I wouldn't mind a bunch of unfriendly, grumpy, unsympathic gurus if they'd give me a great game. I don't need them to be nice, I need them to give me a game I love playing.
I don't know, I guess it different for me. I just know I didn't like the comment, "If the Sims 4 doesn't sell well there will be no Sims 5." I don't like having the Sims games threatened in order to gain sales. I rather have both nice environment and great games too.
Me neither, but that was because it felt like blackmail in a way. "If you don't buy, we will never give you what you want anymore". And since it's the product I'm interested in, that comment bothered me. I think by the way he didn't mean it as literally as that.
I just don't like blackmail comment. I know it was said in the heat of the moment. I rather read nice comments about being a valued customer than being treated like just a piggy bank to be smashed. During the Sims 2 development, the Maxoids seemed really passionate while making their game. I wasn't even on forums and I noticed it just from interviews. I'd like to see that again. Right now it feels like it doesn't matter what content is in the Sims as long as short-term sales are met. Like both things you mentioned haven't been met. It feels cold and unsympathetic. I want to see Gurus talk about how much they care about the games they create. It sometimes comes off as that the whole development cycle since its initial release it is a struggle to make the Sims 4 for them. Like it is just another paycheck rather than their passion in life to make games. The Sims 4 is just badly missing passion and feels like the beginning of the movie Pleasantville which I watched again tonight. All the color removed and restrictive to being so politically correct. I want the color and fun back again. I want the passion. The life needs to brought back into the Sims. I don't need a sitcom game in which all the Sims are happy. I need a life simulation game full of passion and drama and ups and downs and creativity. It needs color and life and imperfection. I don't know if Maxis can make the Sims 4 Pleasantville colorful again, but I hope they at least do everything they can to at least try.
Let me put it this way: I'd rather have a guru stating this but by now being brainstorming about the sequel, than a guru smiling at me, saying "I hear you, we're listening" but not even considering a Sims 5 (that is a perfect combination of 2 and 3 and some of the good aspects of 4).
I am quite sure that the problem isn't the gurus but EA and EA's attitude to their games.
When the Sims 2 was developed it was released on discs and the developers had an easy job renewing the Sims 1 which was the only earlier games. This meant that the developers almost could make the game and it's expansions just like they wanted. EA's only demands probably was that the game should be targeted at young teens without much experience in gaming and therefore have a low difficulty degree. It also should require too strong computers and become T rated by the ESRB.
This has become much harder today because we now have so many earlier Sims games and EA's demands seem to have become even harder to fulfill. We don't know them in all details. But they seems to be:
1. Each new basegame must be very different from the previous games and always be built on a new engine.
2. Each new basegame must have something new and different which EA can use in their sales campaign. (This must probably also be negotiated and accepted both by the developers and EA before the real development starts.)
3. The minimum requirements must be even (relatively) lower than earlier because too many had problems with this and EA's support was not always able to solve those problems.
4. The development time and the required resources for the development can't be higher than earlier.
5. The developers can't talk in public about not released games without explicit permissions which EA now rarely gives because the games now mainly are sold as digital downloads from Origin.
So I am quite sure that there just wasn't enough time to develop TS4 because the agreement with EA was that the game should have multitasking, new emotions and a new and easier to use CAS and buildmode. To do this and keep the minimum requirements so very low like I am quite sure that EA wanted - must have been a hard job for the developers.
I wouldn't mind a bunch of unfriendly, grumpy, unsympathic gurus if they'd give me a great game. I don't need them to be nice, I need them to give me a game I love playing.
I don't know, I guess it different for me. I just know I didn't like the comment, "If the Sims 4 doesn't sell well there will be no Sims 5." I don't like having the Sims games threatened in order to gain sales. I rather have both nice environment and great games too.
Me neither, but that was because it felt like blackmail in a way. "If you don't buy, we will never give you what you want anymore". And since it's the product I'm interested in, that comment bothered me. I think by the way he didn't mean it as literally as that.
I just don't like blackmail comment. I know it was said in the heat of the moment. I rather read nice comments about being a valued customer than being treated like just a piggy bank to be smashed. During the Sims 2 development, the Maxoids seemed really passionate while making their game. I wasn't even on forums and I noticed it just from interviews. I'd like to see that again. Right now it feels like it doesn't matter what content is in the Sims as long as short-term sales are met. Like both things you mentioned haven't been met. It feels cold and unsympathetic. I want to see Gurus talk about how much they care about the games they create. It sometimes comes off as that the whole development cycle since its initial release it is a struggle to make the Sims 4 for them. Like it is just another paycheck rather than their passion in life to make games. The Sims 4 is just badly missing passion and feels like the beginning of the movie Pleasantville which I watched again tonight. All the color removed and restrictive to being so politically correct. I want the color and fun back again. I want the passion. The life needs to brought back into the Sims. I don't need a sitcom game in which all the Sims are happy. I need a life simulation game full of passion and drama and ups and downs and creativity. It needs color and life and imperfection. I don't know if Maxis can make the Sims 4 Pleasantville colorful again, but I hope they at least do everything they can to at least try.
Let me put it this way: I'd rather have a guru stating this but by now being brainstorming about the sequel, than a guru smiling at me, saying "I hear you, we're listening" but not even considering a Sims 5 (that is a perfect combination of 2 and 3 and some of the good aspects of 4).
I am quite sure that the problem isn't the gurus but EA and EA's attitude to their games.
When the Sims 2 was developed it was released on discs and the developers had an easy job renewing the Sims 1 which was the only earlier games. This meant that the developers almost could make the game and it's expansions just like they wanted. EA's only demands probably was that the game should be targeted at young teens without much experience in gaming and therefore have a low difficulty degree. It also should require too strong computers and become T rated by the ESRB.
This has become much harder today because we now have so many earlier Sims games and EA's demands seem to have become even harder to fulfill. We don't know them in all details. But they seems to be:
1. Each new basegame must be very different from the previous games and always be built on a new engine.
2. Each new basegame must have something new and different which EA can use in their sales campaign. (This must probably also be negotiated and accepted both by the developers and EA before the real development starts.)
3. The minimum requirements must be even (relatively) lower than earlier because too many had problems with this and EA's support was not always able to solve those problems.
4. The development time and the required resources for the development can't be higher than earlier.
5. The developers can't talk in public about not released games without explicit permissions which EA now rarely gives because the games now mainly are sold as digital downloads from Origin.
So I am quite sure that there just wasn't enough time to develop TS4 because the agreement with EA was that the game should have multitasking, new emotions and a new and easier to use CAS and buildmode. To do this and keep the minimum requirements so very low like I am quite sure that EA wanted - must have been a hard job for the developers.
Your posts are really bogged down by these assumptions. Like another member said, your opinions are often presented as facts when they aren't and its getting pretty tired. Looking forward to the next fanfic, Erpe!
I wouldn't mind a bunch of unfriendly, grumpy, unsympathic gurus if they'd give me a great game. I don't need them to be nice, I need them to give me a game I love playing.
I don't know, I guess it different for me. I just know I didn't like the comment, "If the Sims 4 doesn't sell well there will be no Sims 5." I don't like having the Sims games threatened in order to gain sales. I rather have both nice environment and great games too.
Me neither, but that was because it felt like blackmail in a way. "If you don't buy, we will never give you what you want anymore". And since it's the product I'm interested in, that comment bothered me. I think by the way he didn't mean it as literally as that.
I just don't like blackmail comment. I know it was said in the heat of the moment. I rather read nice comments about being a valued customer than being treated like just a piggy bank to be smashed. During the Sims 2 development, the Maxoids seemed really passionate while making their game. I wasn't even on forums and I noticed it just from interviews. I'd like to see that again. Right now it feels like it doesn't matter what content is in the Sims as long as short-term sales are met. Like both things you mentioned haven't been met. It feels cold and unsympathetic. I want to see Gurus talk about how much they care about the games they create. It sometimes comes off as that the whole development cycle since its initial release it is a struggle to make the Sims 4 for them. Like it is just another paycheck rather than their passion in life to make games. The Sims 4 is just badly missing passion and feels like the beginning of the movie Pleasantville which I watched again tonight. All the color removed and restrictive to being so politically correct. I want the color and fun back again. I want the passion. The life needs to brought back into the Sims. I don't need a sitcom game in which all the Sims are happy. I need a life simulation game full of passion and drama and ups and downs and creativity. It needs color and life and imperfection. I don't know if Maxis can make the Sims 4 Pleasantville colorful again, but I hope they at least do everything they can to at least try.
Let me put it this way: I'd rather have a guru stating this but by now being brainstorming about the sequel, than a guru smiling at me, saying "I hear you, we're listening" but not even considering a Sims 5 (that is a perfect combination of 2 and 3 and some of the good aspects of 4).
I am quite sure that the problem isn't the gurus but EA and EA's attitude to their games.
