I think it comes down to the point of, the worst received EP's for The Sims 3 (Generations, World Adventures, Into The Future & Showtime) were all new ideas. Most of these packs received mostly negative reception from hardcore players. (Generations contains popular gameplay, but as an EP people hated it as it was base game stuff, or should have been apart of other packs).
Get Together also received HEAPS of hate, despite being one of the more popular EP's from fans in the last 10 years or so (it's reviews from the GP were really good on Amazon, Metacritic etc).
I think EA are stuck, because new ideas are often unwelcome, but people want old idea's taken next level, and Maxis probably don't get a budget to do better than the last time (e.g. They already did the best they could do with a budget in TS3, so now in TS4 what can they do that's the same theme?).
I think it comes down to the point of, the worst received EP's for The Sims 3 (Generations, World Adventures, Into The Future & Showtime) were all new ideas. Most of these packs received mostly negative reception from hardcore players. (Generations contains popular gameplay, but as an EP people hated it as it was base game stuff, or should have been apart of other packs).
Get Together also received HEAPS of hate, despite being one of the more popular EP's from fans in the last 10 years or so (it's reviews from the GP were really good on Amazon, Metacritic etc).
I think EA are stuck, because new ideas are often unwelcome, but people want old idea's taken next level, and Maxis probably don't get a budget to do better than the last time (e.g. They already did the best they could do with a budget in TS3, so now in TS4 what can they do that's the same theme?).
Correction: WA was controversial and got negative reception, but after that the EP revenged itself by becoming one of the most favourite EP's for Sims 3 players (when you ask them the EP always ends up in the top list). Which is exactly why they should follow their own ideas instead of turning it into some sort of a malfunctioning democracy (which will only produce a safe side, lukewarm, boring result).
Generations wasn't a new idea at all, it meant to cater those who complained they missed proper family play in the new iteration. The fact it's not as popular as it could have been, is because it was poorly implemented. With rabbithole features that shouldn't have been rabbithole, a haunted doll that looks like nothing and keeps your kids from playing with normal toys and bugs all over the place (I believe our TS3 guru - not being sarcastic, he is - igazor even said once that EP is the most borked of them all). This is probably because they hadn't planned it, they made it because of (justified) complaints from the fanbase.
Get Together is only fun when you like to play the game by setting up a scene and then sit back to watch it roll. It wasn't so much a new idea, it was listening to and catering those fans who want big crowds in their game doing the same thing.
I think the fact there are so much more SP's than EP's also might have something to do with it If I'd really like the game I would too, because any addition is better than no addition.
But you prefer TS3 because you know that game and don't think that TS4 is as good. If you read this forum you will see that a lot of simmers agree. Just not the new young simmers who play TS4 as their very first Sims game and I think that is very understandably because I likely would have loved TS4 too if I never had played TS2 and TS3.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
I think it comes down to the point of, the worst received EP's for The Sims 3 (Generations, World Adventures, Into The Future & Showtime) were all new ideas. Most of these packs received mostly negative reception from hardcore players. (Generations contains popular gameplay, but as an EP people hated it as it was base game stuff, or should have been apart of other packs).
Get Together also received HEAPS of hate, despite being one of the more popular EP's from fans in the last 10 years or so (it's reviews from the GP were really good on Amazon, Metacritic etc).
I think EA are stuck, because new ideas are often unwelcome, but people want old idea's taken next level, and Maxis probably don't get a budget to do better than the last time (e.g. They already did the best they could do with a budget in TS3, so now in TS4 what can they do that's the same theme?).
Into the future was at a disadvantage as it was the last EP for TS3 so it could never really be built on. WA was pretty much always there as where the Ambitions careers when you look at the later EPs so for Ambitions especially it is almost like base content once a later expansion expands on it such as the active career in Late Night for instance
I think the fact there are so much more SP's than EP's also might have something to do with it If I'd really like the game I would too, because any addition is better than no addition.
But you prefer TS3 because you know that game and don't think that TS4 is as good. If you read this forum you will see that a lot of simmers agree. Just not the new young simmers who play TS4 as their very first Sims game and I think that is very understandably because I likely would have loved TS4 too if I never had played TS2 and TS3.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
True. Making it look cheap (and the fact there's not much else to save money for if you like the game) is a strong selling point here. My son (17) by the way doesn't play Sims, but recently said out of the blue 'EA is only in it for the money'. Also referring to other games apparently.
I think the fact there are so much more SP's than EP's also might have something to do with it If I'd really like the game I would too, because any addition is better than no addition.
But you prefer TS3 because you know that game and don't think that TS4 is as good. If you read this forum you will see that a lot of simmers agree. Just not the new young simmers who play TS4 as their very first Sims game and I think that is very understandably because I likely would have loved TS4 too if I never had played TS2 and TS3.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
True. Making it look cheap (and the fact there's not much else to save money for if you like the game) is a strong selling point here. My son (17) by the way doesn't play Sims, but recently said out of the blue 'EA is only in it for the money'. Also referring to other games apparently.
That EA only makes games for money is a fact that you can read everywhere and it is obviously true because EA started as a publisher that only earned money by publishing and distributing games made by other companies. Publishing games from other companies is also still one of EA's main activities.
My daughter has never shown much interest for Sims games either. Instead she almost completely stopped playing PC games when she became a teen. But my niece has played Sims games too. She is also interested in many other games though and she is very active discussing a lot of things on Facebook. My nephew has instead always preferred action games.
I'm pretty happy with TS4. I will admit that I'm a story player so I happily fill in any blanks in play and feel more engaged by doing so. I like playing simulations and open-ended strategy rather than being overly directed. Part of my happiness is an anticipation for new content though, so I do understand some impatience from people who are waiting for elements that they want to see in the game, including new ideas. I'm much more interested in what content will be released for the game than I am in the specific timeline. Calling me a story player doesn't insult me. I will freely admit to having a vivid imagination.
I personally do like the SPs that I've gotten but I used to get SPs in TS2 and TS3 as well. I've said before that I like bowling and still send my sims to do it regularly. I now have a lot of the later SPs and I like them. I like my movie theater and I like Backyard for certain suburban households. At some point, I do think I will get the rock wall because I do tend to like the gameplay objects in SPs.
I play what is now a self-sustaining rotation that has come together nicely. By that, I mean that I have multiple households that are now all interacting with each other. Newly generated townies (which I either delete to regenerate or quickly edit in CAS) are like the new people in town. My clubs are nearly all full and I'm only limited by the 3 clubs-per-sim limit. I have got a (mostly) nice little town going on and anything that gets added in builds upon it. I now can take breaks from the game and check back into any of a number of households and it's easy to pick up where I left off. I'm just saying this because I'm enjoying TS4; I'm playing differently than I did in other versions and I'm enjoying how TS4 is coming together for me.
I do look forward to new content and an increase in quality. I'm glad that they are working on some of the bugs which have sometimes really impacted the game. I am seeing improvements with the monthly patch updates. Sure, something new will sometimes break with a patch, but I do see them working on improving the quality of the game.
