They would make so much more $$$$ long term if they developed the complicated stuff into one game and created the happy pony game as an offshoot.
You think like a player, my friend.
Think like a developer. "If you don't have to do something, don't do it".
Of course, the critics reviews might be worse, but till they do not have any competitors and people paying for their games, nothing will change, I'm afraid.
I like to think not every game developer/company thinks like that...
They would make so much more $$$$ long term if they developed the complicated stuff into one game and created the happy pony game as an offshoot.
You think like a player, my friend.
Think like a developer. "If you don't have to do something, don't do it".
Of course, the critics reviews might be worse, but till they do not have any competitors and people paying for their games, nothing will change, I'm afraid.
I like to think not every game developer/company thinks like that...
Misfortune...
Of course not every game developers thinks like that... There are many wonderful games, like The Witcher made by small Polish group of passionate people (my father in law made cd covers for them). They know, that if the quality of their product will be low, they will be ended. In Poland we are still in shock because of The Witcher success, BTW.
I don't know who directing The Sims, but he (or she) is not a visionary. The company is big and they do not need to "fight for players", so low quality is not a big problem for them.
I don't know TS4 history, but the game looks like made for online project. Seriously, I'm not good in English... No fears, no desires, It looks like incomplete game, like in the middle of works someone changed decision and they had to speed up their works. And look at the expansions - when I bought TS4 in June 2017 there were only 3 expansions and lots of stuff packs. I remember only 2 new stuffs in 2 years - laundry and "the hamster from space" - and more expansions, including "must be", like seasons and pets. The policy was changed and good.
And the players... They (including myself) will buy everything and instead of scream about the source of problem, they demanding new objects like cars, spiral stairs etc (sorry, guys, I want them too, but maybe later...). The game changers are, for me, group of "walking commercials" (they love everything!).
I still believe, that they will improve TS4. They must show us, that they know, where they were wrong. Without it I do not believe in better TS5.
Origin ID: ukyojin
Unofficial Polish Forum - simtopia.pl
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
Now that I've managed to get my Sims 3 game back, I'm moving back to it again with the hope that sometime in the not too distant future, someone will say 'Hey, we need to up our game a bit and create what our players actually want in a Sims game.' At that point, if it ever happens, I will return to spend some of my money on a Sims game but for now, it's just a ....... massive disappointment ..... from so many perspectives.
Sims 5 hopefully is a mixture of Sims 3‘s freedom of open world and color wheel and Sims 2‘s gameplay!
With modern graphics. Without all the Sims having glassy-eyed grins on their faces no matter what is happening.
I don't know TS4 history, but the game looks like made for online project.
It was. Then they had to do an about-face when their latest online-only SimCity bombed so badly. Gamers have been dealing with the fallout from this botched project for 5 years now. TS5, if there is one, reallyreallyreally needs to start from scratch.
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
Somehow at this point this is also their fault. They also have bad priorities. I don't think it's to EA to decide whether they're going to make a fonctional elevator or a talking toilet.
This game is totally childish in my humble opinion. It's full of rainbows everywhere you look. Whose life is actually like that? There's simply no content in Sims 4; there is nothing to do and no consequences to face. No challenges, no options whatsoever to make up any story the players' imaginations can stir up because the sims have their own agenda going on, ALL the time. No matter what a player wants to create, it's not possible because the sims are like robots, getting on with their own thing, oblivious of the player.
I find it very difficult to believe that someone, somewhere, has decided to keep such a game running for such a long time, knowing how much has been spoken about its lack of content; its lack of reality; its lack of player control .... I could go on for some time about this but I'm not going to. It's sufficient to say only that this game does not measure up, plain and simple. It's pretty, it runs well but in comparison to previous games, it's so lacking that life is too short to list what's missing or what has been glossed over.
I managed to get my old Sims 3 game running again on my older pc this afternoon and time passed so quickly I couldn't believe what time it was when I finally ended the game. The reason I lost track of time was because I was lost in all that content; there was so much to do and nothing like enough time to do it all in. So many things to do! I was totally absorbed. I had forgotten just how much I used to enjoy playing Sims 3. What a difference! It hits you in the face!
I really don't know who they aimed this game at. (I'm not sure who 'they' are) I feel they were either not informed about what players really want in a sims game or they seriously overlooked it, for some reason. Who knows? Whoever is making Sims 4 should definitely spend some a good amount of time playing the game in an effort to discover for themselves whether they become absorbed or not. The people making decisions about what to add into the game are adults, like many of their players, so they must surely know for themselves how impossible it is for a player to really enjoy this game as much as they should. Would anyone making the game enjoy making sand castles all day? Would they enjoy sailing around in circles? Would they enjoy watching a sim pick up and put down a book repeatedly? Would they enjoy watching their sims sitting at a computer every single spare moment? Do they really enjoy watching sims 'chat' constantly, with the player never really knowing exactly what they are chatting about? I tend to think not.