When the Sims 2 was developed it was released on discs and the developers had an easy job renewing the Sims 1 which was the only earlier games. This meant that the developers almost could make the game and it's expansions just like they wanted. EA's only demands probably was that the game should be targeted at young teens without much experience in gaming and therefore have a low difficulty degree. It also should require too strong computers and become T rated by the ESRB.
This has become much harder today because we now have so many earlier Sims games and EA's demands seem to have become even harder to fulfill. We don't know them in all details. But they seems to be:
1. Each new basegame must be very different from the previous games and always be built on a new engine.
2. Each new basegame must have something new and different which EA can use in their sales campaign. (This must probably also be negotiated and accepted both by the developers and EA before the real development starts.)
3. The minimum requirements must be even (relatively) lower than earlier because too many had problems with this and EA's support was not always able to solve those problems.
4. The development time and the required resources for the development can't be higher than earlier.
5. The developers can't talk in public about not released games without explicit permissions which EA now rarely gives because the games now mainly are sold as digital downloads from Origin.
So I am quite sure that there just wasn't enough time to develop TS4 because the agreement with EA was that the game should have multitasking, new emotions and a new and easier to use CAS and buildmode. To do this and keep the minimum requirements so very low like I am quite sure that EA wanted - must have been a hard job for the developers.
Your posts are really bogged down by these assumptions. Like another member said, your opinions are often presented as facts when they aren't and its getting pretty tired. Looking forward to the next fanfic, Erpe!
It's a forum, virtually anything one posts is opinionated. I don't see why people need to write IMO every other sentence.
I wouldn't mind a bunch of unfriendly, grumpy, unsympathic gurus if they'd give me a great game. I don't need them to be nice, I need them to give me a game I love playing.
I don't know, I guess it different for me. I just know I didn't like the comment, "If the Sims 4 doesn't sell well there will be no Sims 5." I don't like having the Sims games threatened in order to gain sales. I rather have both nice environment and great games too.
Me neither, but that was because it felt like blackmail in a way. "If you don't buy, we will never give you what you want anymore". And since it's the product I'm interested in, that comment bothered me. I think by the way he didn't mean it as literally as that.
I just don't like blackmail comment. I know it was said in the heat of the moment. I rather read nice comments about being a valued customer than being treated like just a piggy bank to be smashed. During the Sims 2 development, the Maxoids seemed really passionate while making their game. I wasn't even on forums and I noticed it just from interviews. I'd like to see that again. Right now it feels like it doesn't matter what content is in the Sims as long as short-term sales are met. Like both things you mentioned haven't been met. It feels cold and unsympathetic. I want to see Gurus talk about how much they care about the games they create. It sometimes comes off as that the whole development cycle since its initial release it is a struggle to make the Sims 4 for them. Like it is just another paycheck rather than their passion in life to make games. The Sims 4 is just badly missing passion and feels like the beginning of the movie Pleasantville which I watched again tonight. All the color removed and restrictive to being so politically correct. I want the color and fun back again. I want the passion. The life needs to brought back into the Sims. I don't need a sitcom game in which all the Sims are happy. I need a life simulation game full of passion and drama and ups and downs and creativity. It needs color and life and imperfection. I don't know if Maxis can make the Sims 4 Pleasantville colorful again, but I hope they at least do everything they can to at least try.
Let me put it this way: I'd rather have a guru stating this but by now being brainstorming about the sequel, than a guru smiling at me, saying "I hear you, we're listening" but not even considering a Sims 5 (that is a perfect combination of 2 and 3 and some of the good aspects of 4).
I am quite sure that the problem isn't the gurus but EA and EA's attitude to their games.
When the Sims 2 was developed it was released on discs and the developers had an easy job renewing the Sims 1 which was the only earlier games. This meant that the developers almost could make the game and it's expansions just like they wanted. EA's only demands probably was that the game should be targeted at young teens without much experience in gaming and therefore have a low difficulty degree. It also should require too strong computers and become T rated by the ESRB.
This has become much harder today because we now have so many earlier Sims games and EA's demands seem to have become even harder to fulfill. We don't know them in all details. But they seems to be:
1. Each new basegame must be very different from the previous games and always be built on a new engine.
2. Each new basegame must have something new and different which EA can use in their sales campaign. (This must probably also be negotiated and accepted both by the developers and EA before the real development starts.)
3. The minimum requirements must be even (relatively) lower than earlier because too many had problems with this and EA's support was not always able to solve those problems.
4. The development time and the required resources for the development can't be higher than earlier.
5. The developers can't talk in public about not released games without explicit permissions which EA now rarely gives because the games now mainly are sold as digital downloads from Origin.
So I am quite sure that there just wasn't enough time to develop TS4 because the agreement with EA was that the game should have multitasking, new emotions and a new and easier to use CAS and buildmode. To do this and keep the minimum requirements so very low like I am quite sure that EA wanted - must have been a hard job for the developers.
Your posts are really bogged down by these assumptions. Like another member said, your opinions are often presented as facts when they aren't and its getting pretty tired. Looking forward to the next fanfic, Erpe!
They are not facts. But they are based upon my inside knowledge about how employees and inside politics usually works in other companies. I also know how programmers and designers elsewhere usually thinks. You are welcome to disagree if you want just because there are no "mathematical" proofs that the designers in Maxis thinks like similar employees in other companies do. But usually in such big companies there are rules like the following:
1. Inside negotiations between bosses and employees or between different parts of the company are confidential and can't be discussed in public.
2. Employees are loyal to the company even when aren't very satisfied with the decisions.
3. Employees always want to do their job as well as possible and to satisfy customers as much as possible within the restrictions which they work under.
So when I see the developers in Maxis ignore us then I am quite sure that it is caused by the restrictions which they work under because this is just normal human behavior for such employees in a big company.
So you are welcome to believe that the developers instead ignore us because they are evil or don't care. This is just something that wouldn't fit at all with my experiences from many other similar cases. So therefore I can't believe it myself.
I wouldn't mind a bunch of unfriendly, grumpy, unsympathic gurus if they'd give me a great game. I don't need them to be nice, I need them to give me a game I love playing.
I don't know, I guess it different for me. I just know I didn't like the comment, "If the Sims 4 doesn't sell well there will be no Sims 5." I don't like having the Sims games threatened in order to gain sales. I rather have both nice environment and great games too.
Me neither, but that was because it felt like blackmail in a way. "If you don't buy, we will never give you what you want anymore". And since it's the product I'm interested in, that comment bothered me. I think by the way he didn't mean it as literally as that.
I just don't like blackmail comment. I know it was said in the heat of the moment. I rather read nice comments about being a valued customer than being treated like just a piggy bank to be smashed. During the Sims 2 development, the Maxoids seemed really passionate while making their game. I wasn't even on forums and I noticed it just from interviews. I'd like to see that again. Right now it feels like it doesn't matter what content is in the Sims as long as short-term sales are met. Like both things you mentioned haven't been met. It feels cold and unsympathetic. I want to see Gurus talk about how much they care about the games they create. It sometimes comes off as that the whole development cycle since its initial release it is a struggle to make the Sims 4 for them. Like it is just another paycheck rather than their passion in life to make games. The Sims 4 is just badly missing passion and feels like the beginning of the movie Pleasantville which I watched again tonight. All the color removed and restrictive to being so politically correct. I want the color and fun back again. I want the passion. The life needs to brought back into the Sims. I don't need a sitcom game in which all the Sims are happy. I need a life simulation game full of passion and drama and ups and downs and creativity. It needs color and life and imperfection. I don't know if Maxis can make the Sims 4 Pleasantville colorful again, but I hope they at least do everything they can to at least try.
Let me put it this way: I'd rather have a guru stating this but by now being brainstorming about the sequel, than a guru smiling at me, saying "I hear you, we're listening" but not even considering a Sims 5 (that is a perfect combination of 2 and 3 and some of the good aspects of 4).
I am quite sure that the problem isn't the gurus but EA and EA's attitude to their games.
When the Sims 2 was developed it was released on discs and the developers had an easy job renewing the Sims 1 which was the only earlier games. This meant that the developers almost could make the game and it's expansions just like they wanted. EA's only demands probably was that the game should be targeted at young teens without much experience in gaming and therefore have a low difficulty degree. It also should require too strong computers and become T rated by the ESRB.
This has become much harder today because we now have so many earlier Sims games and EA's demands seem to have become even harder to fulfill. We don't know them in all details. But they seems to be:
1. Each new basegame must be very different from the previous games and always be built on a new engine.
2. Each new basegame must have something new and different which EA can use in their sales campaign. (This must probably also be negotiated and accepted both by the developers and EA before the real development starts.)
3. The minimum requirements must be even (relatively) lower than earlier because too many had problems with this and EA's support was not always able to solve those problems.
4. The development time and the required resources for the development can't be higher than earlier.
5. The developers can't talk in public about not released games without explicit permissions which EA now rarely gives because the games now mainly are sold as digital downloads from Origin.