As for creativity in ideas, I'd like to see more. I agree with the person who said that part of the problem with that is that the fan base keeps calling for old favorites back into the game. I'm a bit like that because I want to see more concepts from older games as well. I agree that it sounds like there are people who tend to pan any new content if it doesn't satisfy their preconceived ideas. Those vocal contingents aren't necessarily reflective of many players who don't use the forums but obviously have some influence on pr. I'm not bashing the right to criticize or give feedback, I'm just saying that with a game this broad, it can be difficult to release new ideas with mass appeal.
I'd say that polling the global community is a good way to deal with that but as we have seen, even when doing that, the community is very divided. Releasing different types of content at different price points to appeal to different players is another way of doing so. Hopefully they will go with that strategy.
@ChampandGirlie I could agree with most of your writing. But for me to see it is only a dream because the problems are:
1. The game is mostly targeted at builders and decorators who mainly just like to build houses, decorate the houses in new ways and to dress up their sims. Therefore EA releases more and more SPs and fewer and fewer EPs and therefore the game is seen more like a virtual dollhouse than as a real game.
2. EA now releases about 5 SP, 2 GPs and at most 1 EP each year.
3. Story telling was the main thing in TS2. But it has been dumped down in both TS3 and TS4.
Personally i feel this is a bad year for Sims 4. Lack of exciting expansions coupled with unnecessary stuff packs. It was fun at Vampire pack but after that it was a downhill for the game until now.
@ChampandGirlie I could agree with most of your writing. But for me to see it is only a dream because the problems are:
1. The game is mostly targeted at builders and decorators who mainly just like to build houses, decorate the houses in new ways and to dress up their sims. Therefore EA releases more and more SPs and fewer and fewer EPs and therefore the game is seen more like a virtual dollhouse than as a real game.
2. EA now releases about 5 SP, 2 GPs and at most 1 EP each year.
3. Story telling was the main thing in TS2. But it has been dumped down in both TS3 and TS4.
There are a lot of builders who might disagree with you, who are complaining about a lack of tools. Decorating? Yes, there's definitely a lot. I will admit that I probably did more building in older versions of the game though my memory isn't the best. My memory of it isn't great because The Sims Series was always just a fun range of games I played where I did different things and didn't think too much about it when I turned the game off. I still do some building now but I've never braved putting my stuff up for public consumption. I tend to be a practical builder in TS4; ie: this house is too small and I need more space, where can I put it? With major builds, I tend to make them a work in progress by sketching the place out and adding the minimal necessities then adding detail later as I go along. Building is secondary to the live play for me, I guess. I've said before that I preferred TS3 building including the auto-roofing.
I do like the ability to create different spaces by decorating. Sure, it's fun but no, it's not my main interest. As for being a virtual dollhouse? It certainly can be for those who play that way. I wouldn't bash dollhouses though as a form of play. There are some "freemium"/social media games out there that are way more like simple decorating games. I don't want to bash it but Gardens of Time is a bit like that. I know several people who are into that but it's pretty much decorating without any depth. I'm just saying that there is a genre out there like that and it's not all played by kids. (Admittedly, those gardens can be REALLY elaborately decorated but it's a decorating game).
I will say that I have not been around with the TS4 version since its release as I took a very long break. This means that I have not been waiting for the new content nearly as long as others and even I got a bit bored a month ago. Now, I'm not bored because I have a rotation that is interesting but also something that I can step away from - and I do want to step away sometimes as a natural thing. I am expecting to see certain content in this version though and if I ultimately feel underwhelmed at the end then I will bail. I agree with the person who said that for a future version, if I come back at all, it may be after a lot of stuff has been released.
Translation: Hurry up and release Pets, Seasons, the other good stuff and hopefully some new ideas, EA, before you move on. They were getting somewhere with ideas like Off The Grid survivalism (combining the canning, environmental technology, and a quirky resourcefulness would have been cool) but it hasn't happened, at least so far. Releasing something risky -- and creative -- would be risky, I guess. Lol. Hopefully, we will see some stuff like that before this wraps up, whenever that is.
Sure....everything should have been added in base game....and packs should all have 5 times as much stuff in them....and we should all have money trees growing in our backyards too, lol. As far as "creativity" is concerned, look through the forums and see how many threads and posts are begging for stuff from previous games to be added to Sims 4....some people want old stuff, some people want new stuff, some people want more stuff, some people want free stuff....they can't please everyone.
Sure....everything should have been added in base game....and packs should all have 5 times as much stuff in them....and we should all have money trees growing in our backyards too, lol. As far as "creativity" is concerned, look through the forums and see how many threads and posts are begging for stuff from previous games to be added to Sims 4....some people want old stuff, some people want new stuff, some people want more stuff, some people want free stuff....they can't please everyone.
These days the word 'money tree' makes me nervous!
@ChampandGirlie I could agree with most of your writing. But for me to see it is only a dream because the problems are:
1. The game is mostly targeted at builders and decorators who mainly just like to build houses, decorate the houses in new ways and to dress up their sims. Therefore EA releases more and more SPs and fewer and fewer EPs and therefore the game is seen more like a virtual dollhouse than as a real game.
2. EA now releases about 5 SP, 2 GPs and at most 1 EP each year.
3. Story telling was the main thing in TS2. But it has been dumped down in both TS3 and TS4.
There are a lot of builders who might disagree with you, who are complaining about a lack of tools. Decorating? Yes, there's definitely a lot. I will admit that I probably did more building in older versions of the game though my memory isn't the best. My memory of it isn't great because The Sims Series was always just a fun range of games I played where I did different things and didn't think too much about it when I turned the game off. I still do some building now but I've never braved putting my stuff up for public consumption. I tend to be a practical builder in TS4; ie: this house is too small and I need more space, where can I put it? With major builds, I tend to make them a work in progress by sketching the place out and adding the minimal necessities then adding detail later as I go along. Building is secondary to the live play for me, I guess. I've said before that I preferred TS3 building including the auto-roofing.
I do like the ability to create different spaces by decorating. Sure, it's fun but no, it's not my main interest. As for being a virtual dollhouse? It certainly can be for those who play that way. I wouldn't bash dollhouses though as a form of play. There are some "freemium"/social media games out there that are way more like simple decorating games. I don't want to bash it but Gardens of Time is a bit like that. I know several people who are into that but it's pretty much decorating without any depth. I'm just saying that there is a genre out there like that and it's not all played by kids. (Admittedly, those gardens can be REALLY elaborately decorated but it's a decorating game).
I will say that I have not been around with the TS4 version since its release as I took a very long break. This means that I have not been waiting for the new content nearly as long as others and even I got a bit bored a month ago. Now, I'm not bored because I have a rotation that is interesting but also something that I can step away from - and I do want to step away sometimes as a natural thing. I am expecting to see certain content in this version though and if I ultimately feel underwhelmed at the end then I will bail. I agree with the person who said that for a future version, if I come back at all, it may be after a lot of stuff has been released.
