The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
How could I forget BioWare? I love that game. I agree with your post. The only game that I like that comes close to falling under bad practice is the Sims. I’m so excited for CP2077 and their attitude to fans is so refreshing. I love it.
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18. They cannot offer content to kids - and no one can stop them from offering players 18 and over content - it is not our respeonsibility to stop players or parents from allowing their kids to buy this stuff. We do not have the right to tell any one what game content they can buy their own kids and we have no business getting involved - that is between the players, the parents and the companies offering any content regardless of whether you call them loot boxes or any other dlc.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18.
Incorrect - Fifa is rated E for everyone. Game is full of loot boxes.
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18.
Incorrect - Fifa is rated E for everyone. Game is full of loot boxes.
I'm kinda written Reg on this one.Is the practice scummy yes? But it us your responsibility as parent to see what they are spending, and doing.
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18.
Incorrect - Fifa is rated E for everyone. Game is full of loot boxes.
That is the playing rating not EA's rules on selling content. They specifically say you must be 18 or older to purchase these products - has not a thing to do with playing them.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18.
Incorrect - Fifa is rated E for everyone. Game is full of loot boxes.
That is the playing rating not EA's rules on selling content. The specifically say you must be 18 or older to purchase these products - has not a thing to do with playing them.
Well EA don’t give a 🐸🐸🐸🐸- they are the ones putting Loot boxes in games targeted at children. Its a vile practice and many countries agree and have banned it. If they aren’t aiming it at children the Vice President would not have said in court “it’s akin to a Kinder egg”
Adults don’t eat kinder eggs, kinder eggs are marketed to children. With a kinder egg a child knows they are getting a toy, with loot boxes players don’t know what they are getting hence why EA also called them “fun, surprise mechanics”
Loot boxes are linked to gambling addiction. Is that something EA should be using in their biggest cash cow which is rated for ages 3+?
Should a non gaming parent have to be concerned their pre schooler is going to have a game push loot boxes on them? (Ideally yes a parent should be aware what their child is playing but if you don’t know how scummy some gsme companies are, you probably wouldn’t think a game like Fifa which I’ll keep repeating is aimed at kids is going to push gambling mechanics on kids.
They made fools of themselves in court and they have once again re affirmed why they have repeatedly been voted America’s worst company.
It’s indefensible. To defend it, says a lot about the person.
Edit to add: Please, where does it say you have to be 18 and up to buy a loot box from ea? Their terms say a child can have an account from 13. They know fine well putting loot boxes in games marketed and aimed at children it’s to attract kids to buy them!
Same with gambling addicts, companies (the bad ones) thrive on exploiting the brain's psychological investment/reward system in order to get people to keep buying stuff, be it games or 'surprise mechanics'.
Casinos at least help keep taxes down and pay for schools, so yay thank you poor man tax. I was talking about this with a friend yesterday. Pretty sure EA is making more money too with not releasing as many tangible products anymore, which keeps the cost of shipping and boxes CDs down. I was actually reading job reviews of EA jobs and seems like unless someone is management, they aren't getting paid more than minimum wage and that it isn't a job to grow with working there, but good place to start off and grow elsewhere.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
Well EA don’t give a plum- they are the ones putting Loot boxes in games targeted at children. Its a vile practice and many countries agree and have banned it. If they aren’t aiming it at children the Vice President would not have said in court “it’s akin to a Kinder egg”
Adults don’t eat kinder eggs, kinder eggs are marketed to children. With a kinder egg a child knows they are getting a toy, with loot boxes players don’t know what they are getting hence why EA also called them “fun, surprise mechanics”
Loot boxes are linked to gambling addiction. Is that something EA should be using in their biggest cash cow which is rated for ages 3+?
Should a non gaming parent have to be concerned their pre schooler is going to have a game push loot boxes on them? (Ideally yes a parent should be aware what their child is playing but if you don’t know how scummy some gsme companies are, you probably wouldn’t think a game like Fifa which I’ll keep repeating is aimed at kids is going to push gambling mechanics on kids.
They made fools of themselves in court and they have once again re affirmed why they have repeatedly been voted America’s worst company.
It’s indefensible. To defend it, says a lot about the person.