So I am quite sure that there just wasn't enough time to develop TS4 because the agreement with EA was that the game should have multitasking, new emotions and a new and easier to use CAS and buildmode. To do this and keep the minimum requirements so very low like I am quite sure that EA wanted - must have been a hard job for the developers.
Your posts are really bogged down by these assumptions. Like another member said, your opinions are often presented as facts when they aren't and its getting pretty tired. Looking forward to the next fanfic, Erpe!
It's a forum, virtually anything one posts is opinionated. I don't see why people need to write IMO every other sentence.
Opinions depend on the individual, but facts are facts and its that simple. I don't care who it is that does this, but a list of weak and baseless arguments, repeating said arguments over and over again as if it were true can become irksome. Its annoying and ultimately doesn't add much of anything to the topic if we're largely going on speculation.
I wouldn't mind a bunch of unfriendly, grumpy, unsympathic gurus if they'd give me a great game. I don't need them to be nice, I need them to give me a game I love playing.
I don't know, I guess it different for me. I just know I didn't like the comment, "If the Sims 4 doesn't sell well there will be no Sims 5." I don't like having the Sims games threatened in order to gain sales. I rather have both nice environment and great games too.
Me neither, but that was because it felt like blackmail in a way. "If you don't buy, we will never give you what you want anymore". And since it's the product I'm interested in, that comment bothered me. I think by the way he didn't mean it as literally as that.
I just don't like blackmail comment. I know it was said in the heat of the moment. I rather read nice comments about being a valued customer than being treated like just a piggy bank to be smashed. During the Sims 2 development, the Maxoids seemed really passionate while making their game. I wasn't even on forums and I noticed it just from interviews. I'd like to see that again. Right now it feels like it doesn't matter what content is in the Sims as long as short-term sales are met. Like both things you mentioned haven't been met. It feels cold and unsympathetic. I want to see Gurus talk about how much they care about the games they create. It sometimes comes off as that the whole development cycle since its initial release it is a struggle to make the Sims 4 for them. Like it is just another paycheck rather than their passion in life to make games. The Sims 4 is just badly missing passion and feels like the beginning of the movie Pleasantville which I watched again tonight. All the color removed and restrictive to being so politically correct. I want the color and fun back again. I want the passion. The life needs to brought back into the Sims. I don't need a sitcom game in which all the Sims are happy. I need a life simulation game full of passion and drama and ups and downs and creativity. It needs color and life and imperfection. I don't know if Maxis can make the Sims 4 Pleasantville colorful again, but I hope they at least do everything they can to at least try.
Let me put it this way: I'd rather have a guru stating this but by now being brainstorming about the sequel, than a guru smiling at me, saying "I hear you, we're listening" but not even considering a Sims 5 (that is a perfect combination of 2 and 3 and some of the good aspects of 4).
I am quite sure that the problem isn't the gurus but EA and EA's attitude to their games.
When the Sims 2 was developed it was released on discs and the developers had an easy job renewing the Sims 1 which was the only earlier games. This meant that the developers almost could make the game and it's expansions just like they wanted. EA's only demands probably was that the game should be targeted at young teens without much experience in gaming and therefore have a low difficulty degree. It also should require too strong computers and become T rated by the ESRB.
This has become much harder today because we now have so many earlier Sims games and EA's demands seem to have become even harder to fulfill. We don't know them in all details. But they seems to be:
1. Each new basegame must be very different from the previous games and always be built on a new engine.
2. Each new basegame must have something new and different which EA can use in their sales campaign. (This must probably also be negotiated and accepted both by the developers and EA before the real development starts.)
3. The minimum requirements must be even (relatively) lower than earlier because too many had problems with this and EA's support was not always able to solve those problems.
4. The development time and the required resources for the development can't be higher than earlier.
5. The developers can't talk in public about not released games without explicit permissions which EA now rarely gives because the games now mainly are sold as digital downloads from Origin.
So I am quite sure that there just wasn't enough time to develop TS4 because the agreement with EA was that the game should have multitasking, new emotions and a new and easier to use CAS and buildmode. To do this and keep the minimum requirements so very low like I am quite sure that EA wanted - must have been a hard job for the developers.
Your posts are really bogged down by these assumptions. Like another member said, your opinions are often presented as facts when they aren't and its getting pretty tired. Looking forward to the next fanfic, Erpe!
They are not facts. But they are based upon my inside knowledge about how employees and inside politics usually works in other companies. I also know how programmers and designers elsewhere usually thinks. You are welcome to disagree if you want just because there are no "mathematical" proofs that the designers in Maxis thinks like similar employees in other companies do. But usually in such big companies there are rules like the following:
1. Inside negotiations between bosses and employees or between different parts of the company are confidential and can't be discussed in public.
2. Employees are loyal to the company even when aren't very satisfied with the decisions.
3. Employees always want to do their job as well as possible and to satisfy customers as much as possible within the restrictions which they work under.
So when I see the developers in Maxis ignore us then I am quite sure that it is caused by the restrictions which they work under because this is just normal human behavior for such employees in a big company.
So you are welcome to believe that the developers instead ignore us because they are evil or don't care. This is just something that wouldn't fit at all with my experiences from many other similar cases. So therefore I can't believe it myself.
See, THIS is much better explained than the last post because reasoning has been given about the "why" behind your thoughts, whereas the previous post was lacking it.
And to the bolded part, I obviously don't think that EA is the devil and that the gurus are mustache twirling as they read the Feedback section because that's not how the world operates.
I wouldn't mind a bunch of unfriendly, grumpy, unsympathic gurus if they'd give me a great game. I don't need them to be nice, I need them to give me a game I love playing.
I don't know, I guess it different for me. I just know I didn't like the comment, "If the Sims 4 doesn't sell well there will be no Sims 5." I don't like having the Sims games threatened in order to gain sales. I rather have both nice environment and great games too.
Me neither, but that was because it felt like blackmail in a way. "If you don't buy, we will never give you what you want anymore". And since it's the product I'm interested in, that comment bothered me. I think by the way he didn't mean it as literally as that.
I just don't like blackmail comment. I know it was said in the heat of the moment. I rather read nice comments about being a valued customer than being treated like just a piggy bank to be smashed. During the Sims 2 development, the Maxoids seemed really passionate while making their game. I wasn't even on forums and I noticed it just from interviews. I'd like to see that again. Right now it feels like it doesn't matter what content is in the Sims as long as short-term sales are met. Like both things you mentioned haven't been met. It feels cold and unsympathetic. I want to see Gurus talk about how much they care about the games they create. It sometimes comes off as that the whole development cycle since its initial release it is a struggle to make the Sims 4 for them. Like it is just another paycheck rather than their passion in life to make games. The Sims 4 is just badly missing passion and feels like the beginning of the movie Pleasantville which I watched again tonight. All the color removed and restrictive to being so politically correct. I want the color and fun back again. I want the passion. The life needs to brought back into the Sims. I don't need a sitcom game in which all the Sims are happy. I need a life simulation game full of passion and drama and ups and downs and creativity. It needs color and life and imperfection. I don't know if Maxis can make the Sims 4 Pleasantville colorful again, but I hope they at least do everything they can to at least try.
Let me put it this way: I'd rather have a guru stating this but by now being brainstorming about the sequel, than a guru smiling at me, saying "I hear you, we're listening" but not even considering a Sims 5 (that is a perfect combination of 2 and 3 and some of the good aspects of 4).
I am quite sure that the problem isn't the gurus but EA and EA's attitude to their games.
When the Sims 2 was developed it was released on discs and the developers had an easy job renewing the Sims 1 which was the only earlier games. This meant that the developers almost could make the game and it's expansions just like they wanted. EA's only demands probably was that the game should be targeted at young teens without much experience in gaming and therefore have a low difficulty degree. It also should require too strong computers and become T rated by the ESRB.
This has become much harder today because we now have so many earlier Sims games and EA's demands seem to have become even harder to fulfill. We don't know them in all details. But they seems to be:
1. Each new basegame must be very different from the previous games and always be built on a new engine.
2. Each new basegame must have something new and different which EA can use in their sales campaign. (This must probably also be negotiated and accepted both by the developers and EA before the real development starts.)
3. The minimum requirements must be even (relatively) lower than earlier because too many had problems with this and EA's support was not always able to solve those problems.
4. The development time and the required resources for the development can't be higher than earlier.
5. The developers can't talk in public about not released games without explicit permissions which EA now rarely gives because the games now mainly are sold as digital downloads from Origin.
So I am quite sure that there just wasn't enough time to develop TS4 because the agreement with EA was that the game should have multitasking, new emotions and a new and easier to use CAS and buildmode. To do this and keep the minimum requirements so very low like I am quite sure that EA wanted - must have been a hard job for the developers.
Your posts are really bogged down by these assumptions. Like another member said, your opinions are often presented as facts when they aren't and its getting pretty tired. Looking forward to the next fanfic, Erpe!