Translation: Hurry up and release Pets, Seasons, the other good stuff and hopefully some new ideas, EA, before you move on. They were getting somewhere with ideas like Off The Grid survivalism (combining the canning, environmental technology, and a quirky resourcefulness would have been cool) but it hasn't happened, at least so far. Releasing something risky -- and creative -- would be risky, I guess. Lol. Hopefully, we will see some stuff like that before this wraps up, whenever that is.
Builders and decorators will never be satisfied with the game because they want EA to release tools such that they can make their own neighborhoods, worlds, clothes and decorations. But EA won't of course do that for a game where EA mainly wants to sell new hair, new clothes and new decorations in SPs because otherwise people didn't need to buy the SPs.
I don't play TS4 anymore. But I still play the Sims Freeplay even though also Freeplay is targeted at builders and decorators. I am instead a gamer though who doesn't care about stuff. So I play Freeplay only for the weekly events even though I don't care much about the weekly prices which are just more stuff. Even though Freeplay is free to play we also are offered stuff every week which would cost about the same each week as a SP for TS4 costs. So if I was tempted to buy it then Freeplay would be even more expensive to play than TS4 is. But I am neither a builder nor a decorator. So of course I don't buy anything. Even so I also "win" a lot of free decorations, hair and clothes is week. I just never use it anyway
Luckily I now have found two real games where all the building isn't just stuff but also is much more about advancing in real gameplay. So the Sims Freeplay isn't my main game anymore either.
I like the (too easy though) gameplay in all the Sims games. But I would just wish that EA would include better and more challenging gameplay too instead of just making the Sims games into virtual dollhouses with a lot of stuff but dumped down and way too easy gameplay.
I think the fact there are so much more SP's than EP's also might have something to do with it If I'd really like the game I would too, because any addition is better than no addition.
But you prefer TS3 because you know that game and don't think that TS4 is as good. If you read this forum you will see that a lot of simmers agree. Just not the new young simmers who play TS4 as their very first Sims game and I think that is very understandably because I likely would have loved TS4 too if I never had played TS2 and TS3.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
I think you're forgetting people who make enough to have some hobby money on the side and for whom The Sims is their main hobby, with very little else. In a scenario like that, the person doesn't need to have a huge amount of hobby money to keep up with the content cycle, since it's mostly a "once every few months" setup. For some of those people, they may wait for sales on things like EPs, or maybe even GPs too, but by entertainment standards, a $10 purchase every few months is pretty cheap overall. So for someone on a budget, who is only really interested in The Sims, it's not a huge amount to save.
Consider, by comparison, people who pay a monthly MMO sub fee. $15 a month is significantly more than $10 once every few months. So it's going to be affordable to even more people than an MMO sub fee is.
(This is not to say anything about the price for amount of content, or about what the content is. Rather, it's just to make a point about how the price relates to peoples' income.)
I think the fact there are so much more SP's than EP's also might have something to do with it If I'd really like the game I would too, because any addition is better than no addition.
But you prefer TS3 because you know that game and don't think that TS4 is as good. If you read this forum you will see that a lot of simmers agree. Just not the new young simmers who play TS4 as their very first Sims game and I think that is very understandably because I likely would have loved TS4 too if I never had played TS2 and TS3.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
I think you're forgetting people who make enough to have some hobby money on the side and for whom The Sims is their main hobby, with very little else. In a scenario like that, the person doesn't need to have a huge amount of hobby money to keep up with the content cycle, since it's mostly a "once every few months" setup. For some of those people, they may wait for sales on things like EPs, or maybe even GPs too, but by entertainment standards, a $10 purchase every few months is pretty cheap overall. So for someone on a budget, who is only really interested in The Sims, it's not a huge amount to save.
Consider, by comparison, people who pay a monthly MMO sub fee. $15 a month is significantly more than $10 once every few months. So it's going to be affordable to even more people than an MMO sub fee is.
(This is not to say anything about the price for amount of content, or about what the content is. Rather, it's just to make a point about how the price relates to peoples' income.)
You seem to be missing my point which is that adults who like the game usually won't look so much at the prices because they will usually just want to buy every expansion they like immediately. They have the money. So why wait?
But the young new simmers are likely just pupils in school. So they don't have a big income and will likely have to ask their parents for permission to download the expansions and also ask their parents to pay unless they can afford to buy the expansion for their pocket money. But their parents are much more likely to say yes to a $10 SP than to a $40 EP. So if they ask for permission to download an EP they will likely be told to wait until they maybe have saved enough money (which maybe never happens) while they often are allowed to just download the cheap SPs immediately. The chance for them to get permission to download a $20 GP is in the middle but still much better than their chance to be allowed to download a new EP.
EA's policy about making many more SPs and much fewer EPs than earlier is almost certainly a proof of this because I don't believe that EA ever would do this unless SPs sell much better than EPs. Recently EA also released 2 GPs in a row which for me strongly indicates that GPs for TS4 also have sold much better than EPs and I can't imagine any other reason that what I wrote above.
I think the fact there are so much more SP's than EP's also might have something to do with it If I'd really like the game I would too, because any addition is better than no addition.
But you prefer TS3 because you know that game and don't think that TS4 is as good. If you read this forum you will see that a lot of simmers agree. Just not the new young simmers who play TS4 as their very first Sims game and I think that is very understandably because I likely would have loved TS4 too if I never had played TS2 and TS3.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
I think you're forgetting people who make enough to have some hobby money on the side and for whom The Sims is their main hobby, with very little else. In a scenario like that, the person doesn't need to have a huge amount of hobby money to keep up with the content cycle, since it's mostly a "once every few months" setup. For some of those people, they may wait for sales on things like EPs, or maybe even GPs too, but by entertainment standards, a $10 purchase every few months is pretty cheap overall. So for someone on a budget, who is only really interested in The Sims, it's not a huge amount to save.
Consider, by comparison, people who pay a monthly MMO sub fee. $15 a month is significantly more than $10 once every few months. So it's going to be affordable to even more people than an MMO sub fee is.
(This is not to say anything about the price for amount of content, or about what the content is. Rather, it's just to make a point about how the price relates to peoples' income.)
You seem to be missing my point which is that adults who like the game usually won't look so much at the prices because they will usually just want to buy every expansion they like immediately. They have the money. So why wait?
But the young new simmers are likely just pupils in school. So they don't have a big income and will likely have to ask their parents for permission to download the expansions and also ask their parents to pay unless they can afford to buy the expansion for their pocket money. But their parents are much more likely to say yes to a $10 SP than to a $40 EP. So if they ask for permission to download an EP they will likely be told to wait until they maybe have saved enough money (which maybe never happens) while they often are allowed to just download the cheap SPs immediately. The chance for them to get permission to download a $20 GP is in the middle but still much better than their chance to be allowed to download a new EP.