Maybe I'm being a bit harsh but seriously, does everyone who designs content for this game not have any idea how important colour schemes are, or how important it is to create a story line where your sims actually do what you ask? Do they not realise that when gameplay becomes tedious as it inevitably does after a time, that the player might then go on to building and decorating a home with 'colour schemes' in mind?
Now that I've managed to get my Sims 3 game back, I'm moving back to it again with the hope that sometime in the not too distant future, someone will say 'Hey, we need to up our game a bit and create what our players actually want in a Sims game.' At that point, if it ever happens, I will return to spend some of my money on a Sims game but for now, it's just a ....... massive disappointment ..... from so many perspectives.
I agree so much with you. You totally explained how I'm feeling and I do really hope the sim gurus we'll see it. It's an amazing thread where they can understand why TS4 get so much hate. Don't know if they'll listen tho, can't believe that after 5 years they still don't know. I also agree with you about TS3, I returned to it too, cause TS4 is pointless, without any purposes/consequences etc, just BORING. In TS3 you have so many customization, possiblities etc. When I first reopened my game I was amazed, it was magical just like the first time I played TS3.
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
Somehow at this point this is also their fault. They also have bad priorities. I don't think it's to EA to decide whether they're going to make a fonctional elevator or a talking toilet.
Well said! I totally agree and still frustrated with City Living. It looks like both expansions with "living" in the name are flops
I'm going to drop here a comment extracted for a Parent-Review website, were a parent ask that TS4 should remove more content.
***************************************************************************************
Bug says:
November 7, 2018 at 11:15 pm
The company needs to delete the sexual content. This is another example of media telling girls that having enlarged breasts and butt is more attractive. Also, showing that if they put a few good things into the video game, like managing money, consumers should ignore the inappropriate material. There is no need for the sexual aspects to be included in this game.
***************************************************************************************
And another one:
***************************************************************************************
Is there a password protection option on the SIMS4 game? We only want our daughter (8 years) to play this game when we are about. She was beside herself when some of the characters inexplicably(!?) died (much to our horror – yes, it was our fault for not understanding the game!). I have had a scout round in the options menu but nothing obvious there. Thanks
***************************************************************************************
I think catering to girls is not the problem, catering to parents is.
Source: geekdad.com, parents-should-know-about-the-sims-4
(You will have to search for it, I'm not able to post the link)
These producers have said they would be perfectly fine with letting their five year old play TS4. I can see why, no consequences to make a five year old cry is the direction of it at it's core. And if anything hurtful or disturbing or 'mature' happened where Sims had to deal with another Sim walking up to bully your Sim etc. like poking them in the chest, like in TS2, would be thrown out the door these days. Because yes, a five year old might cry about that in a game. Notice in TS4 Sims rarely if ever cry. But it's o.k. to be 'sad' and teach kids to get a voodoo doll and get revenge on their enemies, but don't point a finger at another Sim. It was the first thing they showed in a trailer about this game, to get a voodoo doll and get even with another Sim for taking all the attention of a girl the one Sim was interested in. But heaven forbid a Sim points a finger at another Sim that's abuse according to some of the pearl clutchers. But perfectly normal to hex someone. Even I can't keep up with their contradictions.
I won't be suprised if they take away hugging since today people have to ask instead of just givng someone a hug, but at the same time add a nude lot trait where it's perfectly normal to walk around naked all day. It's starting to look like they have no idea what they are building or what messages they want to send to the public buying their games. They seem to be in a twisted knot by their own contradicting statements and features and maybe they should just stay out of the messaging business and build a game that reflects life, it's ugly, it's mean and it's sometimes brutal to deal with situations, and sometimes life hurts, and is controversal, but when they build features all willy nilly they have no idea they look all mixed up with their focus being all over the place.
Other examples, take care of the environment, but say or add nothing (no animations) for using sunblock and no messaging about tanning causes skin cancer which will you get faster than trash in the water. Sims get sick but don't worry if you don't 'heal' them they are fine in a few hours, they won't die. I can see why a five year old plays TS4.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
No matter when ts4 ends... EA already believes that we'll buy whatever they slap a Sims name onto. It'll only get better when EA stops believing that.
They will only stop believing it when consumers stop buying every pile of steaming garbage that has the Sims name on it. I wish what had happened to The Sims Medieval (base game, one expansion, then killed) had happened to TS4, but no, people keep buying all the overpriced packs. That's the problem. However, I know a lot of people really enjoy TS4 although I personally don't see how they can, so my hopes rest on another company/developer taking the life simulation idea and making something really great.
They would make so much more $$$$ long term if they developed the complicated stuff into one game and created the happy pony game as an offshoot.
You think like a player, my friend.
Think like a developer. "If you don't have to do something, don't do it".
Of course, the critics reviews might be worse, but till they do not have any competitors and people paying for their games, nothing will change, I'm afraid.
I like to think not every game developer/company thinks like that...
Misfortune...