Mobile games are extremely guilty of this too and very easy with how credit cards are tied to devices now. My nephew spent $100 on a My Little Pony Game and $50 on another game. My mom had to report it as a fraud and thankfully got her money back. He was only five at the time.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
LOL always thought #SpendYourMoneyOnOtherThings was the same as #EAListen. Kind of supporting the movement if you think about it. Same with the go away comments too because if you look at the bigger picture both are encouraging less customers for the Sims 4 and ending the game earlier decreasing demand and profits. By all means bring the Sims 5 sooner.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
I agree.
EA MURDERED Bioware. Bioware is working on Dragon Age 4 now. I have already heard bad rumors of EA forcing Bioware to use the Frostbite engine which is great for shooters but horrible for RPGs. I used to preorder Bioware games and now I will sit and wait until after release and get all the spoilers to make sure it is worth my time. I got burned by Andromeda and then they SHELVED it leaving all those open questions. When EA first took Bioware over, Dragon Age 2 was a mess with repeating maps, Mass Effect 3 had a terrible ending, Dragon Age Inquisition had a great story but all this open space with nothing but boring fluff quest and it just got worse and worse. I have been playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey and the whole game is amazing even the side quests are interesting. The choices I made had totally different outcomes then what I saw my husband play in the same scenario. I watch my husband play Witcher 3 and I was amazed how the world changed based on his decisions. EA definitely needs to step up and stop doing the bare minimal. This is why I have no faith in Sims 5.
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18. They cannot offer content to kids - and no one can stop them from offering players 18 and over content - it is not our respeonsibility to stop players or parents from allowing their kids to buy this stuff. We do not have the right to tell any one what game content they can buy their own kids and we have no business getting involved - that is between the players, the parents and the companies offering any content regardless of whether you call them loot boxes or any other dlc.
Loot boxes where the content is not transferable are not illegal (therefore, are seen as gaming).
Loot boxes where the content is transferable are illegal (and a seen as gambling).
Loot boxes are prohibited under current gambling laws and regulations if the items from the loot boxes are transferable.
Netherlands Gaming Authority recommends game developers to disable functionalities that allow items to be converted into money or transferred to other parties (including other players).
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18.
Incorrect - Fifa is rated E for everyone. Game is full of loot boxes.
I'm kinda written Reg on this one.Is the practice scummy yes? But it us your responsibility as parent to see what they are spending, and doing.
Small kids, yes. But teens? That make their own money and spend it in ways they see fit? I actually think you’re a poor parent when you want to control and constantly observe and forbid your teens. Allowing them to make mistakes and take responsibility is part of growing up. Teach them young so that they’re at least prepared when they get older. But at a certain age guarding them too heavily will actually be very counterproductive (because your teen will just do their thing behind your back). Kids are not sims, they don’t have a remote control and you can’t order them.
I got about 5 pages into the comments to this and then finally had to say something.
TL;DR - Where does EA start in order to make everyone happy when we can't even come to consensus on most polls here? // One persons content is another persons waste of time. // If EA didn't promise us anything when it came to content then why are we throwing a fit about it not being included when they never said it would be? // Abuse was a poor word choice because of it's standard meaning to many people.
A long time ago I played a series called Might and Magic. I don't know if any of you all played that series. Many people thought it was an awesome franchise. There were slight differences between the sixth, seventh and eighth titles but apart from those minor differences the gameplay was pretty much the same. *sighs* Then they released Might and Magic 9. It was the only game in the franchise I simply could not play past the introduction and so I shelved it. Every once in a while I dust it off and try it again and still just can't get into it. The gameplay is such a departure from what I was used to and things I took for granted were either changed drastically or were taken out. Even so, I don't regret buying the title. I don't consider 3DO (the developers) as having done a 'bait and switch' with releasing the next title and having it be much different. So, having said that - here is the correlation to the Sims.
Like me when I purchased MM9, many people bought Sims 4 assuming that certain things would be in the game. When they found that they weren't, they got angry and felt ripped off. But were they? People say the game was incomplete at launch because those things they wanted weren't in it. But incomplete according to who? The player that wanted them or according to EA? Did they promise certain things would be in at launch and then on launch day said "Oh sorry, we decided not to add that in after all?" If EA never promised certain things would be in game at launch then they are not responsible for our expectations. I also think they more than made up for certain omissions when those things finally did get into game.