EA's policy about making many more SPs and much fewer EPs than earlier is almost certainly a proof of this because I don't believe that EA ever would do this unless SPs sell much better than EPs. Recently EA also released 2 GPs in a row which for me strongly indicates that GPs for TS4 also have sold much better than EPs and I can't imagine any other reason that what I wrote above.
I think I see your point better now, but I still disagree. I think you're assuming a lot about demographic and sales. For instance, one could argue that young kids will actually be more fickle overall, due to a desire to follow "trends" and do the "cool new thing." I'm also pretty sure none of us have actual numbers on the age range of the average simmer, so it's speculative at best.
Personally, I think the format of SPs largely comes from how quarterly revenue works. GPs and EPs take too long to pad quarterlies reliably. SPs are short enough development time that they can fill the gap and make sure TS4 looks like a profitable business on a quarterly, rather than yearly, basis. If you traced back the rise in importance of quarterly revenue over the years, I'm betting you'd find that it corresponds pretty well with the steady move toward a format that focuses on smaller, but more frequent, content updates.
I think the fact there are so much more SP's than EP's also might have something to do with it If I'd really like the game I would too, because any addition is better than no addition.
But you prefer TS3 because you know that game and don't think that TS4 is as good. If you read this forum you will see that a lot of simmers agree. Just not the new young simmers who play TS4 as their very first Sims game and I think that is very understandably because I likely would have loved TS4 too if I never had played TS2 and TS3.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
I think you're forgetting people who make enough to have some hobby money on the side and for whom The Sims is their main hobby, with very little else. In a scenario like that, the person doesn't need to have a huge amount of hobby money to keep up with the content cycle, since it's mostly a "once every few months" setup. For some of those people, they may wait for sales on things like EPs, or maybe even GPs too, but by entertainment standards, a $10 purchase every few months is pretty cheap overall. So for someone on a budget, who is only really interested in The Sims, it's not a huge amount to save.
Consider, by comparison, people who pay a monthly MMO sub fee. $15 a month is significantly more than $10 once every few months. So it's going to be affordable to even more people than an MMO sub fee is.
(This is not to say anything about the price for amount of content, or about what the content is. Rather, it's just to make a point about how the price relates to peoples' income.)
You seem to be missing my point which is that adults who like the game usually won't look so much at the prices because they will usually just want to buy every expansion they like immediately. They have the money. So why wait?
But the young new simmers are likely just pupils in school. So they don't have a big income and will likely have to ask their parents for permission to download the expansions and also ask their parents to pay unless they can afford to buy the expansion for their pocket money. But their parents are much more likely to say yes to a $10 SP than to a $40 EP. So if they ask for permission to download an EP they will likely be told to wait until they maybe have saved enough money (which maybe never happens) while they often are allowed to just download the cheap SPs immediately. The chance for them to get permission to download a $20 GP is in the middle but still much better than their chance to be allowed to download a new EP.
EA's policy about making many more SPs and much fewer EPs than earlier is almost certainly a proof of this because I don't believe that EA ever would do this unless SPs sell much better than EPs. Recently EA also released 2 GPs in a row which for me strongly indicates that GPs for TS4 also have sold much better than EPs and I can't imagine any other reason that what I wrote above.
I think I see your point better now, but I still disagree. I think you're assuming a lot about demographic and sales. For instance, one could argue that young kids will actually be more fickle overall, due to a desire to follow "trends" and do the "cool new thing." I'm also pretty sure none of us have actual numbers on the age range of the average simmer, so it's speculative at best.
It isn't about the average age but about 2 other things:
1. There are 2 groups of simmers:
a) Those who can afford to buy all the expansions if they want them.
b) Those who can't (and most likely because they still go to school and therefore don't really earn their own money).
2. EA clearly now seems to think that expansions sell better the cheaper they are. This can only be caused by looking at non public sales numbers because earlier EA only made big EPs and therefore EA must have thought that only big EPs would have a good chance to sell at all. But slowly and gradually EA first made a few experiments with SPs for TS2 and TS3. The sales numbers for those SPs must then have been so high that EA decided to make even more SPs for TS4 and to replace about half of the EPs with half priced GPs. Now we recently saw EA change that again by suddenly releasing 2 GPs in a short period of time such that it now seems that EA's new plan is to release twice as many GPs compared to the number of EPs.
Personally, I think the format of SPs largely comes from how quarterly revenue works. GPs and EPs take too long to pad quarterlies reliably. SPs are short enough development time that they can fill the gap and make sure TS4 looks like a profitable business on a quarterly, rather than yearly, basis. If you traced back the rise in importance of quarterly revenue over the years, I'm betting you'd find that it corresponds pretty well with the steady move toward a format that focuses on smaller, but more frequent, content updates.
EA's plans are not shortsighted and EA has a strong economy which doesn't need such things as "artificially improved shortsighted looks". Yes GPs and EPs take longer time to make than SPs. But this wouldn't matter to EA if their sales numbers were as high as the sales numbers for the SPs because their prices are also much higher. Therefore I am sure that EA just has changed their release plans to make more of the best selling expansions which must be SPs while the sales numbers for EPs must have been the lowest.
I think the fact there are so much more SP's than EP's also might have something to do with it If I'd really like the game I would too, because any addition is better than no addition.
But you prefer TS3 because you know that game and don't think that TS4 is as good. If you read this forum you will see that a lot of simmers agree. Just not the new young simmers who play TS4 as their very first Sims game and I think that is very understandably because I likely would have loved TS4 too if I never had played TS2 and TS3.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
I think you're forgetting people who make enough to have some hobby money on the side and for whom The Sims is their main hobby, with very little else. In a scenario like that, the person doesn't need to have a huge amount of hobby money to keep up with the content cycle, since it's mostly a "once every few months" setup. For some of those people, they may wait for sales on things like EPs, or maybe even GPs too, but by entertainment standards, a $10 purchase every few months is pretty cheap overall. So for someone on a budget, who is only really interested in The Sims, it's not a huge amount to save.
Consider, by comparison, people who pay a monthly MMO sub fee. $15 a month is significantly more than $10 once every few months. So it's going to be affordable to even more people than an MMO sub fee is.
(This is not to say anything about the price for amount of content, or about what the content is. Rather, it's just to make a point about how the price relates to peoples' income.)
You seem to be missing my point which is that adults who like the game usually won't look so much at the prices because they will usually just want to buy every expansion they like immediately. They have the money. So why wait?
But the young new simmers are likely just pupils in school. So they don't have a big income and will likely have to ask their parents for permission to download the expansions and also ask their parents to pay unless they can afford to buy the expansion for their pocket money. But their parents are much more likely to say yes to a $10 SP than to a $40 EP. So if they ask for permission to download an EP they will likely be told to wait until they maybe have saved enough money (which maybe never happens) while they often are allowed to just download the cheap SPs immediately. The chance for them to get permission to download a $20 GP is in the middle but still much better than their chance to be allowed to download a new EP.
