Forum Announcement, Click Here to Read More From EA_Cade.

Statement about toddlers

Comments

  • Options
    jackjack_kjackjack_k Posts: 8,601 Member
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    I don't know how true that is. I don't think EA has any word on the content they release as long as it makes money, they are just the publisher but I guess no one knows for certain.

    Well we do know for a fact, EA weren't green lighting The Sims 4 unless it was online.
    We do know EA are the ones that send out the Surveys, to get information about what packs are popular.
    We do know EA pitched the Into The Future idea, to the Devs, and not the other way around. Which probably sets the scene for most of the packs.

    EA know what brings them money, which is why since we are at The Sims 4, they have a long history of things that did well and things that didn't, which puts them in a bigger position to be more stubborn.

    This is also maybe another reason why SimGuruDrake just recently was saying "Why do you want old packs? Why not new ideas?" because it's probably easier for Devs to get a green light for new ideas, than ones that proved unsuccessful in the past, which the comment may be demanding.
  • Options
    kwanzaabotkwanzaabot Posts: 2,440 Member
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    I don't know how true that is. I don't think EA has any word on the content they release as long as it makes money, they are just the publisher but I guess no one knows for certain.

    Maxis isn't an indie studio that makes a game and then finds a publisher to distribute it. Maxis is directly owned by EA, meaning EA has a vested interest in what their money is spent on.

    You don't say "here's a million dollars for this quarter, make whatever you want" and stay in business for very long.

    And then again, you don't know if that happens with certainty. So your *opinion* is just as redundant as mine.

    Do you know anything about running a business? Because I do.
    wJbomAo.png
  • Options
    jackjack_kjackjack_k Posts: 8,601 Member
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.
  • Options
    Sigzy05Sigzy05 Posts: 19,406 Member
    edited August 2016
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    I don't know how true that is. I don't think EA has any word on the content they release as long as it makes money, they are just the publisher but I guess no one knows for certain.

    Well we do know for a fact, EA weren't green lighting The Sims 4 unless it was online.
    We do know EA are the ones that send out the Surveys, to get information about what packs are popular.
    We do know EA pitched the Into The Future idea, to the Devs, and not the other way around. Which probably sets the scene for most of the packs.

    EA know what brings them money, which is why since we are at The Sims 4, they have a long history of things that did well and things that didn't, which puts them in a bigger position to be more stubborn.

    This is also maybe another reason why SimGuruDrake just recently was saying "Why do you want old packs? Why not new ideas?" because it's probably easier for Devs to get a green light for new ideas, than ones that proved unsuccessful in the past, which the comment may be demanding.

    Those two things don't go directly hand in hand.

    Just because we want old packs doesn't mean they didn't sold well, or that they won't. If anything EA wants Maxis to repeat the packs that sold well, not new ideas that can potentially flop hard on the ground.
    mHdgPlU.jpg?1
  • Options
    CiarassimsCiarassims Posts: 3,547 Member
    edited August 2016
    Removed
    giphy_1.gif
  • Options
    kwanzaabotkwanzaabot Posts: 2,440 Member
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.
    wJbomAo.png
  • Options
    jackjack_kjackjack_k Posts: 8,601 Member
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    I don't know how true that is. I don't think EA has any word on the content they release as long as it makes money, they are just the publisher but I guess no one knows for certain.

    Well we do know for a fact, EA weren't green lighting The Sims 4 unless it was online.
    We do know EA are the ones that send out the Surveys, to get information about what packs are popular.
    We do know EA pitched the Into The Future idea, to the Devs, and not the other way around. Which probably sets the scene for most of the packs.

    EA know what brings them money, which is why since we are at The Sims 4, they have a long history of things that did well and things that didn't, which puts them in a bigger position to be more stubborn.

    This is also maybe another reason why SimGuruDrake just recently was saying "Why do you want old packs? Why not new ideas?" because it's probably easier for Devs to get a green light for new ideas, than ones that proved unsuccessful in the past, which the comment may be demanding.

    Those two things don't go directly hand in hand.

    Just because we want old packs doesn't mean they didn't sold well, or that they won't. If anything EA wants Maxis to repeat the packs that sold well, not new ideas that can potentially flop hard on the ground.

    True.

    But it's probably easier for Devs (not that I ever hope they do), to Pitch a new idea, rather than a new take on a pack that did badly.
    For example, World Adventures had a strong following, but on grand schemes, it was Niche.

    When people were asking for it, SimGuruGraham pretty much made it clear that it wasn't going to happen. He claimed it wasn't popular. But personally, he wanted to.