Of course not every game developers thinks like that... There are many wonderful games, like The Witcher made by small Polish group of passionate people (my father in law made cd covers for them). They know, that if the quality of their product will be low, they will be ended. In Poland we are still in shock because of The Witcher success, BTW.
I don't know who directing The Sims, but he (or she) is not a visionary. The company is big and they do not need to "fight for players", so low quality is not a big problem for them.
I don't know TS4 history, but the game looks like made for online project. Seriously, I'm not good in English... No fears, no desires, It looks like incomplete game, like in the middle of works someone changed decision and they had to speed up their works. And look at the expansions - when I bought TS4 in June 2017 there were only 3 expansions and lots of stuff packs. I remember only 2 new stuffs in 2 years - laundry and "the hamster from space" - and more expansions, including "must be", like seasons and pets. The policy was changed and good.
And the players... They (including myself) will buy everything and instead of scream about the source of problem, they demanding new objects like cars, spiral stairs etc (sorry, guys, I want them too, but maybe later...). The game changers are, for me, group of "walking commercials" (they love everything!).
I still believe, that they will improve TS4. They must show us, that they know, where they were wrong. Without it I do not believe in better TS5.
You're from Poland I visited Krakow a month ago and fell in love with the city, the whole atmosphere. Ok, this is off topic, sorry Anyway, I very much agree with you. I must add that it saddens me how so many fans seem to openly support and accept their decision to sacrifice so many features I love for 'performance' sake. I don't buy it tbh, I just don't believe fo example an open world isn't possible without the issues it had in Sims 3. They just need to do it right, but instead I see people stating they don't want/need it back, apparently feeling it's necessary to be able to play the game and I fear that's all EA needs to hear to continue this way.
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
I believe this.
I believe that people need their jobs and have to follow whatever the people at the top say. Its the real world - we are just playing with make believe worlds and these people who create them have bosses who might not be willing to listen to us consumers.
For whatever reason, a while ago, EA made a decision that has changed the foundation of what made the Sims (the original version) great.
We saw what happened to SimCity 2013. If that's how they want to dismantle these once great games and for some reason refuse to budge - that's ultimately their loss - because we still all have the old games.
This will be their legacy. They will be known as the company that killed anything good about these games and turned them into crap.
Actually, they already are known as that - just look at all the lists of games and studios bought by them and were killed.
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
I believe this.
I believe that people need their jobs and have to follow whatever the people at the top say. Its the real world - we are just playing with make believe worlds and these people who create them have bosses who might not be willing to listen to us consumers.
For whatever reason, a while ago, EA made a decision that has changed the foundation of what made the Sims (the original version) great.
We saw what happened to SimCity 2013. If that's how they want to dismantle these once great games and for some reason refuse to budge - that's ultimately their loss - because we still all have the old games.
This will be their legacy. They will be known as the company that killed anything good about these games and turned them into plum.
Actually, they already are known as that - just look at all the lists of games and studios bought by them and were killed.
It's not just the Sims.
I don't know why people have the misconception that EA tells Lyndsay and the producers what to do in a pack or base game. That's all a myth. (TS4) And it was Lucy Bradshaw's idea not EA's to build an online multiplayer Sim City.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
I don't know TS4 history, but the game looks like made for online project.
It was. Then they had to do an about-face when their latest online-only SimCity bombed so badly. Gamers have been dealing with the fallout from this botched project for 5 years now. TS5, if there is one, reallyreallyreally needs to start from scratch.
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
I believe this.
I believe that people need their jobs and have to follow whatever the people at the top say. Its the real world - we are just playing with make believe worlds and these people who create them have bosses who might not be willing to listen to us consumers.
For whatever reason, a while ago, EA made a decision that has changed the foundation of what made the Sims (the original version) great.
We saw what happened to SimCity 2013. If that's how they want to dismantle these once great games and for some reason refuse to budge - that's ultimately their loss - because we still all have the old games.
This will be their legacy. They will be known as the company that killed anything good about these games and turned them into plum.
Actually, they already are known as that - just look at all the lists of games and studios bought by them and were killed.
It's not just the Sims.
I don't know why people have the misconception that EA tells Lyndsay and the producers what to do in a pack or base game. That's all a myth. (TS4) And it was Lucy Bradshaw's idea not EA's to build an online multiplayer Sim City.
I don't know what happens behind closed doors there.
I don't care.
The only thing I know, as fact is that Ocean Quigley, lead developer himself with SimCity 2013, stated that we would have gotten something better if EA hadn't interfered.
EA greenlit the project, with a caveat: It had to be an always-online title, because that's the future that EA believed the gaming industry was heading toward. (Microtransactions were a part of EA's reasoning, said Quigley, but not the main impetus behind the decision.)
"EA wanted to make it more of a platform, an ongoing platform, that they'd sort of build and develop on," Quigley explained. "And so that [...] mandated, kind of, the server and online stuff. Which, in retrospect — I mean, obviously — was the fatal flaw in it."
