would in my opinion have a completely incompetent and foolish board in direct contradiction with EA's overwhelming economical success in the about 40 yrs EA has existed.
I consider point 2 to be much more unlikely than point 1 for obvious reasons because I can't see the highly educated and experienced leaders in EA to be foolish enough to naively do such a huge and obvious mistake. But sure EA can do mistakes - just probably not so obvious ones as dropping a lot of done work and naively order an important game finished in no time anyway.
As long as the SPs sell extremely well you will have a very hard job to convince EA to make much bigger and much more expensive EPs instead!
o.O
Correct. But there is a huge difference between this and making the basegame small because releasing small SPs, GPs and EPs doesn't have much risk. If an expansion get lower sales numbers than expected EA can always analyze the situation and make the next expansion a little bigger if EA thinks that the small size is the most likely reason (but it probably isn't).
The basegame is much more important because small sales numbers for the basegame will obviously also affect the sales numbers for every single one of the huge number of expansions very badly. Therefore it would be extremely foolish for EA to attempt to rush the basegame through in no time.
We don't know exactly how the negotiations between Maxis and EA works. But I imagine something like the following:
1. EA tells Maxis to start developing the Sims 4 basegame. EA also tells Maxis that EA wants a new game and not just a modified version of TS3. EA wants the minimum requirements to be low so very few young teens will need a new expensive computer to run it and EA wants Maxis to make propositions for the main new content. Maybe EA also wants Maxis to investigate the possibilities for making TS4 as an online game.
2. Maxis start working and negotiations with EA results in an agreement about the new emotions, the new multitasking and the new build mode. Maxis also has investigated the option about making the game as an online game (and maybe other options too). But this is dropped again after some time.
3. Maxis is given suitable time and resources to make the game and now works more directly against the final goal.
4. Things don't work out too well for the development. The new emotions are less impressive than Maxis had wanted and the multitasking is technically very difficult and also less impressive than Maxis had hoped. The new build mode works better but also takes long time to develop. So Maxis persuades EA to get the release date postponed by a few months.
5. Maxis is still in time trouble even though the deadline was postponed and EA won't like another postponement. Negotiations between EA and Maxis results in omission of toddlers and to delay a few other things to upcoming free patches. EA prefers this compared to another delay for the release date.
As long as the SPs sell extremely well you will have a very hard job to convince EA to make much bigger and much more expensive EPs instead!
But are EPs selling that well? on sale within a week.
Nice try, but Get Together and Get To Work are still selling a lot more than major games on Origin.
Of course Get Together was on sale within a week. It was released two weeks before Christmas. Most games go on sale during Christmas. Star Wars went on sale (and still is on sale), and it had already sold millions. Companies won't put games that haven't earned back the investment on sale so quick, because if it's not selling well they need to make the money back. Going on sale only works once a fair time period has passed, and it's established that the main audience has stopped buying. A company putting their game on sale within a week shows confidence they'll make back the investment.
If EA were scared it wasn't going to sell, they would have kept it at full price during Christmas rush.
EA have already said The Sims 4's been doing really well, and the strength of the Expansions has exceeded expectations.
Also, The Sims 4 is still the second best selling game on Origin only behind Star Wars. Even the new Plants VS Zombies can't overtake it and it's an Origin exclusive. It's doing really well.
Also, Origin has a lot of games from other companies outside EA now, like Watch Dogs, The Witcher 3 and many more. The Sims 4's still selling better.
Sims 4 is on top of Origin's best selling because there is nothing on Origin to begin with. Going through some of the list; Battlefront flopped, Plants vs Zombies GW2 is a joke, Fifa16 is console-preferred by its fanbase, BF4 is old, nobody likes BF4's spinoffs, etc. And why would anyone go through Origin to get third party games, when Amazon, Steam, etc. are just flat out better retailers to deal with?
Sims 4 is still riding on the very high prestige set by TS3.
EDIT: And, as I recall, you like to justify TS4's "popularity" with Amazon charts.
It's nowhere to be found. It's pretty far down the list, an expansion is outselling it, and TS3 is outselling it as well.
As long as the SPs sell extremely well you will have a very hard job to convince EA to make much bigger and much more expensive EPs instead!
But are EPs selling that well? on sale within a week.
Nice try, but Get Together and Get To Work are still selling a lot more than major games on Origin.
Of course Get Together was on sale within a week. It was released two weeks before Christmas. Most games go on sale during Christmas. Star Wars went on sale (and still is on sale), and it had already sold millions. Companies won't put games that haven't earned back the investment on sale so quick, because if it's not selling well they need to make the money back. Going on sale only works once a fair time period has passed, and it's established that the main audience has stopped buying. A company putting their game on sale within a week shows confidence they'll make back the investment.
If EA were scared it wasn't going to sell, they would have kept it at full price during Christmas rush.
EA have already said The Sims 4's been doing really well, and the strength of the Expansions has exceeded expectations.