They are not facts. But they are based upon my inside knowledge about how employees and inside politics usually works in other companies. I also know how programmers and designers elsewhere usually thinks. You are welcome to disagree if you want just because there are no "mathematical" proofs that the designers in Maxis thinks like similar employees in other companies do. But usually in such big companies there are rules like the following:
1. Inside negotiations between bosses and employees or between different parts of the company are confidential and can't be discussed in public.
2. Employees are loyal to the company even when aren't very satisfied with the decisions.
3. Employees always want to do their job as well as possible and to satisfy customers as much as possible within the restrictions which they work under.
So when I see the developers in Maxis ignore us then I am quite sure that it is caused by the restrictions which they work under because this is just normal human behavior for such employees in a big company.
So you are welcome to believe that the developers instead ignore us because they are evil or don't care. This is just something that wouldn't fit at all with my experiences from many other similar cases. So therefore I can't believe it myself.
See, THIS is much better explained than the last post because reasoning has been given about the "why" behind your thoughts, whereas the previous post was lacking it.
And to the bolded part, I obviously don't think that EA is the devil and that the gurus are mustache twirling as they read the Feedback section because that's not how the world operates.
No. But we won't get any answers from the gurus because as I wrote everything points in the direction that all their considerations about the matter have been discussed internally in places where they have signed confidentially agreements never to refer from to the public. So we can either believe that all their controversial decisions about designing the Sims 4 were taken without any real considerations at all (because we won't ever be told any different) - or we can attempt to compare several more likely explanations and then see if some of those possible explanations are more likely to actually have been true.
So let us as an example take the fact that the open world was removed from the Sims 4. Which of the following possible scenarios would you think is the most likely:
1. The leading developer didn't care and just ordered it removed. (I don't believe that at all because such a developer could be fired if/when EA found out and maybe didn't like the decision!)
2. EA told the leading developer that the minimum requirements had to be quite low because too many still had problems with the minimum requirements for the Sims 3. The developer then told EA that it would be quite difficult to obtain if the open world still should be in the game - and especially if EA also wanted the game to be more advanced in other areas. Negotiations then resulted in EA preferring to let the open world go to make the other options possible and to get more customers by giving the Sims 4 low minimum requirements.
I believe in point 2. Do you believe in point 1 or do you have another likely explanation?
@Erpe are you forgetting the changing horses in the middle of the stream scenario? (Dear readers, bear in mind the following is based in fact but certain details may or may not be represented 100% accurately and no names will be mentioned.) We can speculate all we want but the fact remains, this started out as Olympus, a multi-player online game, and was changed a considerable way through development. The peasants revolted and mid-stream it was changed. By that time there weren't enough resources (time, money, man-power, whatever) left to put together a proper sequel. The base of the small neighborhoods, adult Sims, emotions, multi-tasking, walk styles, extra spiffy CAS, etc. were already there. These were things developed especially for a multi-player game that would be more about socializing and reaching goals than anything else. I believe this Olympus never started out having babies, children, teens or elders. If from the outset the game had been designed as a true sequel, not an online social event (remember the one guy at EA who was pushing so hard for mobile--I won't type his name here but he's currently CEO of another online game company), I feel certain the end result would have been more in line with what we had in the previous two sequels.
On the original subject of telemetry, any stats collected are useless without the reason behind those numbers. I'll use a popular video streaming service as an example. Everything I watch I rate. Anything that enters my recommendations that I find objectionable I rate with one star. (I used to click the 'Not Interested' button but they removed that some months back so the only way to get it out of my recommendations is to rate it down.) In the second group of videos that I consistently rate with one star are a number of programs with subject matter that interests me that I would watch if not for objectionable content. However, the algorithm sees my low ratings as that I am not interested in any of that type of content and keeps suggesting more and more content that I'm not interested in because although it knows how I rated certain programs it doesn't know why I rated them as such.
Here's another example (purely fictional). For lunch I go to a food court near where I work. I have a favorite spot and most of the time I get lunch there. When I buy lunch I use a payment app on my smartphone to pay. Data miners collect the information on which stalls in the food court I am using. One day out of the blue I go to a different stall to buy lunch and for the next three days I buy lunch at this other stall. Telemetry can collect my actions but telemetry can only make assumptions as to why I started eating lunch at a different place. Did I get tired of the first one? Am I trying to save a few dollars and the second stall serves cheaper food? Did the first one run out of a favorite ingredient and won't have a new shipment in for the next several days? Did I end up in a tiff with an employee and needed to give myself time to cool off before going back? I mean you just never know what is behind a decision and this is exactly why telemetry shouldn't be used to decide which features should be left out of a video game.
Thanks to AdBlock: currently blocking 184 annoying animated siggy .gifs
@BSIRegina@Erpe has said he/she (sorry I don't know) doesn't believe EA would make a mistake like Olympus which would have a big enough impact on the game from the last time we were discussing this.
I agree with you completely. Data is no good without the study behind why. It is not a case of just seeing the data and being able to take it at face value-you need to do your research, work out why it says what it does. However with comments from RF saying that the players say one thing and do another in game it suggests that there isn't a lot of research going into the why people are telling them what they want to see then doing another. A big answer would be insufficient features to be able to play as people wish-like @Writin_Reg who likes playing families but until toddlers doesn't want to play that way. I know she won't be the only one. So her data may say that she doesn't play with families much-but that is not even half of the story!
@BSIRegina@Erpe has said he/she (sorry I don't know) doesn't believe EA would make a mistake like Olympus which would have a big enough impact on the game from the last time we were discussing this.
I agree with you completely. Data is no good without the study behind why. It is not a case of just seeing the data and being able to take it at face value-you need to do your research, work out why it says what it does. However with comments from RF saying that the players say one thing and do another in game it suggests that there isn't a lot of research going into the why people are telling them what they want to see then doing another. A big answer would be insufficient features to be able to play as people wish-like @Writin_Reg who likes playing families but until toddlers doesn't want to play that way. I know she won't be the only one. So her data may say that she doesn't play with families much-but that is not even half of the story!
Everyone, including a large company like EA, can make a decision that ultimately can be not such a good one and I know they didn't intentionally create a bad game. The fellow I mentioned in my above post (his initials are F.G.) believes strongly in mobile being the future of computing. I know in some regards he is right but I think what he didn't understand was when it comes to some games people want a full-fledged experience, one they can sink their teeth into. Mobile games provide past-time entertainment, as in something a person does while they have a few minutes, very much like how I play Mahjong or Solitaire on my computer. They are something I will spend five or ten minutes on then go back to bookkeeping or housework. Sims is a hobby and most of us want to sit down to something we can sink ourselves into for a few hours. If I want to actually get something done in a day I don't dare start up my Sims game because I'll get lost in it.
Thanks to AdBlock: currently blocking 184 annoying animated siggy .gifs
@BSIRegina@Erpe has said he/she (sorry I don't know) doesn't believe EA would make a mistake like Olympus which would have a big enough impact on the game from the last time we were discussing this.
I agree with you completely. Data is no good without the study behind why. It is not a case of just seeing the data and being able to take it at face value-you need to do your research, work out why it says what it does. However with comments from RF saying that the players say one thing and do another in game it suggests that there isn't a lot of research going into the why people are telling them what they want to see then doing another. A big answer would be insufficient features to be able to play as people wish-like @Writin_Reg who likes playing families but until toddlers doesn't want to play that way. I know she won't be the only one. So her data may say that she doesn't play with families much-but that is not even half of the story!
Everyone, including a large company like EA, can make a decision that ultimately can be not such a good one and I know they didn't intentionally create a bad game. The fellow I mentioned in my above post (his initials are F.G.) believes strongly in mobile being the future of computing. I know in some regards he is right but I think what he didn't understand was when it comes to some games people want a full-fledged experience, one they can sink their teeth into. Mobile games provide past-time entertainment, as in something a person does while they have a few minutes, very much like how I play Mahjong or Solitaire on my computer. They are something I will spend five or ten minutes on then go back to bookkeeping or housework. Sims is a hobby and most of us want to sit down to something we can sink ourselves into for a few hours. If I want to actually get something done in a day I don't dare start up my Sims game because I'll get lost in it.
I agree. There is a good market for both. Unless the plan is to bring gaming to a place where we are only seeing console or mobile. That would be a huge loss in my opinion. It may be easier to create for consoles in that they have the same specs and you don't need to worry about creating across many variations in equipment etc but I have had consoles and the games I enjoy just don't have the depth I'm looking for. The sims console games and the mobile games have been nothing more than a distraction for me, and never for long at that.
I'd rather have no sims game than just console or mobile, or a game like the sims stories. I want the depth a traditional sims game offered-I want it to be a game that pushes me to upgrade computers, to push what's possible in this type of game.
If they want to cater to lower end computers then introduce 'sims stories' type games again. Give options for sims fans. It's not like we don't pay much for these games-they could make even more!