    My take on that is, EA go "nope" because if it didn't work then, it didn't work now. Generations was probably the worst executed pack in The Sims 3, and it got bad reviews from Critics and Fans. It also didn't sell as much (according to the PC charts). So Devs trying to push that concept to EA again, might be proving difficult.

    So instead, Devs may be like "Oh new ideas, instead of old ones!!!" and trying to get us onboard the new ideas train. Rather than the "bring back fan favourite content" train.

    All speculation of course, but this has rung true to me since Day 1.
  • Options
    Sigzy05Sigzy05 Posts: 19,406 Member
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    Devs make the households not EA. Devs only make those references if they want.

    As for KPS, it was the Katy Perry team that addressed EA and Maxis to make a SP to promote her documentary.

    mHdgPlU.jpg?1
  • Options
    jackjack_kjackjack_k Posts: 8,601 Member
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    The Sims 3 was definitely a teenage girls dream. Which is why when you go on YouTube, a lot of the male simmers only build in The Sims 3.
    A lot of the girls though, love The Sims 3.

    I do actually like a lot of The Sims 3, I just cannot bare all the issues that come with it. I pull my hair out when I install mods to fix issues, and then they start conflicting, and cause other issues. I wish someone would upload a Zip file of "all fixes as of 2016 patch" so I can plop it into my mods folder and play.

    Le Sigh.
  • Options
    Sigzy05Sigzy05 Posts: 19,406 Member
    edited August 2016
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    I don't know how true that is. I don't think EA has any word on the content they release as long as it makes money, they are just the publisher but I guess no one knows for certain.

    Well we do know for a fact, EA weren't green lighting The Sims 4 unless it was online.
    We do know EA are the ones that send out the Surveys, to get information about what packs are popular.
    We do know EA pitched the Into The Future idea, to the Devs, and not the other way around. Which probably sets the scene for most of the packs.

    EA know what brings them money, which is why since we are at The Sims 4, they have a long history of things that did well and things that didn't, which puts them in a bigger position to be more stubborn.

    This is also maybe another reason why SimGuruDrake just recently was saying "Why do you want old packs? Why not new ideas?" because it's probably easier for Devs to get a green light for new ideas, than ones that proved unsuccessful in the past, which the comment may be demanding.

    Those two things don't go directly hand in hand.

    Just because we want old packs doesn't mean they didn't sold well, or that they won't. If anything EA wants Maxis to repeat the packs that sold well, not new ideas that can potentially flop hard on the ground.

    True.

    But it's probably easier for Devs (not that I ever hope they do), to Pitch a new idea, rather than a new take on a pack that did badly.
    For example, World Adventures had a strong following, but on grand schemes, it was Niche.

    When people were asking for it, SimGuruGraham pretty much made it clear that it wasn't going to happen. He claimed it wasn't popular. But personally, he wanted to.

    My take on that is, EA go "nope" because if it didn't work then, it didn't work now. Generations was probably the worst executed pack in The Sims 3, and it got bad reviews from Critics and Fans. It also didn't sell as much (according to the PC charts). So Devs trying to push that concept to EA again, might be proving difficult.

    So instead, Devs may be like "Oh new ideas, instead of old ones!!!" and trying to get us onboard the new ideas train. Rather than the "bring back fan favourite content" train.

    All speculation of course, but this has rung true to me since Day 1.

    The problem with Generations wasn't the theme, it was that it didn't had as much content as people hoped, not having a world was the biggest thing people ranted over.

    Not to mention 90% of the people ask for a Generations EP in these forums. Outside I'm not sure, but I think Social Media refers Pets, Seasons, Supernatural and Generations the most, especially toddlers.
    mHdgPlU.jpg?1
  • Options
    jackjack_kjackjack_k Posts: 8,601 Member
    edited August 2016
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    I don't know how true that is. I don't think EA has any word on the content they release as long as it makes money, they are just the publisher but I guess no one knows for certain.

    Well we do know for a fact, EA weren't green lighting The Sims 4 unless it was online.
    We do know EA are the ones that send out the Surveys, to get information about what packs are popular.
    We do know EA pitched the Into The Future idea, to the Devs, and not the other way around. Which probably sets the scene for most of the packs.

    EA know what brings them money, which is why since we are at The Sims 4, they have a long history of things that did well and things that didn't, which puts them in a bigger position to be more stubborn.

    This is also maybe another reason why SimGuruDrake just recently was saying "Why do you want old packs? Why not new ideas?" because it's probably easier for Devs to get a green light for new ideas, than ones that proved unsuccessful in the past, which the comment may be demanding.

    Those two things don't go directly hand in hand.