The other thing about the Sims is that each title evolves. What features the game had at the beginning is greatly expanded by the things they add to it. It's like building a house: first you pour the foundation, then build the frame, then add the walls, windows and doors and then you add all the finishing touches. Each expansion and game pack are just the things that build the title so you can never judge what a game is going to be right at launch. Not when it comes to the Sims anyway. Sometimes it seems like some people here are throwing a fit and screaming "I asked for a house not a foundation you 🐸🐸🐸🐸!" We don't see their development schedule so we can't see the entire vision they have in mind and they have to work on their time frame not ours.
Then there is the cost. After playing the Sims 3, the Sims 4 is way cheaper. I think I had probably spent more than $600 just in the store alone not including any of the expansions for Sims 3. They release far more free content in this iteration than in the previous ones. However, it is important to realize that that is a high end quote. You can get combination packs for dirt cheap and you can also skip packs you aren't interested in which will cut down the price you pay. But I still can't understand why people complain about the price of games and expansions anyway since to have computers as a hobby in general is going to be expensive regardless of what you use it for.
The price was just one complaint in the article someone had posted a link to in an earlier comment. The other complaint was that they release packs with very little content or that it has so many bugs. I can agree with the limited content but there are still a lot to do and things that I haven't done yet. I don't like the repetition - everything seems to be on the computer or involve painting and writing. Freelancer career was awful as it added nothing I couldn't already do. So that's MY opinion on it. Other people have very different opinions which leads me to the next point. Which does EA do first? Do they fix the bugs? Or add in the content? Either one they choose the people in the other camp are going to be upset that they didn't choose to address their issue.
But okay - lets say we as a player base come to an agreement and say "Fix the bugs." Okay, which bugs do they work on? And what if the thing isn't a bug at all? What are we using for definition when it comes to the word "bug"? Some people call things bugs that aren't bugs at all - just not working as they WANT them to and there is a difference. Also, can anyone show me any title out there that does NOT have a bug or two in it? Every single game out there has them. It's just the downside of computer games. Some are minor and some are major but to say they are making it completely unplayable? Hmm... no I don't think so. I can still log in and play relatively easily with no trouble most of the time.
And now to the final chapter in this novel. The fact that I can log in and play each session relatively trouble free does not make me feel that I am being in any way mistreated by EA. They have a product I am interested in and in order to have access to that product I have to pay for it. Just like every other product or service out there. For the most part, if it adds to my game in even a small way then it was worth purchasing it. I may not really like Island Living but the world is cool and it adds a holiday spot for my sims to enjoy and new abilities and lot types that didn't exist previously. That made it worth it.
EA does many things I don't like - I do feel they are hypocritical and biased and that causes me to think they are being too political. But abusive? Perhaps a poor word choice but still - that's the word they chose to use. If it means unjust or corrupt use. I am sorry - EA owns the Sims franchise. WE DON'T. They are not obligated really to us to put in or take out anything when it comes to this title. No game company does. But the flip side of that is - WE are not under any obligation to them either.
::Rolls eyes at the entitlement:: Things like prescription drugs, clean water, safe housing, yes. Video games, no. If the game isn't fun anymore, find another hobby. (I did, when the game came out without my toddlers.)
In one way I can also vote for stopthesabuse since EA employees and others representing EA have made comments I felt were verbably abusive to the core fanbase who helped put this series on the map for them. I have known some to call individuals names, or label them with names which isn't the job of an EA employee but an opinion and their opinions of a consumer should not be a reason to insult one. EA employees, no matter who it is, should keep their mouths shut and not rule or decide things on a personal opinion of someone's motivation and not say to consumers what opinion they have of them. Whether that's on Reddit or Twitter, in an email or here.
If that was the experience of the majority of players that deal with EA (regardless of the franchise) then the hastag would make far more sense. That is not a good way for any company to deal with their customers.
::Rolls eyes at the entitlement:: Things like prescription drugs, clean water, safe housing, yes. Video games, no. If the game isn't fun anymore, find another hobby. (I did, when the game came out without my toddlers.)
In one way I can also vote for stopthesabuse since EA employees and others representing EA have made comments I felt were verbably abusive to the core fanbase who helped put this series on the map for them. I have known some to call individuals names, or label them with names which isn't the job of an EA employee but an opinion and their opinions of a consumer should not be a reason to insult one. EA employees, no matter who it is, should keep their mouths shut and not rule or decide things on a personal opinion of someone's motivation and not say to consumers what opinion they have of them. Whether that's on Reddit or Twitter, in an email or here.