EA's policy about making many more SPs and much fewer EPs than earlier is almost certainly a proof of this because I don't believe that EA ever would do this unless SPs sell much better than EPs. Recently EA also released 2 GPs in a row which for me strongly indicates that GPs for TS4 also have sold much better than EPs and I can't imagine any other reason that what I wrote above.
I think I see your point better now, but I still disagree. I think you're assuming a lot about demographic and sales. For instance, one could argue that young kids will actually be more fickle overall, due to a desire to follow "trends" and do the "cool new thing." I'm also pretty sure none of us have actual numbers on the age range of the average simmer, so it's speculative at best.
It isn't about the average age but about 2 other things:
1. There are 2 groups of simmers:
a) Those who can afford to buy all the expansions if they want them.
b) Those who can't (and most likely because they still go to school and therefore don't really earn their own money).
2. EA clearly now seems to think that expansions sell better the cheaper they are. This can only be caused by looking at non public sales numbers because earlier EA only made big EPs and therefore EA must have thought that only big EPs would have a good chance to sell at all. But slowly and gradually EA first made a few experiments with SPs for TS2 and TS3. The sales numbers for those SPs must then have been so high that EA decided to make even more SPs for TS4 and to replace about half of the EPs with half priced GPs. Now we recently saw EA change that again by suddenly releasing 2 GPs in a short period of time such that it now seems that EA's new plan is to release twice as many GPs compared to the number of EPs.
Personally, I think the format of SPs largely comes from how quarterly revenue works. GPs and EPs take too long to pad quarterlies reliably. SPs are short enough development time that they can fill the gap and make sure TS4 looks like a profitable business on a quarterly, rather than yearly, basis. If you traced back the rise in importance of quarterly revenue over the years, I'm betting you'd find that it corresponds pretty well with the steady move toward a format that focuses on smaller, but more frequent, content updates.
EA's plans are not shortsighted and EA has a strong economy which doesn't need such things as "artificially improved shortsighted looks". Yes GPs and EPs take longer time to make than SPs. But this wouldn't matter to EA if their sales numbers were as high as the sales numbers for the SPs because their prices are also much higher. Therefore I am sure that EA just has changed their release plans to make more of the best selling expansions which must be SPs while the sales numbers for EPs must have been the lowest.
I'm not gonna lie. I'm no expert on the dynamic of investing and shareholders and the stock market and the like. But I'm pretty sure of one thing: Shareholders/investors can be really ignorant about how the actual business of your product works sometimes. Meaning that yes "artificially improved shortsighted looks" can actually be pretty important for convincing the people invested in your business that the investment is worth it.
In other words, they aren't necessarily going to know, or be understanding about, you wanting to release content less often in bigger chunks, cause all that might mean to them is, "What the heck happened to revenue this quarter? This business is really unstable the way it fluctuates in its profits."
Can't speak for everyone else but i rather throw 8-10$ at something i think i might like than 40$ if i am unsure i will get gameplay value enough out of it. Then it's more than likely i will wait and pick up around one the sales periods, not because i can't afford it or anything just important to me i get game value equal to what i pay.
Things like steam made me especially conscious about this because i can see how many game played hours i have gotten out each my purchases there, so i essentially much more aware of what i want now and what i am willing to pay for it. Assuming there some other more "tough" to deal with customers like myself out there too, who have money but want value in terms of gameplay for it.
@ChampandGirlie I could agree with most of your writing. But for me to see it is only a dream because the problems are: 1. The game is mostly targeted at builders and decorators who mainly just like to build houses, decorate the houses in new ways and to dress up their sims. Therefore EA releases more and more SPs and fewer and fewer EPs and therefore the game is seen more like a virtual dollhouse than as a real game.
2. EA now releases about 5 SP, 2 GPs and at most 1 EP each year.
3. Story telling was the main thing in TS2. But it has been dumped down in both TS3 and TS4.
I don't think builders have really been happy with the content either based on their complaining
I think the fact there are so much more SP's than EP's also might have something to do with it If I'd really like the game I would too, because any addition is better than no addition.
But you prefer TS3 because you know that game and don't think that TS4 is as good. If you read this forum you will see that a lot of simmers agree. Just not the new young simmers who play TS4 as their very first Sims game and I think that is very understandably because I likely would have loved TS4 too if I never had played TS2 and TS3.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
I think you're forgetting people who make enough to have some hobby money on the side and for whom The Sims is their main hobby, with very little else. In a scenario like that, the person doesn't need to have a huge amount of hobby money to keep up with the content cycle, since it's mostly a "once every few months" setup. For some of those people, they may wait for sales on things like EPs, or maybe even GPs too, but by entertainment standards, a $10 purchase every few months is pretty cheap overall. So for someone on a budget, who is only really interested in The Sims, it's not a huge amount to save.
Consider, by comparison, people who pay a monthly MMO sub fee. $15 a month is significantly more than $10 once every few months. So it's going to be affordable to even more people than an MMO sub fee is.
(This is not to say anything about the price for amount of content, or about what the content is. Rather, it's just to make a point about how the price relates to peoples' income.)
You seem to be missing my point which is that adults who like the game usually won't look so much at the prices because they will usually just want to buy every expansion they like immediately. They have the money. So why wait?
But the young new simmers are likely just pupils in school. So they don't have a big income and will likely have to ask their parents for permission to download the expansions and also ask their parents to pay unless they can afford to buy the expansion for their pocket money. But their parents are much more likely to say yes to a $10 SP than to a $40 EP. So if they ask for permission to download an EP they will likely be told to wait until they maybe have saved enough money (which maybe never happens) while they often are allowed to just download the cheap SPs immediately. The chance for them to get permission to download a $20 GP is in the middle but still much better than their chance to be allowed to download a new EP.
EA's policy about making many more SPs and much fewer EPs than earlier is almost certainly a proof of this because I don't believe that EA ever would do this unless SPs sell much better than EPs. Recently EA also released 2 GPs in a row which for me strongly indicates that GPs for TS4 also have sold much better than EPs and I can't imagine any other reason that what I wrote above.
I think I see your point better now, but I still disagree. I think you're assuming a lot about demographic and sales. For instance, one could argue that young kids will actually be more fickle overall, due to a desire to follow "trends" and do the "cool new thing." I'm also pretty sure none of us have actual numbers on the age range of the average simmer, so it's speculative at best.
It isn't about the average age but about 2 other things:
1. There are 2 groups of simmers:
a) Those who can afford to buy all the expansions if they want them.
b) Those who can't (and most likely because they still go to school and therefore don't really earn their own money).
2. EA clearly now seems to think that expansions sell better the cheaper they are. This can only be caused by looking at non public sales numbers because earlier EA only made big EPs and therefore EA must have thought that only big EPs would have a good chance to sell at all. But slowly and gradually EA first made a few experiments with SPs for TS2 and TS3. The sales numbers for those SPs must then have been so high that EA decided to make even more SPs for TS4 and to replace about half of the EPs with half priced GPs. Now we recently saw EA change that again by suddenly releasing 2 GPs in a short period of time such that it now seems that EA's new plan is to release twice as many GPs compared to the number of EPs.