@BSIRegina@Erpe has said he/she (sorry I don't know) doesn't believe EA would make a mistake like Olympus which would have a big enough impact on the game from the last time we were discussing this.
I agree with you completely. Data is no good without the study behind why. It is not a case of just seeing the data and being able to take it at face value-you need to do your research, work out why it says what it does. However with comments from RF saying that the players say one thing and do another in game it suggests that there isn't a lot of research going into the why people are telling them what they want to see then doing another. A big answer would be insufficient features to be able to play as people wish-like @Writin_Reg who likes playing families but until toddlers doesn't want to play that way. I know she won't be the only one. So her data may say that she doesn't play with families much-but that is not even half of the story!
I don't play families in this game after seeing the baby stuck in a crib, either. I only add some Sims here and there with kids created in CAS. But they are the very least of the Sims I play. So, if they read my telemetry they may think the only Sims I want to play are YA or Adult and a few elders. They will never glean why not by numbers.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
BSIRegina Erpe has said he/she (sorry I don't know) doesn't believe EA would make a mistake like Olympus which would have a big enough impact on the game from the last time we were discussing this.
Except of course that EA has form for doing exactly that... Command & Conquer 4 was originally going to be Command & Conquer Arena, but when it was decided that there wasn't enough interest in a C&C arena game, they decided to try and make C&C 4 but EA wouldn't give them any more resources (Time, money, ETC) so they changed what was left of C&C Arena into C&C 4... Killing the series in the process.
@BSIRegina@Erpe has said he/she (sorry I don't know) doesn't believe EA would make a mistake like Olympus which would have a big enough impact on the game from the last time we were discussing this.
I agree with you completely. Data is no good without the study behind why. It is not a case of just seeing the data and being able to take it at face value-you need to do your research, work out why it says what it does. However with comments from RF saying that the players say one thing and do another in game it suggests that there isn't a lot of research going into the why people are telling them what they want to see then doing another. A big answer would be insufficient features to be able to play as people wish-like @Writin_Reg who likes playing families but until toddlers doesn't want to play that way. I know she won't be the only one. So her data may say that she doesn't play with families much-but that is not even half of the story!
Everyone, including a large company like EA, can make a decision that ultimately can be not such a good one and I know they didn't intentionally create a bad game. The fellow I mentioned in my above post (his initials are F.G.) believes strongly in mobile being the future of computing. I know in some regards he is right but I think what he didn't understand was when it comes to some games people want a full-fledged experience, one they can sink their teeth into. Mobile games provide past-time entertainment, as in something a person does while they have a few minutes, very much like how I play Mahjong or Solitaire on my computer. They are something I will spend five or ten minutes on then go back to bookkeeping or housework. Sims is a hobby and most of us want to sit down to something we can sink ourselves into for a few hours. If I want to actually get something done in a day I don't dare start up my Sims game because I'll get lost in it.
I agree. There is a good market for both. Unless the plan is to bring gaming to a place where we are only seeing console or mobile. That would be a huge loss in my opinion. It may be easier to create for consoles in that they have the same specs and you don't need to worry about creating across many variations in equipment etc but I have had consoles and the games I enjoy just don't have the depth I'm looking for. The sims console games and the mobile games have been nothing more than a distraction for me, and never for long at that.
I'd rather have no sims game than just console or mobile, or a game like the sims stories. I want the depth a traditional sims game offered-I want it to be a game that pushes me to upgrade computers, to push what's possible in this type of game.
If they want to cater to lower end computers then introduce 'sims stories' type games again. Give options for sims fans. It's not like we don't pay much for these games-they could make even more!
If we look at the latest financial report from EA which EA made public yesterday then it seems like console games dominate, mobile games are increasing and PC games decrease and already matter less. This is the opposite of what we see in this forum. But the reason probably is that a forum like this one is dominated by adults while I actually believe that young teens play more games in general than adults. I just don't think that they like to discuss their games as much as we do. So they probably only rarely visit this forum. Nevertheless I believe that EA has investigated the market very thoroughly and from such investigations knows that most games are bought by young teens. Otherwise it wouldn't make any sense for EA to make the games like EA does and target them so completely at young inexperienced teens with cheap computers and therefore also make the minimum requirements (relatively) even lower for the Sims 4 than they were for the previous Sims games.
Yes I know about Olympus. But if EA really used a full team in about two years (and therefore a huge number of millions of dollars) to make that game then EA would never have just ordered the team to start over like you seem to assume! To assume such a thing is a complete underestimation of EA's professionalism and focus on finances! So even though you want to believe otherwise this can't be a completely true explanation. It is also just normal to make experiments during the development of a game and that a lot of things made for such experiments don't make it to the final version of the game.
But you forget that EA is known for changing game series instead of just going on making almost the same game over and over like several other game companies often do. Therefore you shouldn't expect EA to ever make a new Sims game and plan it to include nearly all content from the previous game and just do it slightly different. This would also make even less sense for the Sims games because the differ from other games by having this huge number of expansions which means that EA would fear that people just waited for the new expansions before they even considered to buy the basegame for a new version of the game. This would be completely unacceptable for EA. Therefore I am sure that EA won't ever let the developers really start on a new basegame before EA has some kind of agreement on some planned main new content which EA believes that people will find interesting enough to just buy the new basegame immediately without waiting for some of the expansions. Therefore I believe that it mainly was the multitasking, the new emotions, the improved CAS and buildmode and EA's wish about the game being able to also run on young teens' cheap computers that are the main reasons for the simplifications in TS4 while Olympus had less influence than people (a little too quickly) just assumed.
I'm stepping back for a minute to answer the previous page's questions.
A). How many of the sims games do you own ?
All of Sims 2 and Sims 3. I used to have Sims 1, and Sims Medieval but I donated them in the "Big Purge" before the move.
B ). Favorite game in the series?
Sims 2
C). How much of the sims 4 content do you own?
Base game. Yes
Get to work. Yes
Get Together. Yes
Outdoor Retreat. Yes
Spa Day. Yes
Luxury Party. No
Perfect Patio. Yes
Spooky Day. No
Romantic Garden. No
Cool Kitchen. No
Movie Hangout. No
If No to some of the above, give reason.
I'm frustrated with how some of the base gameplay is still missing, the silence about that, how packs seem to be chiseled down to get us to pay more, and RPG-like features that annoy me (task lists).
The new kids stuff and Resturant packs?
Maybe. I'm waiting to see what the reviews say.
D). How often did you/or do you still pre-order....previous sims game and current.
I used to pre-order. Sims 4 burned me of that notion. I will NEVER pre-order again. I've even become very cautious with non-Sims games now because of my experience.
E). How do you see your future with Ts4?
1. I will continue to buy all content and packs for the duration of the series
2. I will buy content but be picky about what I buy
3. I will stop buying further content till they give me what I'm looking for
4. I'm over it!
I don't really know yet. I fluctuate between 2-4. There are things I like about Sims 4, but many features frustrate me. I'm also frustrated with the odd type of communication from EA/Maxis. I'm still waiting for what I consider to be missing base game content. They can keep saying that they "can't talk about future content," but my issues will remain with them until they address that problem. I'm finding myself to be more and more disappointed with them, and less willing to give them the chance they ask for in regards to Sims 4. But I'm increasingly worried that they're going to pull a SimCity 2013/SimCity Buildit, as in give up, shut it all down, and turn it into a mobile version.
@Erpe Indeed they "investigate" their players. I can't count how many times I got a survey about Sims 2 and later for Sims 3 where as soon as I answered the first question: "What is your age group?" I was locked out of answering any more questions. I was far from the only person locked out of these surveys. That is how they "investigated" the over-thirty-ish crowd of players.
Of course more younger people play video games than older. Shoot, I don't know how many teens I've encountered shocked at the fact I play video games because their parents told them video games are for children. Mind you, when my children were younger I didn't play much, usually only got in a couple of hours a week, but I was still playing video games. It was the same thing with my mom. She was the one who bought Pong for us in 1972. After I was a young adult and living on my own and didn't have access to video games at home it was nothing for me to walk into her house and find her sitting on the floor playing an Atari game and she was in her late forties at that time. If she was still alive she'd still be playing video games.
...Yes I know about Olympus. But if EA really used a full team in about two years (and therefore a huge number of millions of dollars) to make that game then EA would never have just ordered the team to start over like you seem to assume! To assume such a thing is a complete underestimation of EA's professionalism and focus on finances! So even though you want to believe otherwise this can't be a completely true explanation....
Right back atcha. Never mind what @Evil_One said in the post right above yours about "Command & Conquer Arena". See, the difference between us is that you don't believe they would ever do such a thing whereas I believe they would stoop to any level to make money but we would be hard pressed to get them to openly admit it.
And have you forgotten the fall-out of SC2013? Players said over and over again they didn't want a multi-player game then were lied to about how it required such heavy processing ability no one's computers could handle it if it was offline? It was proven within a matter of hours that all that was required to run it offline was to change (literally) a couple of lines of code. It was only after that disaster that TS4 developers finally convinced whomever that players demanding the new Sims game to be offline had been right all along.