If that was the experience of the majority of players that deal with EA (regardless of the franchise) then the hastag would make far more sense. That is not a good way for any company to deal with their customers.
I know the hashtag is used by Sims players who are unhappy with what’s happening to the game, but I think there is this background that takes it much further than just the here and now.
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18.
Incorrect - Fifa is rated E for everyone. Game is full of loot boxes.
I'm kinda written Reg on this one.Is the practice scummy yes? But it us your responsibility as parent to see what they are spending, and doing.
Small kids, yes. But teens? That make their own money and spend it in ways they see fit? I actually think you’re a poor parent when you want to control and constantly observe and forbid your teens. Allowing them to make mistakes and take responsibility is part of growing up. Teach them young so that they’re at least prepared when they get older. But at a certain age guarding them too heavily will actually be very counterproductive (because your teen will just do their thing behind your back). Kids are not sims, they don’t have a remote control and you can’t order them.
Oh I agree, I was referring to little kids.Teens can have third freedom.
The hash tag is not about content specific. It’s about how EA treat their customers. It’s about their treatment of a twenty year franchise.
I was also referring to the word 'abuse' which is melodramatic when it comes down to a choice of whether you buy games or not. EA aren't bullying or threatening anyone to buy their content, therefore it's not abuse of the customers. Yeah, it's milking them but don't all gaming companies do that, one way or another?
If you don't approve of EA's methods, don't buy their games. It doesn't sound helpful I know but it's still a valid point. The top bosses at EA are more likely to take notice of mass sales drops (strength in numbers, like you said) than they are of Twitter hashtags, surely? How many senior producers will pay attention to a StopEAAbuse tag? Not many, I wouldn't imagine.
But don’t thank EA for ruining this franchise, nor any of the franchises before it, nor any of them after it. They don’t deserve gratification
That is an opinion, not a global fact. Some people might feel they do deserve a thank you for certain things. If it's right for people who don't like elements of the content to shout out, then it's also right for those who are happy with content to shout out too. Otherwise, the balance tips the other way again and nobody gets anywhere.
Tell that to fans of Sim city, dungeon keeper, bullfrog games, dead space and FIFA. All games EA have plum the souls out of or downright destroyed never to be seen again. My Husband is a game developer for a AAA studio - EA do not have a good reputation among his colleagues and the gaming industry. That is a fact. EA have been in trouble recently for loot boxes and gambling in games aimed at children. Again that is a fact and many people in the industry and gamers think they are disgusting. I don’t know if you remember when EA used the phrase “EA, it’s in the Game” well now it should be “EA, it’s out in the game, in loot boxes”
Their reputation is 100% deserved.
Edit to add as you have added - yes a hashtag thanking Ea most likely would lead to ridicule for the reasons above - I’m not suggesting I personally would ridicule you, I’m not that way inclined. If you want to thank EA and start a hashtag feel free.
I agree a hash tag may not change much in the future for the sims but the Simming community showing discontent for once is not a bad thing. As a community, generally speaking it’s very passive.
I play lots of different game genres, there are ones that try and milk their games with scummy monetisation practices but it’s not fair to say they all do that. Some games I’ve played this year off the top of my head -Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 2, Layers of fear 2, Days Gone, The Last of Us, Until Dawn, Man of Medan, Detroit Become Human, My Time at Portia all are complete games (or in the case of my time at Portia is still being developed but the devs have gave us so much for free in major updates it would be really unfair to say they are milking fans) None of those games have people complaining the way simmers are behind the hashtag. They aren’t perfect but you can’t accuse those devs of milking fans. So I can’t agree that all devs do it. Some definitely do - Activision and Frontier I’m looking at you! But it shouldn’t be considered okay or normal.
You left out Bioware! Ah, the developer who brought us Baldur's Gate have, under EA's tutelage, evolved to bring us such gems as Anthem and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Big spenders are a small minority of total gamers, but they make far more for the company than sales do. Which means more and more games will be designed to keeping the whales as addicted as possible to the detriment of the rest of the game. They want all their games on line, to be live services, so whales have a reason to spend to be the best (or prettiest, because cosmetics do matter).
The bonus for me, though, as a consumer is I'm not interested in these substandard games so my laptop should last me a few more years as a gaming rig Sims 4 will continue to run well, and if there's a Sims 5, I'll probably still be fine.