Personally, I think the format of SPs largely comes from how quarterly revenue works. GPs and EPs take too long to pad quarterlies reliably. SPs are short enough development time that they can fill the gap and make sure TS4 looks like a profitable business on a quarterly, rather than yearly, basis. If you traced back the rise in importance of quarterly revenue over the years, I'm betting you'd find that it corresponds pretty well with the steady move toward a format that focuses on smaller, but more frequent, content updates.
EA's plans are not shortsighted and EA has a strong economy which doesn't need such things as "artificially improved shortsighted looks". Yes GPs and EPs take longer time to make than SPs. But this wouldn't matter to EA if their sales numbers were as high as the sales numbers for the SPs because their prices are also much higher. Therefore I am sure that EA just has changed their release plans to make more of the best selling expansions which must be SPs while the sales numbers for EPs must have been the lowest.
I'm not gonna lie. I'm no expert on the dynamic of investing and shareholders and the stock market and the like. But I'm pretty sure of one thing: Shareholders/investors can be really ignorant about how the actual business of your product works sometimes. Meaning that yes "artificially improved shortsighted looks" can actually be pretty important for convincing the people invested in your business that the investment is worth it.
In other words, they aren't necessarily going to know, or be understanding about, you wanting to release content less often in bigger chunks, cause all that might mean to them is, "What the heck happened to revenue this quarter? This business is really unstable the way it fluctuates in its profits."
EA's top managers don't get fix wages. Instead they get huge salaries which are completely depending on how much profit EA currently makes. Therefore the size of EA's profit is the only thing that EA's top managers care about.
Those top managers also don't fear to lose their jobs because they know that they won't unless EA's economy get into a crisis. This doesn't seem to be the case at all right now. So EA's top is much more interested in getting results that aren't just temporarily good. Therefore the top managers will stop game series which aren't very profitable (like Spore and Darkspore) and try to expand more profitable series (like the Sims) to more platforms. They will also make more of the type of expansions which sell best (which therefore must be SPs) and less of the type of expansions that sell worst (which therefore must be EPs).
@ChampandGirlie I could agree with most of your writing. But for me to see it is only a dream because the problems are: 1. The game is mostly targeted at builders and decorators who mainly just like to build houses, decorate the houses in new ways and to dress up their sims. Therefore EA releases more and more SPs and fewer and fewer EPs and therefore the game is seen more like a virtual dollhouse than as a real game.
2. EA now releases about 5 SP, 2 GPs and at most 1 EP each year.
3. Story telling was the main thing in TS2. But it has been dumped down in both TS3 and TS4.
I don't think builders have really been happy with the content either based on their complaining
I haven't followed their discussions very closely. But I have seen though that they especially have complained about not having the create-a-wold tool like they had for TS3. But EA wants to sell stuff to them and not to give them tools to make the stuff themselves. Besides that EA doesn't want problems with big worlds or customer made worlds for TS4.
@ChampandGirlie I could agree with most of your writing. But for me to see it is only a dream because the problems are: 1. The game is mostly targeted at builders and decorators who mainly just like to build houses, decorate the houses in new ways and to dress up their sims. Therefore EA releases more and more SPs and fewer and fewer EPs and therefore the game is seen more like a virtual dollhouse than as a real game.
2. EA now releases about 5 SP, 2 GPs and at most 1 EP each year.
3. Story telling was the main thing in TS2. But it has been dumped down in both TS3 and TS4.
I don't think builders have really been happy with the content either based on their complaining
I haven't followed their discussions very closely. But I have seen though that they especially have complained about not having the create-a-wold tool like they had for TS3. But EA wants to sell stuff to them and not to give them tools to make the stuff themselves. Besides that EA doesn't want problems with big worlds or customer made worlds for TS4.
Their loss.
Dissatisfied with Sims 4 and hoping for a better Sims 5
@ChampandGirlie I could agree with most of your writing. But for me to see it is only a dream because the problems are: 1. The game is mostly targeted at builders and decorators who mainly just like to build houses, decorate the houses in new ways and to dress up their sims. Therefore EA releases more and more SPs and fewer and fewer EPs and therefore the game is seen more like a virtual dollhouse than as a real game.
2. EA now releases about 5 SP, 2 GPs and at most 1 EP each year.
3. Story telling was the main thing in TS2. But it has been dumped down in both TS3 and TS4.
I don't think builders have really been happy with the content either based on their complaining
I haven't followed their discussions very closely. But I have seen though that they especially have complained about not having the create-a-wold tool like they had for TS3. But EA wants to sell stuff to them and not to give them tools to make the stuff themselves. Besides that EA doesn't want problems with big worlds or customer made worlds for TS4.
Thats one big complaint, but there are are a lot of issues with colors not matching, foundation tools that make it impossable to have a raised house and a ground level shed, no terrian tools or a way to makes natural water sources, furniture such as beds where the bed frame color and bedding color aren't seperated. The list goes on more than a create a world tool.
Plus some (not all) also find stuff packs don't really give much stuff. For exaple the kitchen stuff pack really only had one new set of kitchen things (if my recall correctly been a while since I checked) and then a bunch of clutter objects. There have been a few complants about stuff packs not really having a whole lot of stuff to offer up. Considering they are cheeper and also add clothing and some new animation it makes sense but stuff packs can leave a lot to be desired if one does mostly building.
Look at it like this for a game that is suppose to be mainly for builders, why strip the creative tools from older games to save bugs in gameplay and then put gameplay things into stuff packs instead of more stuff or tools? Even things like the gallery tend to favor people who want to go right to live mode, if one doesn't want to spend time building just download a house and play easy peasy. Builders can share things which is a plus but that doesn't nessasrly add or help them do anything more buildwise, where as it does add to a players gameplay by speeding up setup. (Not bashing the gallery or saying its bad to clarify).
@ChampandGirlie I could agree with most of your writing. But for me to see it is only a dream because the problems are: 1. The game is mostly targeted at builders and decorators who mainly just like to build houses, decorate the houses in new ways and to dress up their sims. Therefore EA releases more and more SPs and fewer and fewer EPs and therefore the game is seen more like a virtual dollhouse than as a real game.
2. EA now releases about 5 SP, 2 GPs and at most 1 EP each year.
3. Story telling was the main thing in TS2. But it has been dumped down in both TS3 and TS4.
I don't think builders have really been happy with the content either based on their complaining
I haven't followed their discussions very closely. But I have seen though that they especially have complained about not having the create-a-wold tool like they had for TS3. But EA wants to sell stuff to them and not to give them tools to make the stuff themselves. Besides that EA doesn't want problems with big worlds or customer made worlds for TS4.