But you forget that EA is known for changing game series instead of just going on making almost the same game over and over like several other game companies often do. Therefore you shouldn't expect EA to ever make a new Sims game and plan it to include nearly all content from the previous game and just do it slightly different.
I would never expect an exact replica from Sims game to Sims game. I do, however, expect a game that holds with most of the features of past games and adds a bunch of new ones like TS2 and TS3 delivered. Animal Crossing is a game I've played through multiple generations--four to be exact. Between the GC version and Wild World (for the DS) a lot of things were changed but the vast majority of players felt they were changes for the better. Between DS and Wii versions some new features were added, some good and some bad, but the essence of the game stayed the same and it was a lot of fun to play it on a large screen. Then between Wii and 3DS versions so many new and awesome features were added that in my opinion the 3DS version was heads and shoulders above any of its predecessors.
There's a new Pokemon game coming out next November. This is a series that closely copies its predecessors and will be my fifth generation of playing. I'll be among the first to buy three copies of it: one for me and two for my adult offspring who also enjoy playing it because although it will be very much like the old games it will still have a lot of cool new things like a brand new region, more Pokemon and whatever else the developers come up with. Just imagine if Game Freak did to Pokemon what EA's team did with Sims between three and four. It would be like going from the latest games back to the GameBoy versions.
People expected that type of transition from TS3 to TS4 but look how it turned out--even you have given up on playing it. I expect evolution in sequels, not what seems to be going back to the original and adding a handful of features to it. As my mama used to say, it's time to take off the rose-colored glasses.
Thanks to AdBlock: currently blocking 184 annoying animated siggy .gifs
@BSIRegina Our backgrounds are different and we play different games. Personally I was never in the target group for the Sims games at all. So I actually can't blame EA for targeting the games at a very different type of gamers. Actually I am probably not in the target group for any games because my background is:
1. In the 1970s I was a young male university student who studied mathematics and computer science. My hobbies in those days were tournament chess, tournament bridge and different other card games.
2. In the beginning of the 1980s I got a job as a highschool teacher and bought my first computer. My hobbies soon became computer games and I began to play all kinds of computer games - but mainly strategic games and war games.
3. I continued playing computer games. But the pupils I educated at my work became older even though the level in my teaching was the same. They now just already had finished highschool but needed especially more math before they could start their university studies.
4. The Sims 2 got me hooked because it was very different from all the games that I earlier had played. The only thing I didn't like was the low difficulty degree and also the game had a little too less complexity for me. I played it all the time for about 2.5 years.
5. I also bought the Sims 3. But I didn't play it nearly as long and I stopped playing it after the first couple of expansions.
6. I bought my first smartphone and my iPad 2. They soon became my main platforms for gaming instead of my PC because they had a huge number of different types of games. They were also more handy.
7. I bought the Sims 4 but only played it for a short time even though I bought a GP and an EP for it too.
8. I am now a recently retired teacher even though I probably could have taught math a few years more. I just don't need the money anymore because I have a good pension. So I prefer to just do my hobbies and study things that interests me
9. If we go back to the 1990s then I also taught math at a business school at university level besides my main job. Maybe my interest in business companies and their finances came from those years. But my interests in such things have grown through the years.
EA I started investigating just a few years ago because the way EA's games developed (and especially the Sims games) wondered me. You are right that companies make mistakes. We all do. But there are mistakes we never would make because we have our experiences. An example is that if we wake up in the morning without being hungry then we wouldn't anyway go on a trip all day long without caring about food thinking that we probably wouldn't become hungry before we came home in the evening because our experiences make us expect differently. In the same way there are mistakes with a big group of highly educated financial business experts never would do. But nevertheless people in this forum is way too easy to convince otherwise.
So my conclusion still is that yes EA can make mistakes. But I know more about the way such highly educated financial experts think than most people do and I just don't believe at all that EA just would let Maxis make the Sims games like they would feel fun to do. EA wants to control Maxis and make sure that Maxis only make games that are targeted at the group which EA wants them targeted at and that the games have enough new content to attract new simmers. EA also wouldn't hesitate to close Maxis down if Maxis didn't act like EA wants Maxis to do.
So my conclusion still is that yes EA can make mistakes. But I know more about the way such highly educated financial experts think than most people do and I just don't believe at all that EA just would let Maxis make the Sims games like they would feel fun to do. EA wants to control Maxis and make sure that Maxis only make games that are targeted at the group which EA wants them targeted at and that the games have enough new content to attract new simmers. EA also wouldn't hesitate to close Maxis down if Maxis didn't act like EA wants Maxis to do.
And that makes perfect sense and we are in agreement on most, if not all of that particular paragraph. It's the other things, like the plug being pulled on Olympus, that we disagree on. From your post up the page:
Yes I know about Olympus. But if EA really used a full team in about two years (and therefore a huge number of millions of dollars) to make that game then EA would never have just ordered the team to start over like you seem to assume! To assume such a thing is a complete underestimation of EA's professionalism and focus on finances!
Based on all the evidence I have read in a number of places around the internet during the past couple of years that is exactly what happened and it appears to have been a direct result of SC2013 flopping like it did. Of course their main focus is finance--that's the goal of anyone trying to make money off of a product. However, despite having spent who knows how much time and money on an online version of the game they seem to have decided it would in the long run be more profitable to rethink the direction it was originally heading. Many companies put millions of dollars into R&D of products that never even hit store shelves. Oracle has done it. Microsoft has done it. And goodness knows how many other companies have. Does this make them unprofessional and not money-driven? Hardly.
As for games I've played in the past, I am obviously not as cerebral as you and find as much, if not more, enjoyment out of being creative as I do strategizing although I do love a few "childish" games like Animal Crossing and Pokemon (and Pokemon is a game that attracts even some hardcore gamers as they EV train and battle their Pokemon in serious competitions). I've played almost every Sim game to hit the market as well as all of Sierra's City Building games, a good share of the Civ series and quite a number of others. I've never been "good" at them but I still enjoy playing them. Minecraft ranks up there with my all-time favorites, not because I like battling but because I love building and exploration. In that type of setting I am the person no one wants on their team. If it can go wrong and I touch it, it will go very wrong.
Thanks to AdBlock: currently blocking 184 annoying animated siggy .gifs
So my conclusion still is that yes EA can make mistakes. But I know more about the way such highly educated financial experts think than most people do and I just don't believe at all that EA just would let Maxis make the Sims games like they would feel fun to do. EA wants to control Maxis and make sure that Maxis only make games that are targeted at the group which EA wants them targeted at and that the games have enough new content to attract new simmers. EA also wouldn't hesitate to close Maxis down if Maxis didn't act like EA wants Maxis to do.
And that makes perfect sense and we are in agreement on most, if not all of that particular paragraph. It's the other things, like the plug being pulled on Olympus, that we disagree on. From your post up the page:
Yes I know about Olympus. But if EA really used a full team in about two years (and therefore a huge number of millions of dollars) to make that game then EA would never have just ordered the team to start over like you seem to assume! To assume such a thing is a complete underestimation of EA's professionalism and focus on finances!
Based on all the evidence I have read in a number of places around the internet during the past couple of years that is exactly what happened and it appears to have been a direct result of SC2013 flopping like it did. Of course their main focus is finance--that's the goal of anyone trying to make money off of a product. However, despite having spent who knows how much time and money on an online version of the game they seem to have decided it would in the long run be more profitable to rethink the direction it was originally heading. Many companies put millions of dollars into R&D of products that never even hit store shelves. Oracle has done it. Microsoft has done it. And goodness knows how many other companies have. Does this make them unprofessional and not money-driven? Hardly.
That wasn't my point. The thing that most people in this forum seem to assume but which I don't buy is the assumption that EA would just scratch an almost finished game and then just order Maxis to start over and finish the Sims 4 in no time so it could be realeashed on the originally scheduled date and without giving Maxis more time and more to make the Sims 4. This would be completely unprofessional for such an important game and be a kind of decision that only people who didn't care or know anything about businesses and finances (maybe) should be suspected to be able to do! If EA really ordered Maxis to start over then of course EA would have given Maxis more time and money to finish the game because even though EA's top aren't game developers they still know very well that without more time and money in such a situation neither the Sims 4 nor its many later expansions could be expected to sell very well.
As for games I've played in the past, I am obviously not as cerebral as you and find as much, if not more, enjoyment out of being creative as I do strategizing although I do love a few "childish" games like Animal Crossing and Pokemon (and Pokemon is a game that attracts even some hardcore gamers as they EV train and battle their Pokemon in serious competitions). I've played almost every Sim game to hit the market as well as all of Sierra's City Building games, a good share of the Civ series and quite a number of others. I've never been "good" at them but I still enjoy playing them. Minecraft ranks up there with my all-time favorites, not because I like battling but because I love building and exploration. In that type of setting I am the person no one wants on their team. If it can go wrong and I touch it, it will go very wrong.