Maxis had to figure out how to turn that onerous requirement into a feature that would deliver something useful to SimCity players. Networking allowed for elements like leaderboards, and opened up "interesting design-space possibilities" such as players being able to connect their cities with their friends' cities in a region. But Quigley wished those features had been optional, considering how SimCity's launch turned out.
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
I believe this.
I believe that people need their jobs and have to follow whatever the people at the top say. Its the real world - we are just playing with make believe worlds and these people who create them have bosses who might not be willing to listen to us consumers.
For whatever reason, a while ago, EA made a decision that has changed the foundation of what made the Sims (the original version) great.
We saw what happened to SimCity 2013. If that's how they want to dismantle these once great games and for some reason refuse to budge - that's ultimately their loss - because we still all have the old games.
This will be their legacy. They will be known as the company that killed anything good about these games and turned them into plum.
Actually, they already are known as that - just look at all the lists of games and studios bought by them and were killed.
It's not just the Sims.
I don't know why people have the misconception that EA tells Lyndsay and the producers what to do in a pack or base game. That's all a myth. (TS4) And it was Lucy Bradshaw's idea not EA's to build an online multiplayer Sim City.
I don't know what happens behind closed doors there.
I don't care.
The only thing I know, as fact is that Ocean Quigley, lead developer himself with SimCity 2013, stated that we would have gotten something better if EA hadn't interfered.
EA greenlit the project, with a caveat: It had to be an always-online title, because that's the future that EA believed the gaming industry was heading toward. (Microtransactions were a part of EA's reasoning, said Quigley, but not the main impetus behind the decision.)
"EA wanted to make it more of a platform, an ongoing platform, that they'd sort of build and develop on," Quigley explained. "And so that [...] mandated, kind of, the server and online stuff. Which, in retrospect — I mean, obviously — was the fatal flaw in it."
Maxis had to figure out how to turn that onerous requirement into a feature that would deliver something useful to SimCity players. Networking allowed for elements like leaderboards, and opened up "interesting design-space possibilities" such as players being able to connect their cities with their friends' cities in a region. But Quigley wished those features had been optional, considering how SimCity's launch turned out.
That's interesting to know. Since Frank G. said it was all Lucy Bradshaw's idea. Seriously, he did in an old interview. I know he wouldn't green light any project that wasn't online (any game) but didn't know they might have pushed Maxis in that direction, and just thought it was a requirement, but not necessarily making them build a multiplayer game. I guess we never know the real truth of who said what and who decided.
ETA: but as I said before, EA executives aren't standing over top of Maxis (like some think) saying put butterflies and turtle eggs in the next pack, and hey, make it an island world. Those are totally up to Maxis.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
I believe this.
I believe that people need their jobs and have to follow whatever the people at the top say. Its the real world - we are just playing with make believe worlds and these people who create them have bosses who might not be willing to listen to us consumers.
For whatever reason, a while ago, EA made a decision that has changed the foundation of what made the Sims (the original version) great.
We saw what happened to SimCity 2013. If that's how they want to dismantle these once great games and for some reason refuse to budge - that's ultimately their loss - because we still all have the old games.
This will be their legacy. They will be known as the company that killed anything good about these games and turned them into plum.
Actually, they already are known as that - just look at all the lists of games and studios bought by them and were killed.
It's not just the Sims.
I don't know why people have the misconception that EA tells Lyndsay and the producers what to do in a pack or base game. That's all a myth. (TS4) And it was Lucy Bradshaw's idea not EA's to build an online multiplayer Sim City.
I don't know what happens behind closed doors there.
I don't care.
The only thing I know, as fact is that Ocean Quigley, lead developer himself with SimCity 2013, stated that we would have gotten something better if EA hadn't interfered.
EA greenlit the project, with a caveat: It had to be an always-online title, because that's the future that EA believed the gaming industry was heading toward. (Microtransactions were a part of EA's reasoning, said Quigley, but not the main impetus behind the decision.)
"EA wanted to make it more of a platform, an ongoing platform, that they'd sort of build and develop on," Quigley explained. "And so that [...] mandated, kind of, the server and online stuff. Which, in retrospect — I mean, obviously — was the fatal flaw in it."
Maxis had to figure out how to turn that onerous requirement into a feature that would deliver something useful to SimCity players. Networking allowed for elements like leaderboards, and opened up "interesting design-space possibilities" such as players being able to connect their cities with their friends' cities in a region. But Quigley wished those features had been optional, considering how SimCity's launch turned out.
That's interesting to know. Since Frank G. said it was all Lucy Bradshaw's idea. Seriously, he did in an old interview. I know he wouldn't green light any project that wasn't online (any game) but didn't know they might have pushed Maxis in that direction, and just thought it was a requirement, but not necessarily making them build a multiplayer game. I guess we never know the real truth of who said what and who decided.
ETA: but as I said before, EA executives aren't standing over top of Maxis (like some think) saying put butterflies and turtle eggs in the next pack, and hey, make it an island world. Those are totally up to Maxis.
I do agree that certain design decisions are up to Maxis.
Just wish they would fight harder for what they have to know by now that most players want.