    Just because we want old packs doesn't mean they didn't sold well, or that they won't. If anything EA wants Maxis to repeat the packs that sold well, not new ideas that can potentially flop hard on the ground.

    True.

    But it's probably easier for Devs (not that I ever hope they do), to Pitch a new idea, rather than a new take on a pack that did badly.
    For example, World Adventures had a strong following, but on grand schemes, it was Niche.

    When people were asking for it, SimGuruGraham pretty much made it clear that it wasn't going to happen. He claimed it wasn't popular. But personally, he wanted to.

    My take on that is, EA go "nope" because if it didn't work then, it didn't work now. Generations was probably the worst executed pack in The Sims 3, and it got bad reviews from Critics and Fans. It also didn't sell as much (according to the PC charts). So Devs trying to push that concept to EA again, might be proving difficult.

    So instead, Devs may be like "Oh new ideas, instead of old ones!!!" and trying to get us onboard the new ideas train. Rather than the "bring back fan favourite content" train.

    All speculation of course, but this has rung true to me since Day 1.

    The problem with Generations wasn't the theme, it was that it didn't had as much content as people hoped, not having a world was the biggest thing people ranted over.

    Not to mention 90% of the people ask for a Generations EP in these forums. Outside I'm not sure, but I think Social Media refers Pets, Seasons, Supernatural and Generations the most.

    Hit the nail on the head.

    Because the Devs basically threw Generations out, without really immersing themselves into the theme, EA probably now see it as a Critical and Commercial flop. And being a business, they see Generation = Flop.

    When really, the concept was excellent, it was the execution that ruined it. I'd say if Generations was well made, it would have sold the most, and we'd be sitting here with our family content already.

    To me, it's almost a curse that Generations exists. I think had it not, EA wouldn't be so reluctant to introduce that content again.

    ---

    And yeah, most people who want Generations are on the forums. Pets and Seasons are the two biggest demands, and City and Beaches are the two biggest world requests. Which is probably why EP 3 is City Based. People want Apartments and Beach Houses.

    I said this last year, but when EA sent out the EP survey, I knew that Metropolis would win over Generations, because the demand for cities was huge and more universal than Generations.
  • Options
    Sigzy05Sigzy05 Posts: 19,406 Member
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    The Sims 3 was definitely a teenage girls dream. Which is why when you go on YouTube, a lot of the male simmers only build in The Sims 3.
    A lot of the girls though, love The Sims 3.

    I do actually like a lot of The Sims 3, I just cannot bare all the issues that come with it. I pull my hair out when I install mods to fix issues, and then they start conflicting, and cause other issues. I wish someone would upload a Zip file of "all fixes as of 2016 patch" so I can plop it into my mods folder and play.

    Le Sigh.

    And TS4 isn't? As far as I'm concerned 90% of youtube simmers are female now and then, and to address the male builders, I haven't seen any pop up on youtube now that TS4 is out, so not 100% sure about that statement as far as I can see, it only got worse.
    mHdgPlU.jpg?1
  • Options
    Sigzy05Sigzy05 Posts: 19,406 Member
    edited August 2016
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    I don't know how true that is. I don't think EA has any word on the content they release as long as it makes money, they are just the publisher but I guess no one knows for certain.

    Well we do know for a fact, EA weren't green lighting The Sims 4 unless it was online.
    We do know EA are the ones that send out the Surveys, to get information about what packs are popular.
    We do know EA pitched the Into The Future idea, to the Devs, and not the other way around. Which probably sets the scene for most of the packs.

    EA know what brings them money, which is why since we are at The Sims 4, they have a long history of things that did well and things that didn't, which puts them in a bigger position to be more stubborn.

    This is also maybe another reason why SimGuruDrake just recently was saying "Why do you want old packs? Why not new ideas?" because it's probably easier for Devs to get a green light for new ideas, than ones that proved unsuccessful in the past, which the comment may be demanding.

    Those two things don't go directly hand in hand.

    Just because we want old packs doesn't mean they didn't sold well, or that they won't. If anything EA wants Maxis to repeat the packs that sold well, not new ideas that can potentially flop hard on the ground.

    True.

    But it's probably easier for Devs (not that I ever hope they do), to Pitch a new idea, rather than a new take on a pack that did badly.
    For example, World Adventures had a strong following, but on grand schemes, it was Niche.

    When people were asking for it, SimGuruGraham pretty much made it clear that it wasn't going to happen. He claimed it wasn't popular. But personally, he wanted to.

    My take on that is, EA go "nope" because if it didn't work then, it didn't work now. Generations was probably the worst executed pack in The Sims 3, and it got bad reviews from Critics and Fans. It also didn't sell as much (according to the PC charts). So Devs trying to push that concept to EA again, might be proving difficult.