We only have the Civ series in common here because I just loved Civilization 1 and played it all the time for years. It was a fantastic game until I finally found the right way to beat it and win at the highest difficulty degree regularly. I also played Civ 2. But even though it had better graphics I never got hooked on it in the same way. Several later games I also tried and also Colonization and the Call to Power games. But I have given up on those games. Colonization I still like a little. But the other games I didn't play for very long.
Pokemon I only know from cartoons which didn't make me want to try them in games. So I don't know if I would have liked them. Some rather childish games I have also liked (like SimAnt). But I haven't tried Minecraft or Animal Crossing (probably because they are too new). Sierra I remember for all their adventure games. But I am not sure that I have tried their city building games. SimCity wasn't really my game either. But I have played some of the Caesar city building games.
Anyway the Sims 4 also has a little city building and some life simulation. But not enough for me and what I mainly miss is the same kind of stories and building of relations between the sims as the Sims 2 had. If that had been the game's focus and a little more advanced than in the Sims 2 then I would still have played the game and have bought all its expansions
Comments
When the Sims 2 was developed it was released on discs and the developers had an easy job renewing the Sims 1 which was the only earlier games. This meant that the developers almost could make the game and it's expansions just like they wanted. EA's only demands probably was that the game should be targeted at young teens without much experience in gaming and therefore have a low difficulty degree. It also should require too strong computers and become T rated by the ESRB.
This has become much harder today because we now have so many earlier Sims games and EA's demands seem to have become even harder to fulfill. We don't know them in all details. But they seems to be:
1. Each new basegame must be very different from the previous games and always be built on a new engine.
2. Each new basegame must have something new and different which EA can use in their sales campaign. (This must probably also be negotiated and accepted both by the developers and EA before the real development starts.)
3. The minimum requirements must be even (relatively) lower than earlier because too many had problems with this and EA's support was not always able to solve those problems.
4. The development time and the required resources for the development can't be higher than earlier.
5. The developers can't talk in public about not released games without explicit permissions which EA now rarely gives because the games now mainly are sold as digital downloads from Origin.
So I am quite sure that there just wasn't enough time to develop TS4 because the agreement with EA was that the game should have multitasking, new emotions and a new and easier to use CAS and buildmode. To do this and keep the minimum requirements so very low like I am quite sure that EA wanted - must have been a hard job for the developers.
Your posts are really bogged down by these assumptions. Like another member said, your opinions are often presented as facts when they aren't and its getting pretty tired. Looking forward to the next fanfic, Erpe!
OUTER SENSHI PRIDE
It's a forum, virtually anything one posts is opinionated. I don't see why people need to write IMO every other sentence.
1. Inside negotiations between bosses and employees or between different parts of the company are confidential and can't be discussed in public.
2. Employees are loyal to the company even when aren't very satisfied with the decisions.
3. Employees always want to do their job as well as possible and to satisfy customers as much as possible within the restrictions which they work under.
So when I see the developers in Maxis ignore us then I am quite sure that it is caused by the restrictions which they work under because this is just normal human behavior for such employees in a big company.
So you are welcome to believe that the developers instead ignore us because they are evil or don't care. This is just something that wouldn't fit at all with my experiences from many other similar cases. So therefore I can't believe it myself.
Opinions depend on the individual, but facts are facts and its that simple. I don't care who it is that does this, but a list of weak and baseless arguments, repeating said arguments over and over again as if it were true can become irksome. Its annoying and ultimately doesn't add much of anything to the topic if we're largely going on speculation.
OUTER SENSHI PRIDE
See, THIS is much better explained than the last post because reasoning has been given about the "why" behind your thoughts, whereas the previous post was lacking it.
And to the bolded part, I obviously don't think that EA is the devil and that the gurus are mustache twirling as they read the Feedback section because that's not how the world operates.
OUTER SENSHI PRIDE
So let us as an example take the fact that the open world was removed from the Sims 4. Which of the following possible scenarios would you think is the most likely:
1. The leading developer didn't care and just ordered it removed. (I don't believe that at all because such a developer could be fired if/when EA found out and maybe didn't like the decision!)
2. EA told the leading developer that the minimum requirements had to be quite low because too many still had problems with the minimum requirements for the Sims 3. The developer then told EA that it would be quite difficult to obtain if the open world still should be in the game - and especially if EA also wanted the game to be more advanced in other areas. Negotiations then resulted in EA preferring to let the open world go to make the other options possible and to get more customers by giving the Sims 4 low minimum requirements.
I believe in point 2. Do you believe in point 1 or do you have another likely explanation?
On the original subject of telemetry, any stats collected are useless without the reason behind those numbers. I'll use a popular video streaming service as an example. Everything I watch I rate. Anything that enters my recommendations that I find objectionable I rate with one star. (I used to click the 'Not Interested' button but they removed that some months back so the only way to get it out of my recommendations is to rate it down.) In the second group of videos that I consistently rate with one star are a number of programs with subject matter that interests me that I would watch if not for objectionable content. However, the algorithm sees my low ratings as that I am not interested in any of that type of content and keeps suggesting more and more content that I'm not interested in because although it knows how I rated certain programs it doesn't know why I rated them as such.
Here's another example (purely fictional). For lunch I go to a food court near where I work. I have a favorite spot and most of the time I get lunch there. When I buy lunch I use a payment app on my smartphone to pay. Data miners collect the information on which stalls in the food court I am using. One day out of the blue I go to a different stall to buy lunch and for the next three days I buy lunch at this other stall. Telemetry can collect my actions but telemetry can only make assumptions as to why I started eating lunch at a different place. Did I get tired of the first one? Am I trying to save a few dollars and the second stall serves cheaper food? Did the first one run out of a favorite ingredient and won't have a new shipment in for the next several days? Did I end up in a tiff with an employee and needed to give myself time to cool off before going back? I mean you just never know what is behind a decision and this is exactly why telemetry shouldn't be used to decide which features should be left out of a video game.
I agree with you completely. Data is no good without the study behind why. It is not a case of just seeing the data and being able to take it at face value-you need to do your research, work out why it says what it does. However with comments from RF saying that the players say one thing and do another in game it suggests that there isn't a lot of research going into the why people are telling them what they want to see then doing another. A big answer would be insufficient features to be able to play as people wish-like @Writin_Reg who likes playing families but until toddlers doesn't want to play that way. I know she won't be the only one. So her data may say that she doesn't play with families much-but that is not even half of the story!
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Everyone, including a large company like EA, can make a decision that ultimately can be not such a good one and I know they didn't intentionally create a bad game. The fellow I mentioned in my above post (his initials are F.G.) believes strongly in mobile being the future of computing. I know in some regards he is right but I think what he didn't understand was when it comes to some games people want a full-fledged experience, one they can sink their teeth into. Mobile games provide past-time entertainment, as in something a person does while they have a few minutes, very much like how I play Mahjong or Solitaire on my computer. They are something I will spend five or ten minutes on then go back to bookkeeping or housework. Sims is a hobby and most of us want to sit down to something we can sink ourselves into for a few hours. If I want to actually get something done in a day I don't dare start up my Sims game because I'll get lost in it.
I agree. There is a good market for both. Unless the plan is to bring gaming to a place where we are only seeing console or mobile. That would be a huge loss in my opinion. It may be easier to create for consoles in that they have the same specs and you don't need to worry about creating across many variations in equipment etc but I have had consoles and the games I enjoy just don't have the depth I'm looking for. The sims console games and the mobile games have been nothing more than a distraction for me, and never for long at that.
I'd rather have no sims game than just console or mobile, or a game like the sims stories. I want the depth a traditional sims game offered-I want it to be a game that pushes me to upgrade computers, to push what's possible in this type of game.
If they want to cater to lower end computers then introduce 'sims stories' type games again. Give options for sims fans. It's not like we don't pay much for these games-they could make even more!
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
I don't play families in this game after seeing the baby stuck in a crib, either. I only add some Sims here and there with kids created in CAS. But they are the very least of the Sims I play. So, if they read my telemetry they may think the only Sims I want to play are YA or Adult and a few elders. They will never glean why not by numbers.
Except of course that EA has form for doing exactly that... Command & Conquer 4 was originally going to be Command & Conquer Arena, but when it was decided that there wasn't enough interest in a C&C arena game, they decided to try and make C&C 4 but EA wouldn't give them any more resources (Time, money, ETC) so they changed what was left of C&C Arena into C&C 4... Killing the series in the process.
Yes I know about Olympus. But if EA really used a full team in about two years (and therefore a huge number of millions of dollars) to make that game then EA would never have just ordered the team to start over like you seem to assume! To assume such a thing is a complete underestimation of EA's professionalism and focus on finances! So even though you want to believe otherwise this can't be a completely true explanation. It is also just normal to make experiments during the development of a game and that a lot of things made for such experiments don't make it to the final version of the game.