I agree with this. I started playing the sims 1 as a teenager. I wasn’t playing it to explore a happy, utopia life style. I was definitely more of a “exploring failure states” kind of player.
My niece is almost a teen and she likes the sims 4 but she gets bored quickly as there’s nothing in her eyes to do. She definitely doesn’t care for the constant utopia that is sims 4. It is incredibly sad that EA don’t care about their existing fans from previous games and I think that’s part of why the sims 4 has the problems it has. There are too many instances of fans asking for things, being ignored and the studio telling fans what they want- Who asked for the Moschino Stuff pack? Who asked for content to be held from an expansion and made a stuff pack?
I completely agree the game needs more consequences and depth.
Well they've become pop culture now, not just a video game. It's always about money but it's also about staying modern and keeping up with trends and less about being a sandbox life simulator video game. It kind of puts me in mind of something I used to see back in school. Of the one friend who starts becoming popular and eventually ditches the people they used to hang out with. The old friends accepted them for being who they were but now they've gained popularity and the number one focus is keeping it, no matter what parts of them they have to shed to be accepted. Now suddenly things that used to be cool and acceptable with their old group of friends are no longer cool and acceptable because of their new friends. They want the old friends to follow them into popularity too, trying to have their cake and eat it too, so they encourage the old friends to keep up and get with the times. But when the old friends don't just conform to everything like they expected them to, like they did, they toss the old friends aside and stick to the new, more popular friends. We're the old friends who got tossed aside.
I know they'll say that isn't true and that they listen to us but if they feel money from core players or players who've played any iteration before 4 is a given then what incentive would they have to listen to and provide for those players? Not a lot. Really none. Core players are going to cave regardless, at least in the companies eyes and if they don't well they think they can be popular and trendy enough to reel in new players to compensate for that loss. There's no need to listen or provide for those older players. And listening, at least to me, isn't just putting out practically the same or a worse fan favorite packs and content or so graciously letting players vote to have laundry.
If they were listening there would've been steady advancements made in those packs and laundry wouldn't have needed a vote in the first place. Listening would be knowing actually knowing why your consumers don't seem to like certain things not going off data that only tells part of the story. Listening would be knowing exactly what the problems are and following through on fixing them first instead of moving to the next pack or even the next game. And don't get me wrong, better late listening than never but sometimes late is too late. Damage incurs, and adding to that they can't speak on much of anything which makes it worse. That's part of the reason there are angry players, tired players, frustrated players, hostile players, and players that are just done with them.
I think that it's going to be at least 2 years before they even start working on TS5.. I think they said they wanted to have so many packs before they even started on a new game. Who knows though, maybe it's already in production.
I don't think it will change anything though. If you are unhappy with the game now I feel like you will continue to be disappointed. Just because you feel like something should be one way, doesn't mean that is the direction the devs want to go with it. At the end of the day, the devs are going to win.
I do think listening to the consumers is an extremely beneficial business tactic, however, think of all the many different opinions that are conflicting and coming to you as a dev. Who do you listen to? People that want it A or people who want it B? Usually what happens is they go down the middle to try to compromise for all the consumers, then it ends up feeling incomplete because neither side got what they truly wanted and it just becomes a mess of opinions again.
I'm not vouching for them; even I have complaints about the game. However if I was that unhappy with the game, I wouldn't continue to support it and purchase future games/DLC.
I think in most cases it's not that some of us think something should be done one way over the other so much as we want an option to have it both ways if and when possible. A lot of problems could be solved by just giving players options. It's the one thing everyone can agree on. We want the option to play the way they want to. I want that, but I also want other players to be satisfied as well. Options help. Unfortunately though, they've allowed some narratives to continue and even contributed to them and it's gotten to the point that some players feel options aren't possible or that having an option will make things worse so it should just be this way or no way and this way is better than nothing. That's ridiculous to me. There are ways to go about having options that are mutually beneficial and that work properly. They just have to do it and do it right, but that just hasn't been done for whatever reason and not just in The Sims 4 either. They're not going to be able to please everyone and I think quite a few of us are fine with compromise but in some instances there was no compromise. They picked a side and called it a day. It's a design choice, we get told. That's a big part of the problem.
First example that comes to mind is cellphones. It was something complained about before in the previous game. Not everyone wanted their sim to have a cellphone. And there are some players who don't really think about this because it's a cellphone, everyone has a cellphone these days but it's The Sims. It used to be that players didn't have to just stick with what they provided but we could create and shape our own neighborhoods and worlds. Mandatory cellphones mess up gameplay and become a major headache depending on what the player's going for in their game. I remember some players not playing in a modern setting upset and looking for mods because their sim from another time period would pull out a cellphone and show someone videos or start surfing the web. Or some players just didn't want their sim to have a cellphone regardless of the times. It wasn't like the stocking a fridge where you had a choice in the matter to either go to the grocery store and buy groceries or just go to the fridge and not bother. You have a cellphone, your landline is useless now. Get used to it.