    So instead, Devs may be like "Oh new ideas, instead of old ones!!!" and trying to get us onboard the new ideas train. Rather than the "bring back fan favourite content" train.

    All speculation of course, but this has rung true to me since Day 1.

    The problem with Generations wasn't the theme, it was that it didn't had as much content as people hoped, not having a world was the biggest thing people ranted over.

    Not to mention 90% of the people ask for a Generations EP in these forums. Outside I'm not sure, but I think Social Media refers Pets, Seasons, Supernatural and Generations the most.

    Hit the nail on the head.

    Because the Devs basically threw Generations out, without really immersing themselves into the theme, EA probably now see it as a Critical and Commercial flop. And being a business, they see Generation = Flop.

    When really, the concept was excellent, it was the execution that ruined it. I'd say if Generations was well made, it would have sold the most, and we'd be sitting here with our family content already.

    To me, it's almost a curse that Generations exists. I think had it not, EA wouldn't be so reluctant to introduce that content again.

    ---

    And yeah, most people who want Generations are on the forums. Pets and Seasons are the two biggest demands, and City and Beaches are the two biggest world requests. Which is probably why EP 3 is City Based. People want Apartments and Beach Houses.

    I said this last year, but when EA sent out the EP survey, I knew that Metropolis would win over Generations, because the demand for cities was huge and more universal than Generations.

    You don't even know how much Generations sold though, so why call it a flop, because of reviewers? ...smh. Have you had a look at TS4?

    You are just inducing it based on your own opinion, it might not even be true.
    mHdgPlU.jpg?1
  • Options
    jackjack_kjackjack_k Posts: 8,601 Member
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    The Sims 3 was definitely a teenage girls dream. Which is why when you go on YouTube, a lot of the male simmers only build in The Sims 3.
    A lot of the girls though, love The Sims 3.

    I do actually like a lot of The Sims 3, I just cannot bare all the issues that come with it. I pull my hair out when I install mods to fix issues, and then they start conflicting, and cause other issues. I wish someone would upload a Zip file of "all fixes as of 2016 patch" so I can plop it into my mods folder and play.

    Le Sigh.

    And TS4 isn't? As far as I'm concerned 90% of youtube simmers are female now and then, and to address the male builders, I haven't seen any pop up on youtube now that TS4 is out, so not 100% sure about that statement as far as I can see, it only got worse.

    There's quite a few Sims 4 players that are male. The quirky side of the Sims appeals to males more for whatever reason.
    The Sims 4 totally is, especially with CAS. But none of the packs have been so blindly catered to teenage girls more than anyone else.

    Get To Work, OR, DO, GT are all fairly even between audience. I'd say Spa Day was the only pack that felt more female orientated. But that's simply because girls are more into going to the Spa than Men.
  • Options
    Sigzy05Sigzy05 Posts: 19,406 Member
    edited August 2016
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    The Sims 3 was definitely a teenage girls dream. Which is why when you go on YouTube, a lot of the male simmers only build in The Sims 3.
    A lot of the girls though, love The Sims 3.

    I do actually like a lot of The Sims 3, I just cannot bare all the issues that come with it. I pull my hair out when I install mods to fix issues, and then they start conflicting, and cause other issues. I wish someone would upload a Zip file of "all fixes as of 2016 patch" so I can plop it into my mods folder and play.

    Le Sigh.

    And TS4 isn't? As far as I'm concerned 90% of youtube simmers are female now and then, and to address the male builders, I haven't seen any pop up on youtube now that TS4 is out, so not 100% sure about that statement as far as I can see, it only got worse.

    There's quite a few Sims 4 players that are male. The quirky side of the Sims appeals to males more for whatever reason.
    The Sims 4 totally is, especially with CAS. But none of the packs have been so blindly catered to teenage girls more than anyone else.

    Get To Work, OR, DO, GT are all fairly even between audience. I'd say Spa Day was the only pack that felt more female orientated. But that's simply because girls are more into going to the Spa than Men.

    That's the most ridiculous thing I could ever hear, not to mention sexist. Plus you never, and I never said anything about sims players, only about simmer youtubers.

    Please review your facts because you are obviously putting your own opinions above anything else. Not to mention TS4 is the less quirky of all sims games, unless ofc you are talking about the potty humor, aka "angry poop".