But you forget that EA is known for changing game series instead of just going on making almost the same game over and over like several other game companies often do. Therefore you shouldn't expect EA to ever make a new Sims game and plan it to include nearly all content from the previous game and just do it slightly different. This would also make even less sense for the Sims games because the differ from other games by having this huge number of expansions which means that EA would fear that people just waited for the new expansions before they even considered to buy the basegame for a new version of the game. This would be completely unacceptable for EA. Therefore I am sure that EA won't ever let the developers really start on a new basegame before EA has some kind of agreement on some planned main new content which EA believes that people will find interesting enough to just buy the new basegame immediately without waiting for some of the expansions. Therefore I believe that it mainly was the multitasking, the new emotions, the improved CAS and buildmode and EA's wish about the game being able to also run on young teens' cheap computers that are the main reasons for the simplifications in TS4 while Olympus had less influence than people (a little too quickly) just assumed.
A). How many of the sims games do you own ?
All of Sims 2 and Sims 3. I used to have Sims 1, and Sims Medieval but I donated them in the "Big Purge" before the move.
B ). Favorite game in the series?
Sims 2
C). How much of the sims 4 content do you own?
Base game. Yes
Get to work. Yes
Get Together. Yes
Outdoor Retreat. Yes
Spa Day. Yes
Luxury Party. No
Perfect Patio. Yes
Spooky Day. No
Romantic Garden. No
Cool Kitchen. No
Movie Hangout. No
If No to some of the above, give reason.
I'm frustrated with how some of the base gameplay is still missing, the silence about that, how packs seem to be chiseled down to get us to pay more, and RPG-like features that annoy me (task lists).
The new kids stuff and Resturant packs?
Maybe. I'm waiting to see what the reviews say.
D). How often did you/or do you still pre-order....previous sims game and current.
I used to pre-order. Sims 4 burned me of that notion. I will NEVER pre-order again. I've even become very cautious with non-Sims games now because of my experience.
E). How do you see your future with Ts4?
1. I will continue to buy all content and packs for the duration of the series
2. I will buy content but be picky about what I buy
3. I will stop buying further content till they give me what I'm looking for
4. I'm over it!
I don't really know yet. I fluctuate between 2-4. There are things I like about Sims 4, but many features frustrate me. I'm also frustrated with the odd type of communication from EA/Maxis. I'm still waiting for what I consider to be missing base game content. They can keep saying that they "can't talk about future content," but my issues will remain with them until they address that problem. I'm finding myself to be more and more disappointed with them, and less willing to give them the chance they ask for in regards to Sims 4. But I'm increasingly worried that they're going to pull a SimCity 2013/SimCity Buildit, as in give up, shut it all down, and turn it into a mobile version.
Daily Deals Rotation Thread
Love kids stuff? Check this out!
Cascades & Daily Deals-Get the best bang for your simpoints
Of course more younger people play video games than older. Shoot, I don't know how many teens I've encountered shocked at the fact I play video games because their parents told them video games are for children. Mind you, when my children were younger I didn't play much, usually only got in a couple of hours a week, but I was still playing video games. It was the same thing with my mom. She was the one who bought Pong for us in 1972. After I was a young adult and living on my own and didn't have access to video games at home it was nothing for me to walk into her house and find her sitting on the floor playing an Atari game and she was in her late forties at that time. If she was still alive she'd still be playing video games.
Right back atcha.
And have you forgotten the fall-out of SC2013? Players said over and over again they didn't want a multi-player game then were lied to about how it required such heavy processing ability no one's computers could handle it if it was offline? It was proven within a matter of hours that all that was required to run it offline was to change (literally) a couple of lines of code. It was only after that disaster that TS4 developers finally convinced whomever that players demanding the new Sims game to be offline had been right all along.
I would never expect an exact replica from Sims game to Sims game. I do, however, expect a game that holds with most of the features of past games and adds a bunch of new ones like TS2 and TS3 delivered. Animal Crossing is a game I've played through multiple generations--four to be exact. Between the GC version and Wild World (for the DS) a lot of things were changed but the vast majority of players felt they were changes for the better. Between DS and Wii versions some new features were added, some good and some bad, but the essence of the game stayed the same and it was a lot of fun to play it on a large screen. Then between Wii and 3DS versions so many new and awesome features were added that in my opinion the 3DS version was heads and shoulders above any of its predecessors.
There's a new Pokemon game coming out next November. This is a series that closely copies its predecessors and will be my fifth generation of playing. I'll be among the first to buy three copies of it: one for me and two for my adult offspring who also enjoy playing it because although it will be very much like the old games it will still have a lot of cool new things like a brand new region, more Pokemon and whatever else the developers come up with. Just imagine if Game Freak did to Pokemon what EA's team did with Sims between three and four. It would be like going from the latest games back to the GameBoy versions.
People expected that type of transition from TS3 to TS4 but look how it turned out--even you have given up on playing it. I expect evolution in sequels, not what seems to be going back to the original and adding a handful of features to it. As my mama used to say, it's time to take off the rose-colored glasses.
1. In the 1970s I was a young male university student who studied mathematics and computer science. My hobbies in those days were tournament chess, tournament bridge and different other card games.
2. In the beginning of the 1980s I got a job as a highschool teacher and bought my first computer. My hobbies soon became computer games and I began to play all kinds of computer games - but mainly strategic games and war games.
3. I continued playing computer games. But the pupils I educated at my work became older even though the level in my teaching was the same. They now just already had finished highschool but needed especially more math before they could start their university studies.
4. The Sims 2 got me hooked because it was very different from all the games that I earlier had played. The only thing I didn't like was the low difficulty degree and also the game had a little too less complexity for me. I played it all the time for about 2.5 years.
5. I also bought the Sims 3. But I didn't play it nearly as long and I stopped playing it after the first couple of expansions.
6. I bought my first smartphone and my iPad 2. They soon became my main platforms for gaming instead of my PC because they had a huge number of different types of games. They were also more handy.
7. I bought the Sims 4 but only played it for a short time even though I bought a GP and an EP for it too.
8. I am now a recently retired teacher even though I probably could have taught math a few years more. I just don't need the money anymore because I have a good pension. So I prefer to just do my hobbies and study things that interests me
9. If we go back to the 1990s then I also taught math at a business school at university level besides my main job. Maybe my interest in business companies and their finances came from those years. But my interests in such things have grown through the years.
EA I started investigating just a few years ago because the way EA's games developed (and especially the Sims games) wondered me. You are right that companies make mistakes. We all do. But there are mistakes we never would make because we have our experiences. An example is that if we wake up in the morning without being hungry then we wouldn't anyway go on a trip all day long without caring about food thinking that we probably wouldn't become hungry before we came home in the evening because our experiences make us expect differently. In the same way there are mistakes with a big group of highly educated financial business experts never would do. But nevertheless people in this forum is way too easy to convince otherwise.
So my conclusion still is that yes EA can make mistakes. But I know more about the way such highly educated financial experts think than most people do and I just don't believe at all that EA just would let Maxis make the Sims games like they would feel fun to do. EA wants to control Maxis and make sure that Maxis only make games that are targeted at the group which EA wants them targeted at and that the games have enough new content to attract new simmers. EA also wouldn't hesitate to close Maxis down if Maxis didn't act like EA wants Maxis to do.
As for games I've played in the past, I am obviously not as cerebral as you and find as much, if not more, enjoyment out of being creative as I do strategizing although I do love a few "childish" games like Animal Crossing and Pokemon (and Pokemon is a game that attracts even some hardcore gamers as they EV train and battle their Pokemon in serious competitions). I've played almost every Sim game to hit the market as well as all of Sierra's City Building games, a good share of the Civ series and quite a number of others. I've never been "good" at them but I still enjoy playing them. Minecraft ranks up there with my all-time favorites, not because I like battling but because I love building and exploration. In that type of setting I am the person no one wants on their team. If it can go wrong and I touch it, it will go very wrong.
We only have the Civ series in common here because I just loved Civilization 1 and played it all the time for years. It was a fantastic game until I finally found the right way to beat it and win at the highest difficulty degree regularly. I also played Civ 2. But even though it had better graphics I never got hooked on it in the same way. Several later games I also tried and also Colonization and the Call to Power games. But I have given up on those games. Colonization I still like a little. But the other games I didn't play for very long.
Pokemon I only know from cartoons which didn't make me want to try them in games. So I don't know if I would have liked them. Some rather childish games I have also liked (like SimAnt). But I haven't tried Minecraft or Animal Crossing (probably because they are too new). Sierra I remember for all their adventure games. But I am not sure that I have tried their city building games. SimCity wasn't really my game either. But I have played some of the Caesar city building games.
Anyway the Sims 4 also has a little city building and some life simulation. But not enough for me and what I mainly miss is the same kind of stories and building of relations between the sims as the Sims 2 had. If that had been the game's focus and a little more advanced than in the Sims 2 then I would still have played the game and have bought all its expansions