Thats one big complaint, but there are are a lot of issues with colors not matching, foundation tools that make it impossable to have a raised house and a ground level shed, no terrian tools or a way to makes natural water sources, furniture such as beds where the bed frame color and bedding color aren't seperated. The list goes on more than a create a world tool.
Plus some (not all) also find stuff packs don't really give much stuff. For exaple the kitchen stuff pack really only had one new set of kitchen things (if my recall correctly been a while since I checked) and then a bunch of clutter objects. There have been a few complants about stuff packs not really having a whole lot of stuff to offer up. Considering they are cheeper and also add clothing and some new animation it makes sense but stuff packs can leave a lot to be desired if one does mostly building.
Look at it like this for a game that is suppose to be mainly for builders, why strip the creative tools from older games to save bugs in gameplay and then put gameplay things into stuff packs instead of more stuff or tools? Even things like the gallery tend to favor people who want to go right to live mode, if one doesn't want to spend time building just download a house and play easy peasy. Builders can share things which is a plus but that doesn't nessasrly add or help them do anything more buildwise, where as it does add to a players gameplay by speeding up setup. (Not bashing the gallery or saying its bad to clarify).
Don't forget the lack of stair options. That's another big one. Lack of roof styles is another. Limited colour options for foundations and no ability to add wall papers to them, making split levels unattractive. My biggest peeve is the all or nothing foundations and not being able to edit the neighbourhood. I also don't like the fake backdrops. I'd rather create my own look. The inability to place and re-size lots is another one. Geez, there are a lot of issues for builders.
This game is certainly not geered toward them in any way, shape, or form.
Dissatisfied with Sims 4 and hoping for a better Sims 5
Comments
Get Together also received HEAPS of hate, despite being one of the more popular EP's from fans in the last 10 years or so (it's reviews from the GP were really good on Amazon, Metacritic etc).
I think EA are stuck, because new ideas are often unwelcome, but people want old idea's taken next level, and Maxis probably don't get a budget to do better than the last time (e.g. They already did the best they could do with a budget in TS3, so now in TS4 what can they do that's the same theme?).
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
Generations wasn't a new idea at all, it meant to cater those who complained they missed proper family play in the new iteration. The fact it's not as popular as it could have been, is because it was poorly implemented. With rabbithole features that shouldn't have been rabbithole, a haunted doll that looks like nothing and keeps your kids from playing with normal toys and bugs all over the place (I believe our TS3 guru - not being sarcastic, he is - igazor even said once that EP is the most borked of them all). This is probably because they hadn't planned it, they made it because of (justified) complaints from the fanbase.
Get Together is only fun when you like to play the game by setting up a scene and then sit back to watch it roll. It wasn't so much a new idea, it was listening to and catering those fans who want big crowds in their game doing the same thing.
Therefore I think that the main reason why SPs sell so extremely well is that the youngest simmers much better can afford them. They likely can even easy pursuade their parents to pay for them because a lot of parents wouldn't care to argue with their children over such a small amount of money.
Into the future was at a disadvantage as it was the last EP for TS3 so it could never really be built on. WA was pretty much always there as where the Ambitions careers when you look at the later EPs so for Ambitions especially it is almost like base content once a later expansion expands on it such as the active career in Late Night for instance
My daughter has never shown much interest for Sims games either. Instead she almost completely stopped playing PC games when she became a teen. But my niece has played Sims games too. She is also interested in many other games though and she is very active discussing a lot of things on Facebook. My nephew has instead always preferred action games.
I personally do like the SPs that I've gotten but I used to get SPs in TS2 and TS3 as well. I've said before that I like bowling and still send my sims to do it regularly. I now have a lot of the later SPs and I like them. I like my movie theater and I like Backyard for certain suburban households. At some point, I do think I will get the rock wall because I do tend to like the gameplay objects in SPs.
I play what is now a self-sustaining rotation that has come together nicely. By that, I mean that I have multiple households that are now all interacting with each other. Newly generated townies (which I either delete to regenerate or quickly edit in CAS) are like the new people in town. My clubs are nearly all full and I'm only limited by the 3 clubs-per-sim limit. I have got a (mostly) nice little town going on and anything that gets added in builds upon it. I now can take breaks from the game and check back into any of a number of households and it's easy to pick up where I left off. I'm just saying this because I'm enjoying TS4; I'm playing differently than I did in other versions and I'm enjoying how TS4 is coming together for me.
I do look forward to new content and an increase in quality. I'm glad that they are working on some of the bugs which have sometimes really impacted the game. I am seeing improvements with the monthly patch updates. Sure, something new will sometimes break with a patch, but I do see them working on improving the quality of the game.
As for creativity in ideas, I'd like to see more. I agree with the person who said that part of the problem with that is that the fan base keeps calling for old favorites back into the game. I'm a bit like that because I want to see more concepts from older games as well. I agree that it sounds like there are people who tend to pan any new content if it doesn't satisfy their preconceived ideas. Those vocal contingents aren't necessarily reflective of many players who don't use the forums but obviously have some influence on pr. I'm not bashing the right to criticize or give feedback, I'm just saying that with a game this broad, it can be difficult to release new ideas with mass appeal.
I'd say that polling the global community is a good way to deal with that but as we have seen, even when doing that, the community is very divided. Releasing different types of content at different price points to appeal to different players is another way of doing so. Hopefully they will go with that strategy.
1. The game is mostly targeted at builders and decorators who mainly just like to build houses, decorate the houses in new ways and to dress up their sims. Therefore EA releases more and more SPs and fewer and fewer EPs and therefore the game is seen more like a virtual dollhouse than as a real game.
2. EA now releases about 5 SP, 2 GPs and at most 1 EP each year.
3. Story telling was the main thing in TS2. But it has been dumped down in both TS3 and TS4.
There are a lot of builders who might disagree with you, who are complaining about a lack of tools. Decorating? Yes, there's definitely a lot. I will admit that I probably did more building in older versions of the game though my memory isn't the best. My memory of it isn't great because The Sims Series was always just a fun range of games I played where I did different things and didn't think too much about it when I turned the game off. I still do some building now but I've never braved putting my stuff up for public consumption. I tend to be a practical builder in TS4; ie: this house is too small and I need more space, where can I put it? With major builds, I tend to make them a work in progress by sketching the place out and adding the minimal necessities then adding detail later as I go along. Building is secondary to the live play for me, I guess. I've said before that I preferred TS3 building including the auto-roofing.
I do like the ability to create different spaces by decorating. Sure, it's fun but no, it's not my main interest. As for being a virtual dollhouse? It certainly can be for those who play that way. I wouldn't bash dollhouses though as a form of play. There are some "freemium"/social media games out there that are way more like simple decorating games. I don't want to bash it but Gardens of Time is a bit like that. I know several people who are into that but it's pretty much decorating without any depth. I'm just saying that there is a genre out there like that and it's not all played by kids. (Admittedly, those gardens can be REALLY elaborately decorated but it's a decorating game).