    Besides I don't even see how World Adventures screams girly, or Ambitions, or Late Night or Island Paradise or University and so on.
    mHdgPlU.jpg?1
  • Options
    SimaniteSimanite Posts: 4,833 Member
    edited August 2016
    @Sigzy05 Some of your comments are coming off a bit hostile. You're responding to people as if they've stated their opinion and it's wrong but they're trying to state how they believe the developers/those in charge think/feel and why they think things are like they are. I'm not not sure why there's a barrier between seeing that and your understanding of their posts?
  • Options
    SimaniteSimanite Posts: 4,833 Member
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    The Sims 3 was definitely a teenage girls dream. Which is why when you go on YouTube, a lot of the male simmers only build in The Sims 3.
    A lot of the girls though, love The Sims 3.

    I do actually like a lot of The Sims 3, I just cannot bare all the issues that come with it. I pull my hair out when I install mods to fix issues, and then they start conflicting, and cause other issues. I wish someone would upload a Zip file of "all fixes as of 2016 patch" so I can plop it into my mods folder and play.

    Le Sigh.

    And TS4 isn't? As far as I'm concerned 90% of youtube simmers are female now and then, and to address the male builders, I haven't seen any pop up on youtube now that TS4 is out, so not 100% sure about that statement as far as I can see, it only got worse.

    There's quite a few Sims 4 players that are male. The quirky side of the Sims appeals to males more for whatever reason.
    The Sims 4 totally is, especially with CAS. But none of the packs have been so blindly catered to teenage girls more than anyone else.

    Get To Work, OR, DO, GT are all fairly even between audience. I'd say Spa Day was the only pack that felt more female orientated. But that's simply because girls are more into going to the Spa than Men.

    That's the most ridiculous thing I could ever hear, not to mention sexist.

    Please review your facts because you are obviously putting your own opinions above anything else. Not to mention TS4 is the less quirky of all sims games, unless ofc you are talking about the potty humor, aka "angry poop".

    Besides I don't even see how World Adventures screams girly, or Ambitions, or Late Night or Island Paradise or University and so on.

    latest?cb=20140910040316
  • Options
    JayandMeekaJayandMeeka Posts: 2,377 Member
    edited August 2016
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    The Sims 3 was definitely a teenage girls dream. Which is why when you go on YouTube, a lot of the male simmers only build in The Sims 3.
    A lot of the girls though, love The Sims 3.

    I do actually like a lot of The Sims 3, I just cannot bare all the issues that come with it. I pull my hair out when I install mods to fix issues, and then they start conflicting, and cause other issues. I wish someone would upload a Zip file of "all fixes as of 2016 patch" so I can plop it into my mods folder and play.

    Le Sigh.

    And TS4 isn't? As far as I'm concerned 90% of youtube simmers are female now and then, and to address the male builders, I haven't seen any pop up on youtube now that TS4 is out, so not 100% sure about that statement as far as I can see, it only got worse.

    There's quite a few Sims 4 players that are male. The quirky side of the Sims appeals to males more for whatever reason.
    The Sims 4 totally is, especially with CAS. But none of the packs have been so blindly catered to teenage girls more than anyone else.

    Get To Work, OR, DO, GT are all fairly even between audience. I'd say Spa Day was the only pack that felt more female orientated. But that's simply because girls are more into going to the Spa than Men.

    That's the most ridiculous thing I could ever hear, not to mention sexist.

    Please review your facts because you are obviously putting your own opinions above anything else. Not to mention TS4 is the less quirky of all sims games, unless ofc you are talking about the potty humor, aka "angry poop".

    Besides I don't even see how World Adventures screams girly, or Ambitions, or Late Night or Island Paradise or University and so on.

    giphy.gif
  • Options
    jackjack_kjackjack_k Posts: 8,601 Member
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    I don't know how true that is. I don't think EA has any word on the content they release as long as it makes money, they are just the publisher but I guess no one knows for certain.

    Well we do know for a fact, EA weren't green lighting The Sims 4 unless it was online.
    We do know EA are the ones that send out the Surveys, to get information about what packs are popular.
    We do know EA pitched the Into The Future idea, to the Devs, and not the other way around. Which probably sets the scene for most of the packs.

    EA know what brings them money, which is why since we are at The Sims 4, they have a long history of things that did well and things that didn't, which puts them in a bigger position to be more stubborn.

    This is also maybe another reason why SimGuruDrake just recently was saying "Why do you want old packs? Why not new ideas?" because it's probably easier for Devs to get a green light for new ideas, than ones that proved unsuccessful in the past, which the comment may be demanding.

    Those two things don't go directly hand in hand.

    Just because we want old packs doesn't mean they didn't sold well, or that they won't. If anything EA wants Maxis to repeat the packs that sold well, not new ideas that can potentially flop hard on the ground.

    True.