The thing is, not all games are falling into this. I don't think Outerworlds is going to and I can pretty much guarantee that CP2077 will not. Publishers can make huge profits without microtransactions, but huge profits apparently are not enough for most.
Children cannot buy - so if they are buying loot boxes their parents gave them the credit card or bought them for the kids. You need to be 18 to buy at EA - Keep that in mind. Also one of my grandsons has spent way more money on things like that using his parents credit cards through Bethesda than EA - I know i hear the complaints all the time - then I tell my kid why do you give him the credit card to start with. The ones that need getting sense knocked in their heads is our grown kids letting their kids do these things. EA is far from the only company with loot boxes too..In fact they were not even the first company to come out with them. Then look at mobile games and facebook games have been using that system since they came into being. It's how they make money. Blame the consumers not the company trying to earn a living.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18.
Incorrect - Fifa is rated E for everyone. Game is full of loot boxes.
I'm kinda written Reg on this one.Is the practice scummy yes? But it us your responsibility as parent to see what they are spending, and doing.
Small kids, yes. But teens? That make their own money and spend it in ways they see fit? I actually think you’re a poor parent when you want to control and constantly observe and forbid your teens. Allowing them to make mistakes and take responsibility is part of growing up. Teach them young so that they’re at least prepared when they get older. But at a certain age guarding them too heavily will actually be very counterproductive (because your teen will just do their thing behind your back). Kids are not sims, they don’t have a remote control and you can’t order them.
Oh I agree, I was referring to little kids.Teens can have third freedom.
And it’s teens that are referred to in relation to loot boxes I believe. Not (just) small kids?
Just don't try it on this forum - that's all. They changed that rule here after we had 25000 signatures on the missing Sims 4 content when the game came out about us doing such a thing again on this forum... in our signatures or anywhere to do with this forum or in the game. I even got a time out for over a week and jailed once for linking to the the sign up sheet with all the signatures and at the time did not even know they had made it a bannable offense.
The hashtags refer to Twitter, not this forum. This forum doesn’t do hashtags.
But it is EA twitter - so same thing. Read the tos. We cannot refer to any EA controlled site. The gallery is EA's.
I used to play a game with loot boxes. I personally despised them. I would much prefer to be able to buy a wanted item outright than to gamble small amounts away repeatedly hoping to get what I want. Therefore, the only loot boxes I got were those given away for free on holidays.
My then young son also played the game which was definitely aimed at children. All the player characters were children. I had a parental password on the game to protect my credit card which I used to buy so much game currency a month. The intent was that this would be used to buy access to additional areas in the game, but it could also be used to buy loot boxes. If he bought loot boxes, when he finished up the current area he was playing in, he wouldn't have enough to buy access. So he would have to wait another month.
It did help him learn there was a price to pay for gambling his allowance away, but I still would have preferred not to have the loot boxes. Then he could have learned to save money for the big items instead.
Bottom line is that I think games that are primarily aimed at children shouldn't use loot boxes. But still, parents are ultimately responsible.
Just don't try it on this forum - that's all. They changed that rule here after we had 25000 signatures on the missing Sims 4 content when the game came out about us doing such a thing again on this forum... in our signatures or anywhere to do with this forum or in the game. I even got a time out for over a week and jailed once for linking to the the sign up sheet with all the signatures and at the time did not even know they had made it a bannable offense.
The hashtags refer to Twitter, not this forum. This forum doesn’t do hashtags.
But it is EA twitter - so same thing. Read the tos. We cannot refer to any EA controlled site. The gallery is EA's.
As I know EA doesn't own Twitter.
I'd missed the response, no, indeed, EA doesn't own Twitter. They could of course block people posting with the hashtag, but that wouldn't stop it.
Comments
How could I forget BioWare? I love that game. I agree with your post. The only game that I like that comes close to falling under bad practice is the Sims. I’m so excited for CP2077 and their attitude to fans is so refreshing. I love it.
The company is just as much to blame as the consumer supporting the tactic. If you need to "make a living" off of marketing gambling loot boxes to children, that should speak enough of your developer's skills and the company's morality.
The great thing is more and more parents will have grown up with this poor business model, and know better not to support it.
I believe they are trying to over turn it. My country are also looking into a ban because it’s not ethical to encourage children to gamble.