That carried on in Sims 4 when instead a great solution that could've added more depth and gameplay would've been to make it where if a player wants their sim to have a cellphone they can enable it for a fee taken out of their Sims money or make a sim have to go to a shop and buy one. They could've allowed multiple ways of communication whether by cell phone, computer, landline, or letter. Imagine the possibilities if well implemented and detailed! But we don't get that kind of level of depth anymore. They're strictly thinking in a modern day box. Not a let's help players tell their stories and create how they want box. It's about what's in and what's now for them to capitalize on not about providing more tools and options for the players.
I think that's something they keep missing. Not every player who plays this is someone who loves flexin' on the Gram or making vlogs about how to look good, but solely based off the type teen girls they're trying to appeal to the sims act very much in accordance to that and it explains so much. I kind of agree with that one parent who implied they're contributing to a problem amongst young girls, though not with character creation but influencers. It's fine to be inspired by trends but influenced to follow trends and act like a bunch of carbon copies... That's exactly what these sims act like.
I wasn't always the biggest fan of TS4 but I feel like it gets such a bad rep. 3 and 2 were by no means perfect. I struggled to like 3 for years and I still don't feel attached. It was a buggy mess and the only good bit was the open world. 2 is still the golden child but a lot of my love for it is colored by nostalgia. It's really hard for me to go back to it, and I kind of don't want to because I want to keep those memories of it untarnished. 4 has it's issues (that seem to become better and worse every patch day) and engine limitations but I still have a blast with the game. Even if it's not for everyone the systems it has introduced into the series as a whole are fantastic. I could see them learning from all three games if/when they release The Sims 5. Do I want TS4 to end for 5? Not really, I'm not in a hurry to get to 5 cause I'm enjoying 4. And I'd assume everyone who is playing a sims game is currently enjoying their game of choice. And more importantly, if it's rushed it will never be the game we all want it to be. There's a lot that 5 has to do to win us over from day one and I don't envy the team for having to deal with a fanbase who will all pick their hills to die on. I can wait for them to get it right. I'd rather not wait for them to get it wrong and truly alienate all the fans.
Hoping some day for some toddlers. But also dreading they'll never come. JK THEY ARE HERE!
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
Somehow at this point this is also their fault. They also have bad priorities. I don't think it's to EA to decide whether they're going to make a fonctional elevator or a talking toilet.
I agree Maxis is the developer and EA is the publisher and Maxis uses the money that EA provides them to develop the game.
Omen by HP Intel®️ Core™️ i9- 12900K W/ RGB Liquid Cooler 32GB Nvidia RTX 3080 10Gb ASUS Ultra-Wide 34" Curved Monitor. Omen By HP Intel® Core™ i7-12800HX 32 GB Nvidia 3070 Ti 8 GB 17.3 Screen
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
You’re fine, I don’t mind you singling me out, I didn’t take it that way!
I was just saying devs as a general term for the entire Sims team, I didn’t specifically mean the actual developers. But you are correct!
Also I meant that statement as in, whatever they wanna do with the game they are going to do, regardless of who they lose in the process because there will always be supporters.
Comments
Its another excuse for sure!
Misfortune...
Of course not every game developers thinks like that... There are many wonderful games, like The Witcher made by small Polish group of passionate people (my father in law made cd covers for them). They know, that if the quality of their product will be low, they will be ended. In Poland we are still in shock because of The Witcher success, BTW.
I don't know who directing The Sims, but he (or she) is not a visionary. The company is big and they do not need to "fight for players", so low quality is not a big problem for them.
I don't know TS4 history, but the game looks like made for online project. Seriously, I'm not good in English...
And the players... They (including myself) will buy everything and instead of scream about the source of problem, they demanding new objects like cars, spiral stairs etc (sorry, guys, I want them too, but maybe later...). The game changers are, for me, group of "walking commercials" (they love everything!).
I still believe, that they will improve TS4. They must show us, that they know, where they were wrong. Without it I do not believe in better TS5.
Unofficial Polish Forum - simtopia.pl
Sorry to single you out specifically, but it's a common misconception on these boards that the devs are responsible for every aspect of this game. The devs just do the development/programming they are assigned and probably provide very little input in the actual direction of the game. EA/Maxis, like all other studios, have a separate team of people who actually design HOW the game should work and what the features should be. Producers and a game design team usually decide that stuff.
With modern graphics. Without all the Sims having glassy-eyed grins on their faces no matter what is happening.
It was. Then they had to do an about-face when their latest online-only SimCity bombed so badly. Gamers have been dealing with the fallout from this botched project for 5 years now. TS5, if there is one, reallyreallyreally needs to start from scratch.
Somehow at this point this is also their fault. They also have bad priorities. I don't think it's to EA to decide whether they're going to make a fonctional elevator or a talking toilet.