    But it's probably easier for Devs (not that I ever hope they do), to Pitch a new idea, rather than a new take on a pack that did badly.
    For example, World Adventures had a strong following, but on grand schemes, it was Niche.

    When people were asking for it, SimGuruGraham pretty much made it clear that it wasn't going to happen. He claimed it wasn't popular. But personally, he wanted to.

    My take on that is, EA go "nope" because if it didn't work then, it didn't work now. Generations was probably the worst executed pack in The Sims 3, and it got bad reviews from Critics and Fans. It also didn't sell as much (according to the PC charts). So Devs trying to push that concept to EA again, might be proving difficult.

    So instead, Devs may be like "Oh new ideas, instead of old ones!!!" and trying to get us onboard the new ideas train. Rather than the "bring back fan favourite content" train.

    All speculation of course, but this has rung true to me since Day 1.

    The problem with Generations wasn't the theme, it was that it didn't had as much content as people hoped, not having a world was the biggest thing people ranted over.

    Not to mention 90% of the people ask for a Generations EP in these forums. Outside I'm not sure, but I think Social Media refers Pets, Seasons, Supernatural and Generations the most.

    Hit the nail on the head.

    Because the Devs basically threw Generations out, without really immersing themselves into the theme, EA probably now see it as a Critical and Commercial flop. And being a business, they see Generation = Flop.

    When really, the concept was excellent, it was the execution that ruined it. I'd say if Generations was well made, it would have sold the most, and we'd be sitting here with our family content already.

    To me, it's almost a curse that Generations exists. I think had it not, EA wouldn't be so reluctant to introduce that content again.

    ---

    And yeah, most people who want Generations are on the forums. Pets and Seasons are the two biggest demands, and City and Beaches are the two biggest world requests. Which is probably why EP 3 is City Based. People want Apartments and Beach Houses.

    I said this last year, but when EA sent out the EP survey, I knew that Metropolis would win over Generations, because the demand for cities was huge and more universal than Generations.

    You don't even know how much Generations sold though, so why call it a flop, because of reviewers? ...smh. Have you had a look at TS4?

    According to ESAs charts, it didn't do as well as the other EPs.
    Generations was released in-between Late Night and Pets, right?

    http://www.isfe.eu/sites/isfe.eu/files/attachments/esa_ef_2013.pdf

    In it's second year, Generations was selling less than Late Night, which was released before it, and was even beaten by a Stuff Pack.
    All the EP's for The Sims 3 stayed within the Top 20 easily for two years. In it's second year, Generations was lucky to make the cut.

    While we don't have exact figures, it's enough to go by that it didn't do as well as the rest. That doesn't make it a flop, but it's not as commercially successful as the rest of the EP's, especially in EA's eyes.
  • Options
    king_of_simcity7king_of_simcity7 Posts: 25,102 Member
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    The Sims 3 was definitely a teenage girls dream. Which is why when you go on YouTube, a lot of the male simmers only build in The Sims 3.
    A lot of the girls though, love The Sims 3.

    I do actually like a lot of The Sims 3, I just cannot bare all the issues that come with it. I pull my hair out when I install mods to fix issues, and then they start conflicting, and cause other issues. I wish someone would upload a Zip file of "all fixes as of 2016 patch" so I can plop it into my mods folder and play.

    Le Sigh.

    And TS4 isn't? As far as I'm concerned 90% of youtube simmers are female now and then, and to address the male builders, I haven't seen any pop up on youtube now that TS4 is out, so not 100% sure about that statement as far as I can see, it only got worse.

    There's quite a few Sims 4 players that are male. The quirky side of the Sims appeals to males more for whatever reason.
    The Sims 4 totally is, especially with CAS. But none of the packs have been so blindly catered to teenage girls more than anyone else.

    Get To Work, OR, DO, GT are all fairly even between audience. I'd say Spa Day was the only pack that felt more female orientated. But that's simply because girls are more into going to the Spa than Men.

    That's the most ridiculous thing I could ever hear, not to mention sexist. Plus you never, and I never said anything about sims players, only about simmer youtubers.

    Please review your facts because you are obviously putting your own opinions above anything else. Not to mention TS4 is the less quirky of all sims games, unless ofc you are talking about the potty humor, aka "angry poop".

    Besides I don't even see how World Adventures screams girly, or Ambitions, or Late Night or Island Paradise or University and so on.

    Yes, TS3 is a man's game! :triumph:
    Simbourne
    screenshot_original.jpg
  • Options
    Sigzy05Sigzy05 Posts: 19,406 Member
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    kwanzaabot wrote: »
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    I don't know how true that is. I don't think EA has any word on the content they release as long as it makes money, they are just the publisher but I guess no one knows for certain.