They are not directing loot boxes to children - they simply offer content to players. No one has to buy and they don't offer to players under 18. They cannot offer content to kids - and no one can stop them from offering players 18 and over content - it is not our respeonsibility to stop players or parents from allowing their kids to buy this stuff. We do not have the right to tell any one what game content they can buy their own kids and we have no business getting involved - that is between the players, the parents and the companies offering any content regardless of whether you call them loot boxes or any other dlc.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Incorrect - Fifa is rated E for everyone. Game is full of loot boxes.
I'm kinda written Reg on this one.Is the practice scummy yes? But it us your responsibility as parent to see what they are spending, and doing.
That is the playing rating not EA's rules on selling content. They specifically say you must be 18 or older to purchase these products - has not a thing to do with playing them.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Well EA don’t give a 🐸🐸🐸🐸- they are the ones putting Loot boxes in games targeted at children. Its a vile practice and many countries agree and have banned it. If they aren’t aiming it at children the Vice President would not have said in court “it’s akin to a Kinder egg”
Adults don’t eat kinder eggs, kinder eggs are marketed to children. With a kinder egg a child knows they are getting a toy, with loot boxes players don’t know what they are getting hence why EA also called them “fun, surprise mechanics”
Loot boxes are linked to gambling addiction. Is that something EA should be using in their biggest cash cow which is rated for ages 3+?
Should a non gaming parent have to be concerned their pre schooler is going to have a game push loot boxes on them? (Ideally yes a parent should be aware what their child is playing but if you don’t know how scummy some gsme companies are, you probably wouldn’t think a game like Fifa which I’ll keep repeating is aimed at kids is going to push gambling mechanics on kids.
They made fools of themselves in court and they have once again re affirmed why they have repeatedly been voted America’s worst company.
It’s indefensible. To defend it, says a lot about the person.
Edit to add: Please, where does it say you have to be 18 and up to buy a loot box from ea? Their terms say a child can have an account from 13. They know fine well putting loot boxes in games marketed and aimed at children it’s to attract kids to buy them!
#SpendYourMoneyOnOtherThings
#FeelLuckyIfThisIsYourBiggestProblem
I agree.
EA MURDERED Bioware. Bioware is working on Dragon Age 4 now. I have already heard bad rumors of EA forcing Bioware to use the Frostbite engine which is great for shooters but horrible for RPGs. I used to preorder Bioware games and now I will sit and wait until after release and get all the spoilers to make sure it is worth my time. I got burned by Andromeda and then they SHELVED it leaving all those open questions. When EA first took Bioware over, Dragon Age 2 was a mess with repeating maps, Mass Effect 3 had a terrible ending, Dragon Age Inquisition had a great story but all this open space with nothing but boring fluff quest and it just got worse and worse. I have been playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey and the whole game is amazing even the side quests are interesting. The choices I made had totally different outcomes then what I saw my husband play in the same scenario. I watch my husband play Witcher 3 and I was amazed how the world changed based on his decisions. EA definitely needs to step up and stop doing the bare minimal. This is why I have no faith in Sims 5.
Striking detail, gamers support this ban.
#MoneyIsntTheIssue
#HavingThisProblemDoesntMeanItsYourOnlyOrWorstOne
TL;DR - Where does EA start in order to make everyone happy when we can't even come to consensus on most polls here? // One persons content is another persons waste of time. // If EA didn't promise us anything when it came to content then why are we throwing a fit about it not being included when they never said it would be? // Abuse was a poor word choice because of it's standard meaning to many people.
A long time ago I played a series called Might and Magic. I don't know if any of you all played that series. Many people thought it was an awesome franchise. There were slight differences between the sixth, seventh and eighth titles but apart from those minor differences the gameplay was pretty much the same. *sighs* Then they released Might and Magic 9. It was the only game in the franchise I simply could not play past the introduction and so I shelved it. Every once in a while I dust it off and try it again and still just can't get into it. The gameplay is such a departure from what I was used to and things I took for granted were either changed drastically or were taken out. Even so, I don't regret buying the title. I don't consider 3DO (the developers) as having done a 'bait and switch' with releasing the next title and having it be much different. So, having said that - here is the correlation to the Sims.