I agree so much with you. You totally explained how I'm feeling and I do really hope the sim gurus we'll see it. It's an amazing thread where they can understand why TS4 get so much hate. Don't know if they'll listen tho, can't believe that after 5 years they still don't know. I also agree with you about TS3, I returned to it too, cause TS4 is pointless, without any purposes/consequences etc, just BORING. In TS3 you have so many customization, possiblities etc. When I first reopened my game I was amazed, it was magical just like the first time I played TS3.
Well said! I totally agree and still frustrated with City Living. It looks like both expansions with "living" in the name are flops
These producers have said they would be perfectly fine with letting their five year old play TS4. I can see why, no consequences to make a five year old cry is the direction of it at it's core. And if anything hurtful or disturbing or 'mature' happened where Sims had to deal with another Sim walking up to bully your Sim etc. like poking them in the chest, like in TS2, would be thrown out the door these days. Because yes, a five year old might cry about that in a game. Notice in TS4 Sims rarely if ever cry. But it's o.k. to be 'sad' and teach kids to get a voodoo doll and get revenge on their enemies, but don't point a finger at another Sim. It was the first thing they showed in a trailer about this game, to get a voodoo doll and get even with another Sim for taking all the attention of a girl the one Sim was interested in. But heaven forbid a Sim points a finger at another Sim that's abuse according to some of the pearl clutchers. But perfectly normal to hex someone. Even I can't keep up with their contradictions.
I won't be suprised if they take away hugging since today people have to ask instead of just givng someone a hug, but at the same time add a nude lot trait where it's perfectly normal to walk around naked all day. It's starting to look like they have no idea what they are building or what messages they want to send to the public buying their games. They seem to be in a twisted knot by their own contradicting statements and features and maybe they should just stay out of the messaging business and build a game that reflects life, it's ugly, it's mean and it's sometimes brutal to deal with situations, and sometimes life hurts, and is controversal, but when they build features all willy nilly they have no idea they look all mixed up with their focus being all over the place.
Other examples, take care of the environment, but say or add nothing (no animations) for using sunblock and no messaging about tanning causes skin cancer which will you get faster than trash in the water. Sims get sick but don't worry if you don't 'heal' them they are fine in a few hours, they won't die. I can see why a five year old plays TS4.
They will only stop believing it when consumers stop buying every pile of steaming garbage that has the Sims name on it. I wish what had happened to The Sims Medieval (base game, one expansion, then killed) had happened to TS4, but no, people keep buying all the overpriced packs. That's the problem. However, I know a lot of people really enjoy TS4 although I personally don't see how they can, so my hopes rest on another company/developer taking the life simulation idea and making something really great.
Could be.
I believe this.
I believe that people need their jobs and have to follow whatever the people at the top say. Its the real world - we are just playing with make believe worlds and these people who create them have bosses who might not be willing to listen to us consumers.
For whatever reason, a while ago, EA made a decision that has changed the foundation of what made the Sims (the original version) great.
We saw what happened to SimCity 2013. If that's how they want to dismantle these once great games and for some reason refuse to budge - that's ultimately their loss - because we still all have the old games.
This will be their legacy. They will be known as the company that killed anything good about these games and turned them into crap.
Actually, they already are known as that - just look at all the lists of games and studios bought by them and were killed.
It's not just the Sims.
I don't know why people have the misconception that EA tells Lyndsay and the producers what to do in a pack or base game. That's all a myth. (TS4) And it was Lucy Bradshaw's idea not EA's to build an online multiplayer Sim City.
Yes
I don't know what happens behind closed doors there.
I don't care.
The only thing I know, as fact is that Ocean Quigley, lead developer himself with SimCity 2013, stated that we would have gotten something better if EA hadn't interfered.
That is a fact. From the horse's mouth:
https://www.polygon.com/2016/5/20/11722342/simcity-launch-ea-maxis-ocean-quigley
EA greenlit the project, with a caveat: It had to be an always-online title, because that's the future that EA believed the gaming industry was heading toward. (Microtransactions were a part of EA's reasoning, said Quigley, but not the main impetus behind the decision.)
"EA wanted to make it more of a platform, an ongoing platform, that they'd sort of build and develop on," Quigley explained. "And so that [...] mandated, kind of, the server and online stuff. Which, in retrospect — I mean, obviously — was the fatal flaw in it."
Maxis had to figure out how to turn that onerous requirement into a feature that would deliver something useful to SimCity players. Networking allowed for elements like leaderboards, and opened up "interesting design-space possibilities" such as players being able to connect their cities with their friends' cities in a region. But Quigley wished those features had been optional, considering how SimCity's launch turned out.
That's interesting to know. Since Frank G. said it was all Lucy Bradshaw's idea. Seriously, he did in an old interview. I know he wouldn't green light any project that wasn't online (any game) but didn't know they might have pushed Maxis in that direction, and just thought it was a requirement, but not necessarily making them build a multiplayer game. I guess we never know the real truth of who said what and who decided.
ETA: but as I said before, EA executives aren't standing over top of Maxis (like some think) saying put butterflies and turtle eggs in the next pack, and hey, make it an island world. Those are totally up to Maxis.