Also, The Sims 4 is still the second best selling game on Origin only behind Star Wars. Even the new Plants VS Zombies can't overtake it and it's an Origin exclusive. It's doing really well.
Also, Origin has a lot of games from other companies outside EA now, like Watch Dogs, The Witcher 3 and many more. The Sims 4's still selling better.
Sims 4 is on top of Origin's best selling because there is nothing on Origin to begin with. Going through some of the list; Battlefront flopped, Plants vs Zombies GW2 is a joke, Fifa16 is console-preferred by its fanbase, BF4 is old, nobody likes BF4's spinoffs, etc. And why would anyone go through Origin to get third party games, when Amazon, Steam, etc. are just flat out better retailers to deal with?
Sims 4 is still riding on the very high prestige set by TS3.
EDIT: And, as I recall, you like to justify TS4's "popularity" with Amazon charts.
It's nowhere to be found. It's pretty far down the list, an expansion is outselling it, and TS3 is outselling it as well.
Amazon's list doesn't prove anything else than that people now buy TS4 through Origin and not as a physical copy from Amazon. So we still don't know the relevant sales numbers.
Amazon is an indicator of some trends regardless of the Origin platform sales. Putting that aside, it looks like I will not get my answer to the questions on this thread.
I haven't bought any thing new for the Sims 4 since well I can't remember. I bought a couple of things early last year and then decided to spend my money on other games. I haven't been interested in buying any of the new stuff for Sims 4 and rarely if ever start the game up even to keep it patched.
The gameplay to me is.. meh. It doesn't hold my attention like the previous versions or other games have recently. I find I am bored after an hour or two and turn it off. That is my personal opinion. Those of you that love this version, have fun. Enjoy. But it is not my cup of tea and I'll go find something else to play or spend my money on.
Second Star to the Right and Straight on 'til Morning.
Comments
Apparently the Gurus are all working weekends and late nights at the moment (just check Twitter) ... apparently they all read the forums and see what we are saying, and yet I do not feel like we are seeing the results at all. (Yet?)
Everything they DO release seems shallow and light not just on the gameplay side, but on the stuff side as well! Stuff packs have very little in them - do you remember how many clothes we got in TS2 H&M clothing stuff? How much there was in Teen Style Stuff? Ikea Stuff? It seems like we're getting less and less every time - let alone that the content being released is not addressing the requests on the forums.
Shallow gameplay (i.e. questing, unlocking, and gameplay without actual real consequence, no chance of failure, no personality, and all the other stuff simmers are mentioning) and endless party life have been the legacy of TS4 so far. I'm not sure there will be enough for TS5 off the back of that. But I suppose we *still* just have to wait and see
Edit - Imagine the hullabaloo on the forums if they released just a single concept render of a toddler.... *sighs wistfully*
I want to read that thread.
Edit: One of them was http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/833375/ask-a-guru-tuesday-may-19-11am-noon-pst-closed
They apparently considered an online game named Olympos earlier. But why did they change their mind? My guess would be that downloadable stuff and stuff packs had shown so amazingly good sales numbers that EA wanted that even more for the Sims 4. But such things don't work nearly as well in an online game where everything has to be coordinated much more between a huge number of players. So maybe this was the reason why EA decided that the Sims 4 should be an offline game with even more focus on stuff and stuff packs and less focus on gameplay than the previous games.
My guess about the Sims 5 is different because I believe that it will be a bigger 64 bit game with a bigger (more or less open) world. It could be an online game. But I would think that it is at least equal likely that it still will be an offline game because the number of expansions and possible downloads will still be a little hard to implement in an online game.
Same
Or maybe it's that Sim City 2013 bombed really badly because they messed up their online function by forcing it on every player and then tried to claim offline play was 'impossible' until modders showed that was entirely inaccurate and people lost trust in what Maxis was saying causing issues with the long term effects from such a poor start.
It's quite likely they saw that if forcing SC2013 customers to be online was not working-and in fact causing more trouble than they had realised that it was likely the sims customers would react in a similar fashion. They then had to repurpose what they already made for the online only game in a rush and that's why they couldn't get it done in time. Clearly something huge happened to prevent the team from finishing the base in time for release.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Nice try, but Get Together and Get To Work are still selling a lot more than major games on Origin.
Of course Get Together was on sale within a week. It was released two weeks before Christmas. Most games go on sale during Christmas. Star Wars went on sale (and still is on sale), and it had already sold millions. Companies won't put games that haven't earned back the investment on sale so quick, because if it's not selling well they need to make the money back. Going on sale only works once a fair time period has passed, and it's established that the main audience has stopped buying. A company putting their game on sale within a week shows confidence they'll make back the investment.
If EA were scared it wasn't going to sell, they would have kept it at full price during Christmas rush.
EA have already said The Sims 4's been doing really well, and the strength of the Expansions has exceeded expectations.
Also, The Sims 4 is still the second best selling game on Origin only behind Star Wars. Even the new Plants VS Zombies can't overtake it and it's an Origin exclusive. It's doing really well.