    Well we do know for a fact, EA weren't green lighting The Sims 4 unless it was online.
    We do know EA are the ones that send out the Surveys, to get information about what packs are popular.
    We do know EA pitched the Into The Future idea, to the Devs, and not the other way around. Which probably sets the scene for most of the packs.

    EA know what brings them money, which is why since we are at The Sims 4, they have a long history of things that did well and things that didn't, which puts them in a bigger position to be more stubborn.

    This is also maybe another reason why SimGuruDrake just recently was saying "Why do you want old packs? Why not new ideas?" because it's probably easier for Devs to get a green light for new ideas, than ones that proved unsuccessful in the past, which the comment may be demanding.

    Those two things don't go directly hand in hand.

    Just because we want old packs doesn't mean they didn't sold well, or that they won't. If anything EA wants Maxis to repeat the packs that sold well, not new ideas that can potentially flop hard on the ground.

    True.

    But it's probably easier for Devs (not that I ever hope they do), to Pitch a new idea, rather than a new take on a pack that did badly.
    For example, World Adventures had a strong following, but on grand schemes, it was Niche.

    When people were asking for it, SimGuruGraham pretty much made it clear that it wasn't going to happen. He claimed it wasn't popular. But personally, he wanted to.

    My take on that is, EA go "nope" because if it didn't work then, it didn't work now. Generations was probably the worst executed pack in The Sims 3, and it got bad reviews from Critics and Fans. It also didn't sell as much (according to the PC charts). So Devs trying to push that concept to EA again, might be proving difficult.

    So instead, Devs may be like "Oh new ideas, instead of old ones!!!" and trying to get us onboard the new ideas train. Rather than the "bring back fan favourite content" train.

    All speculation of course, but this has rung true to me since Day 1.

    The problem with Generations wasn't the theme, it was that it didn't had as much content as people hoped, not having a world was the biggest thing people ranted over.

    Not to mention 90% of the people ask for a Generations EP in these forums. Outside I'm not sure, but I think Social Media refers Pets, Seasons, Supernatural and Generations the most.

    Hit the nail on the head.

    Because the Devs basically threw Generations out, without really immersing themselves into the theme, EA probably now see it as a Critical and Commercial flop. And being a business, they see Generation = Flop.

    When really, the concept was excellent, it was the execution that ruined it. I'd say if Generations was well made, it would have sold the most, and we'd be sitting here with our family content already.

    To me, it's almost a curse that Generations exists. I think had it not, EA wouldn't be so reluctant to introduce that content again.

    ---

    And yeah, most people who want Generations are on the forums. Pets and Seasons are the two biggest demands, and City and Beaches are the two biggest world requests. Which is probably why EP 3 is City Based. People want Apartments and Beach Houses.

    I said this last year, but when EA sent out the EP survey, I knew that Metropolis would win over Generations, because the demand for cities was huge and more universal than Generations.

    You don't even know how much Generations sold though, so why call it a flop, because of reviewers? ...smh. Have you had a look at TS4?

    According to ESAs charts, it didn't do as well as the other EPs.
    Generations was released in-between Late Night and Pets, right?

    http://www.isfe.eu/sites/isfe.eu/files/attachments/esa_ef_2013.pdf

    In it's second year, Generations was selling less than Late Night, which was released before it, and was even beaten by a Stuff Pack.
    All the EP's for The Sims 3 stayed within the Top 20 easily for two years. In it's second year, Generations was lucky to make the cut.

    While we don't have exact figures, it's enough to go by that it didn't do as well as the rest. That doesn't make it a flop, but it's not as commercially successful as the rest of the EP's, especially in EA's eyes.

    Even so, they don't have to release a Generations EP to release toddlers, and in fact it's what most people want, them to be released in a patch, because they are base game content.
    mHdgPlU.jpg?1
  • Options
    Sigzy05Sigzy05 Posts: 19,406 Member
    KatyJay88 wrote: »
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    The Sims 3 was definitely a teenage girls dream. Which is why when you go on YouTube, a lot of the male simmers only build in The Sims 3.
    A lot of the girls though, love The Sims 3.

    I do actually like a lot of The Sims 3, I just cannot bare all the issues that come with it. I pull my hair out when I install mods to fix issues, and then they start conflicting, and cause other issues. I wish someone would upload a Zip file of "all fixes as of 2016 patch" so I can plop it into my mods folder and play.

    Le Sigh.