I do agree that certain design decisions are up to Maxis.
Just wish they would fight harder for what they have to know by now that most players want.
Glad you started this whole discussion/thread!
Well they've become pop culture now, not just a video game. It's always about money but it's also about staying modern and keeping up with trends and less about being a sandbox life simulator video game. It kind of puts me in mind of something I used to see back in school. Of the one friend who starts becoming popular and eventually ditches the people they used to hang out with. The old friends accepted them for being who they were but now they've gained popularity and the number one focus is keeping it, no matter what parts of them they have to shed to be accepted. Now suddenly things that used to be cool and acceptable with their old group of friends are no longer cool and acceptable because of their new friends. They want the old friends to follow them into popularity too, trying to have their cake and eat it too, so they encourage the old friends to keep up and get with the times. But when the old friends don't just conform to everything like they expected them to, like they did, they toss the old friends aside and stick to the new, more popular friends. We're the old friends who got tossed aside.
I know they'll say that isn't true and that they listen to us but if they feel money from core players or players who've played any iteration before 4 is a given then what incentive would they have to listen to and provide for those players? Not a lot. Really none. Core players are going to cave regardless, at least in the companies eyes and if they don't well they think they can be popular and trendy enough to reel in new players to compensate for that loss. There's no need to listen or provide for those older players. And listening, at least to me, isn't just putting out practically the same or a worse fan favorite packs and content or so graciously letting players vote to have laundry.
If they were listening there would've been steady advancements made in those packs and laundry wouldn't have needed a vote in the first place. Listening would be knowing actually knowing why your consumers don't seem to like certain things not going off data that only tells part of the story. Listening would be knowing exactly what the problems are and following through on fixing them first instead of moving to the next pack or even the next game. And don't get me wrong, better late listening than never but sometimes late is too late. Damage incurs, and adding to that they can't speak on much of anything which makes it worse. That's part of the reason there are angry players, tired players, frustrated players, hostile players, and players that are just done with them.
I think in most cases it's not that some of us think something should be done one way over the other so much as we want an option to have it both ways if and when possible. A lot of problems could be solved by just giving players options. It's the one thing everyone can agree on. We want the option to play the way they want to. I want that, but I also want other players to be satisfied as well. Options help. Unfortunately though, they've allowed some narratives to continue and even contributed to them and it's gotten to the point that some players feel options aren't possible or that having an option will make things worse so it should just be this way or no way and this way is better than nothing. That's ridiculous to me. There are ways to go about having options that are mutually beneficial and that work properly. They just have to do it and do it right, but that just hasn't been done for whatever reason and not just in The Sims 4 either. They're not going to be able to please everyone and I think quite a few of us are fine with compromise but in some instances there was no compromise. They picked a side and called it a day. It's a design choice, we get told. That's a big part of the problem.
First example that comes to mind is cellphones. It was something complained about before in the previous game. Not everyone wanted their sim to have a cellphone. And there are some players who don't really think about this because it's a cellphone, everyone has a cellphone these days but it's The Sims. It used to be that players didn't have to just stick with what they provided but we could create and shape our own neighborhoods and worlds. Mandatory cellphones mess up gameplay and become a major headache depending on what the player's going for in their game. I remember some players not playing in a modern setting upset and looking for mods because their sim from another time period would pull out a cellphone and show someone videos or start surfing the web. Or some players just didn't want their sim to have a cellphone regardless of the times. It wasn't like the stocking a fridge where you had a choice in the matter to either go to the grocery store and buy groceries or just go to the fridge and not bother. You have a cellphone, your landline is useless now. Get used to it.
That carried on in Sims 4 when instead a great solution that could've added more depth and gameplay would've been to make it where if a player wants their sim to have a cellphone they can enable it for a fee taken out of their Sims money or make a sim have to go to a shop and buy one. They could've allowed multiple ways of communication whether by cell phone, computer, landline, or letter. Imagine the possibilities if well implemented and detailed! But we don't get that kind of level of depth anymore. They're strictly thinking in a modern day box. Not a let's help players tell their stories and create how they want box. It's about what's in and what's now for them to capitalize on not about providing more tools and options for the players.
I think that's something they keep missing. Not every player who plays this is someone who loves flexin' on the Gram or making vlogs about how to look good, but solely based off the type teen girls they're trying to appeal to the sims act very much in accordance to that and it explains so much. I kind of agree with that one parent who implied they're contributing to a problem amongst young girls, though not with character creation but influencers. It's fine to be inspired by trends but influenced to follow trends and act like a bunch of carbon copies... That's exactly what these sims act like.
I agree Maxis is the developer and EA is the publisher and Maxis uses the money that EA provides them to develop the game.
You’re fine, I don’t mind you singling me out, I didn’t take it that way!
I was just saying devs as a general term for the entire Sims team, I didn’t specifically mean the actual developers. But you are correct!
Also I meant that statement as in, whatever they wanna do with the game they are going to do, regardless of who they lose in the process because there will always be supporters.