Like me when I purchased MM9, many people bought Sims 4 assuming that certain things would be in the game. When they found that they weren't, they got angry and felt ripped off. But were they? People say the game was incomplete at launch because those things they wanted weren't in it. But incomplete according to who? The player that wanted them or according to EA? Did they promise certain things would be in at launch and then on launch day said "Oh sorry, we decided not to add that in after all?" If EA never promised certain things would be in game at launch then they are not responsible for our expectations. I also think they more than made up for certain omissions when those things finally did get into game.
The other thing about the Sims is that each title evolves. What features the game had at the beginning is greatly expanded by the things they add to it. It's like building a house: first you pour the foundation, then build the frame, then add the walls, windows and doors and then you add all the finishing touches. Each expansion and game pack are just the things that build the title so you can never judge what a game is going to be right at launch. Not when it comes to the Sims anyway. Sometimes it seems like some people here are throwing a fit and screaming "I asked for a house not a foundation you 🐸🐸🐸🐸!" We don't see their development schedule so we can't see the entire vision they have in mind and they have to work on their time frame not ours.
Then there is the cost. After playing the Sims 3, the Sims 4 is way cheaper. I think I had probably spent more than $600 just in the store alone not including any of the expansions for Sims 3. They release far more free content in this iteration than in the previous ones. However, it is important to realize that that is a high end quote. You can get combination packs for dirt cheap and you can also skip packs you aren't interested in which will cut down the price you pay. But I still can't understand why people complain about the price of games and expansions anyway since to have computers as a hobby in general is going to be expensive regardless of what you use it for.
The price was just one complaint in the article someone had posted a link to in an earlier comment. The other complaint was that they release packs with very little content or that it has so many bugs. I can agree with the limited content but there are still a lot to do and things that I haven't done yet. I don't like the repetition - everything seems to be on the computer or involve painting and writing. Freelancer career was awful as it added nothing I couldn't already do. So that's MY opinion on it. Other people have very different opinions which leads me to the next point. Which does EA do first? Do they fix the bugs? Or add in the content? Either one they choose the people in the other camp are going to be upset that they didn't choose to address their issue.
But okay - lets say we as a player base come to an agreement and say "Fix the bugs." Okay, which bugs do they work on? And what if the thing isn't a bug at all? What are we using for definition when it comes to the word "bug"? Some people call things bugs that aren't bugs at all - just not working as they WANT them to and there is a difference. Also, can anyone show me any title out there that does NOT have a bug or two in it? Every single game out there has them. It's just the downside of computer games. Some are minor and some are major but to say they are making it completely unplayable? Hmm... no I don't think so. I can still log in and play relatively easily with no trouble most of the time.
And now to the final chapter in this novel. The fact that I can log in and play each session relatively trouble free does not make me feel that I am being in any way mistreated by EA. They have a product I am interested in and in order to have access to that product I have to pay for it. Just like every other product or service out there. For the most part, if it adds to my game in even a small way then it was worth purchasing it. I may not really like Island Living but the world is cool and it adds a holiday spot for my sims to enjoy and new abilities and lot types that didn't exist previously. That made it worth it.
EA does many things I don't like - I do feel they are hypocritical and biased and that causes me to think they are being too political. But abusive? Perhaps a poor word choice but still - that's the word they chose to use. If it means unjust or corrupt use. I am sorry - EA owns the Sims franchise. WE DON'T. They are not obligated really to us to put in or take out anything when it comes to this title. No game company does. But the flip side of that is - WE are not under any obligation to them either.
If that was the experience of the majority of players that deal with EA (regardless of the franchise) then the hastag would make far more sense. That is not a good way for any company to deal with their customers.
I know the hashtag is used by Sims players who are unhappy with what’s happening to the game, but I think there is this background that takes it much further than just the here and now.
Oh I agree, I was referring to little kids.Teens can have third freedom.
As I know EA doesn't own Twitter.
My then young son also played the game which was definitely aimed at children. All the player characters were children. I had a parental password on the game to protect my credit card which I used to buy so much game currency a month. The intent was that this would be used to buy access to additional areas in the game, but it could also be used to buy loot boxes. If he bought loot boxes, when he finished up the current area he was playing in, he wouldn't have enough to buy access. So he would have to wait another month.
It did help him learn there was a price to pay for gambling his allowance away, but I still would have preferred not to have the loot boxes. Then he could have learned to save money for the big items instead.
Bottom line is that I think games that are primarily aimed at children shouldn't use loot boxes. But still, parents are ultimately responsible.