    And TS4 isn't? As far as I'm concerned 90% of youtube simmers are female now and then, and to address the male builders, I haven't seen any pop up on youtube now that TS4 is out, so not 100% sure about that statement as far as I can see, it only got worse.

    There's quite a few Sims 4 players that are male. The quirky side of the Sims appeals to males more for whatever reason.
    The Sims 4 totally is, especially with CAS. But none of the packs have been so blindly catered to teenage girls more than anyone else.

    Get To Work, OR, DO, GT are all fairly even between audience. I'd say Spa Day was the only pack that felt more female orientated. But that's simply because girls are more into going to the Spa than Men.

    That's the most ridiculous thing I could ever hear, not to mention sexist.

    Please review your facts because you are obviously putting your own opinions above anything else. Not to mention TS4 is the less quirky of all sims games, unless ofc you are talking about the potty humor, aka "angry poop".

    Besides I don't even see how World Adventures screams girly, or Ambitions, or Late Night or Island Paradise or University and so on.

    giphy.gif

    I'm not sure what you are referring to, the angry poop? XD
    mHdgPlU.jpg?1
  • Options
    JayandMeekaJayandMeeka Posts: 2,377 Member
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    KatyJay88 wrote: »
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Sigzy05 wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    jackjack_k wrote: »
    @Simanite wrote: »
    @jackjack_k OMG you always slay my soul with your posts! Speaking the voice of reason. :star::heart:

    giphy.gif

    :kissing_heart:
    @jackjack_k Dingdingdingding! We have a winner.
    This is almost definitely the problem (didn't know that about Into the Future though, it really brings everything into perspective).

    The project lead/director/whatever doesn't pitch ideas to EA, EA tells the project lead what to tell the team. If EA wants to focus on a particular pack, as determined by their focus groups, then that's what the team's gonna make.

    If EA doesn't want toddlers (because their TS3 and TS2 telemetry, taken directly from gamer's saves, shows that it was an unpopular life stage), then Maxis isn't going to be in a position to make toddlers.

    Who knows, maybe that toddler render they made for the CEO was a sneaky way to get him on board with the idea? As in, "look how cute your kid is? Who wouldn't want to play that in The Sims?"

    Yeah, you can Google the presentation. EA basically pitches the idea to the Devs, based on market research.
    It was really interesting. They pretty much told Devs who they were appealing to (mostly female teens), and why the pack should exist etc.

    That explains so much about TS3, and late-era TS2. SO MUCH teenybopper content.
    Katy Perry packs, how every household in Supernatural was a reference to Tru Blood, Twilight, Teen Wolf or Vampire Diaries, or how Oasis Landing in Into the Future was literally just the Capitol from The Hunger Games.

    The Sims 3 was definitely a teenage girls dream. Which is why when you go on YouTube, a lot of the male simmers only build in The Sims 3.
    A lot of the girls though, love The Sims 3.

    I do actually like a lot of The Sims 3, I just cannot bare all the issues that come with it. I pull my hair out when I install mods to fix issues, and then they start conflicting, and cause other issues. I wish someone would upload a Zip file of "all fixes as of 2016 patch" so I can plop it into my mods folder and play.

    Le Sigh.

    And TS4 isn't? As far as I'm concerned 90% of youtube simmers are female now and then, and to address the male builders, I haven't seen any pop up on youtube now that TS4 is out, so not 100% sure about that statement as far as I can see, it only got worse.

    There's quite a few Sims 4 players that are male. The quirky side of the Sims appeals to males more for whatever reason.
    The Sims 4 totally is, especially with CAS. But none of the packs have been so blindly catered to teenage girls more than anyone else.

    Get To Work, OR, DO, GT are all fairly even between audience. I'd say Spa Day was the only pack that felt more female orientated. But that's simply because girls are more into going to the Spa than Men.

    That's the most ridiculous thing I could ever hear, not to mention sexist.

    Please review your facts because you are obviously putting your own opinions above anything else. Not to mention TS4 is the less quirky of all sims games, unless ofc you are talking about the potty humor, aka "angry poop".

    Besides I don't even see how World Adventures screams girly, or Ambitions, or Late Night or Island Paradise or University and so on.

    giphy.gif

    I'm not sure what you are referring to, the angry poop? XD

    Gave you a like because you got me to laugh.. so have my like and enjoy!
  • Options
    CapraCorn104CapraCorn104 Posts: 1,184 Member
    ok what's even going on in this thread anymore?
  • Options
    JayandMeekaJayandMeeka Posts: 2,377 Member
    ok what's even going on in this thread anymore?

    55345-Community-gif-gif-Animation-Animated-Pictures-jeff-Winger-party-fire-....gif
Sign In or Register to comment.
Return to top