Also, Origin has a lot of games from other companies outside EA now, like Watch Dogs, The Witcher 3 and many more. The Sims 4's still selling better.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
1. Traditional sales which are about permanently lowering the prices for older products which don't sell much anymore. This is the only way to still sell them because everybody who were willing to pay the full original price have already bought the product/game.
2. The new form of sales where products (such as games, books, movies etc.) have lower prices only for very short limited periods. This is done because some people always seem to become tempted when they see something which can be bought for a reduced price. But it is most favorably done in periods where normal customers only buy very little because of course the companies prefer to sell their products for their full price.
Apparently EA only use the limited periods sales. But as explained this indicates nothing about the sales numbers. Only if the lower prices become permanent they would indicate that the games probably don't sell very well anymore.
But you seem to have this (largely unfounded IMO) unshakable faith that EA and their marketing department would never, ever, ever, make a mistake. Ever. Which I find quite interesting since it's certainly possible to list a number of games (including SC '13) which did not last long and faced innumerable criticisms from gamers and reviewers alike.
What makes no sense to me is your insistence that EA executives always make wise and unassailable decisions. I highly doubt that this is the case.
Where are we going, and why am I in this hand basket?!
Exactly.
It's quite likely Maxis were trying to avoid further issues so quickly after SC2013 to try to smooth over the damage done.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Thank you!
To me, it seems they're stepping away from the pc market into the mobile one. It saddens me deeply.
My tumblr - A world of clutter and color
1. Maxis run into unforeseen trouble with the deadline because things won't work as they had planned or they realize that something must be done differently. In this case Maxis wouldn't want to ask EA for more time because then Maxis would then have to admit that the trouble was Maxis' own fault. Instead Maxis would seek a way to finish the game without having to ask EA for extra time ;and money) because otherwise EA could think that Maxis needed better planning and leadership.
2. EA realizes that making the Sims 4 as an online game could be a mistake because it gave problems with SimCity. Therefore EA orders Maxis to drop the work on Olympus and instead make TS4 as an offline game. In this case Maxis would of course ask for extra time as compensation for the wasted work on Olympus. If EA denied that then EA would in my opinion have a completely incompetent and foolish board in direct contradiction with EA's overwhelming economical success in the about 40 yrs EA has existed.
I consider point 2 to be much more unlikely than point 1 for obvious reasons because I can't see the highly educated and experienced leaders in EA to be foolish enough to naively do such a huge and obvious mistake. But sure EA can do mistakes - just probably not so obvious ones as dropping a lot of done work and naively order an important game finished in no time anyway.
o.O
The basegame is much more important because small sales numbers for the basegame will obviously also affect the sales numbers for every single one of the huge number of expansions very badly. Therefore it would be extremely foolish for EA to attempt to rush the basegame through in no time.
We don't know exactly how the negotiations between Maxis and EA works. But I imagine something like the following:
1. EA tells Maxis to start developing the Sims 4 basegame. EA also tells Maxis that EA wants a new game and not just a modified version of TS3. EA wants the minimum requirements to be low so very few young teens will need a new expensive computer to run it and EA wants Maxis to make propositions for the main new content. Maybe EA also wants Maxis to investigate the possibilities for making TS4 as an online game.
2. Maxis start working and negotiations with EA results in an agreement about the new emotions, the new multitasking and the new build mode. Maxis also has investigated the option about making the game as an online game (and maybe other options too). But this is dropped again after some time.
3. Maxis is given suitable time and resources to make the game and now works more directly against the final goal.
4. Things don't work out too well for the development. The new emotions are less impressive than Maxis had wanted and the multitasking is technically very difficult and also less impressive than Maxis had hoped. The new build mode works better but also takes long time to develop. So Maxis persuades EA to get the release date postponed by a few months.
5. Maxis is still in time trouble even though the deadline was postponed and EA won't like another postponement. Negotiations between EA and Maxis results in omission of toddlers and to delay a few other things to upcoming free patches. EA prefers this compared to another delay for the release date.
Sims 4 is on top of Origin's best selling because there is nothing on Origin to begin with. Going through some of the list; Battlefront flopped, Plants vs Zombies GW2 is a joke, Fifa16 is console-preferred by its fanbase, BF4 is old, nobody likes BF4's spinoffs, etc. And why would anyone go through Origin to get third party games, when Amazon, Steam, etc. are just flat out better retailers to deal with?
Sims 4 is still riding on the very high prestige set by TS3.
EDIT: And, as I recall, you like to justify TS4's "popularity" with Amazon charts.
It's nowhere to be found. It's pretty far down the list, an expansion is outselling it, and TS3 is outselling it as well.
The gameplay to me is.. meh. It doesn't hold my attention like the previous versions or other games have recently. I find I am bored after an hour or two and turn it off. That is my personal opinion. Those of you that love this version, have fun. Enjoy. But it is not my cup of tea and I'll go find something else to play or spend my money on.