I will say that I have not been around with the TS4 version since its release as I took a very long break. This means that I have not been waiting for the new content nearly as long as others and even I got a bit bored a month ago. Now, I'm not bored because I have a rotation that is interesting but also something that I can step away from - and I do want to step away sometimes as a natural thing. I am expecting to see certain content in this version though and if I ultimately feel underwhelmed at the end then I will bail. I agree with the person who said that for a future version, if I come back at all, it may be after a lot of stuff has been released.
Translation: Hurry up and release Pets, Seasons, the other good stuff and hopefully some new ideas, EA, before you move on. They were getting somewhere with ideas like Off The Grid survivalism (combining the canning, environmental technology, and a quirky resourcefulness would have been cool) but it hasn't happened, at least so far. Releasing something risky -- and creative -- would be risky, I guess. Lol. Hopefully, we will see some stuff like that before this wraps up, whenever that is.
These days the word 'money tree' makes me nervous!
I don't play TS4 anymore. But I still play the Sims Freeplay even though also Freeplay is targeted at builders and decorators. I am instead a gamer though who doesn't care about stuff. So I play Freeplay only for the weekly events even though I don't care much about the weekly prices which are just more stuff. Even though Freeplay is free to play we also are offered stuff every week which would cost about the same each week as a SP for TS4 costs. So if I was tempted to buy it then Freeplay would be even more expensive to play than TS4 is. But I am neither a builder nor a decorator. So of course I don't buy anything. Even so I also "win" a lot of free decorations, hair and clothes is week. I just never use it anyway
Luckily I now have found two real games where all the building isn't just stuff but also is much more about advancing in real gameplay. So the Sims Freeplay isn't my main game anymore either.
I like the (too easy though) gameplay in all the Sims games. But I would just wish that EA would include better and more challenging gameplay too instead of just making the Sims games into virtual dollhouses with a lot of stuff but dumped down and way too easy gameplay.
Consider, by comparison, people who pay a monthly MMO sub fee. $15 a month is significantly more than $10 once every few months. So it's going to be affordable to even more people than an MMO sub fee is.
(This is not to say anything about the price for amount of content, or about what the content is. Rather, it's just to make a point about how the price relates to peoples' income.)
But the young new simmers are likely just pupils in school. So they don't have a big income and will likely have to ask their parents for permission to download the expansions and also ask their parents to pay unless they can afford to buy the expansion for their pocket money. But their parents are much more likely to say yes to a $10 SP than to a $40 EP. So if they ask for permission to download an EP they will likely be told to wait until they maybe have saved enough money (which maybe never happens) while they often are allowed to just download the cheap SPs immediately. The chance for them to get permission to download a $20 GP is in the middle but still much better than their chance to be allowed to download a new EP.
EA's policy about making many more SPs and much fewer EPs than earlier is almost certainly a proof of this because I don't believe that EA ever would do this unless SPs sell much better than EPs. Recently EA also released 2 GPs in a row which for me strongly indicates that GPs for TS4 also have sold much better than EPs and I can't imagine any other reason that what I wrote above.
Personally, I think the format of SPs largely comes from how quarterly revenue works. GPs and EPs take too long to pad quarterlies reliably. SPs are short enough development time that they can fill the gap and make sure TS4 looks like a profitable business on a quarterly, rather than yearly, basis. If you traced back the rise in importance of quarterly revenue over the years, I'm betting you'd find that it corresponds pretty well with the steady move toward a format that focuses on smaller, but more frequent, content updates.
1. There are 2 groups of simmers:
a) Those who can afford to buy all the expansions if they want them.
b) Those who can't (and most likely because they still go to school and therefore don't really earn their own money).
2. EA clearly now seems to think that expansions sell better the cheaper they are. This can only be caused by looking at non public sales numbers because earlier EA only made big EPs and therefore EA must have thought that only big EPs would have a good chance to sell at all. But slowly and gradually EA first made a few experiments with SPs for TS2 and TS3. The sales numbers for those SPs must then have been so high that EA decided to make even more SPs for TS4 and to replace about half of the EPs with half priced GPs. Now we recently saw EA change that again by suddenly releasing 2 GPs in a short period of time such that it now seems that EA's new plan is to release twice as many GPs compared to the number of EPs.
EA's plans are not shortsighted and EA has a strong economy which doesn't need such things as "artificially improved shortsighted looks". Yes GPs and EPs take longer time to make than SPs. But this wouldn't matter to EA if their sales numbers were as high as the sales numbers for the SPs because their prices are also much higher. Therefore I am sure that EA just has changed their release plans to make more of the best selling expansions which must be SPs while the sales numbers for EPs must have been the lowest.
In other words, they aren't necessarily going to know, or be understanding about, you wanting to release content less often in bigger chunks, cause all that might mean to them is, "What the heck happened to revenue this quarter? This business is really unstable the way it fluctuates in its profits."
Things like steam made me especially conscious about this because i can see how many game played hours i have gotten out each my purchases there, so i essentially much more aware of what i want now and what i am willing to pay for it. Assuming there some other more "tough" to deal with customers like myself out there too, who have money but want value in terms of gameplay for it.
Those top managers also don't fear to lose their jobs because they know that they won't unless EA's economy get into a crisis. This doesn't seem to be the case at all right now. So EA's top is much more interested in getting results that aren't just temporarily good. Therefore the top managers will stop game series which aren't very profitable (like Spore and Darkspore) and try to expand more profitable series (like the Sims) to more platforms. They will also make more of the type of expansions which sell best (which therefore must be SPs) and less of the type of expansions that sell worst (which therefore must be EPs).
Their loss.
Plus some (not all) also find stuff packs don't really give much stuff. For exaple the kitchen stuff pack really only had one new set of kitchen things (if my recall correctly been a while since I checked) and then a bunch of clutter objects. There have been a few complants about stuff packs not really having a whole lot of stuff to offer up. Considering they are cheeper and also add clothing and some new animation it makes sense but stuff packs can leave a lot to be desired if one does mostly building.
Look at it like this for a game that is suppose to be mainly for builders, why strip the creative tools from older games to save bugs in gameplay and then put gameplay things into stuff packs instead of more stuff or tools? Even things like the gallery tend to favor people who want to go right to live mode, if one doesn't want to spend time building just download a house and play easy peasy. Builders can share things which is a plus but that doesn't nessasrly add or help them do anything more buildwise, where as it does add to a players gameplay by speeding up setup. (Not bashing the gallery or saying its bad to clarify).
Don't forget the lack of stair options. That's another big one. Lack of roof styles is another. Limited colour options for foundations and no ability to add wall papers to them, making split levels unattractive. My biggest peeve is the all or nothing foundations and not being able to edit the neighbourhood. I also don't like the fake backdrops. I'd rather create my own look. The inability to place and re-size lots is another one. Geez, there are a lot of issues for builders.
This game is certainly not geered toward them in any way, shape, or form.