They have to step up their game for one simple reason: Their competition is no longer other video game makers. It's guys like him. And guys like him are perfectly happy to step up and take a slice out of their market share.
And guys like him are also perfectly aware that they are incapable of making a life simulator that directly competes against The Sims in any serious fashion, which is why no one is making them
Nah. No one is making them because EA is sue-happy about their copyright. It's easier to just not make it than to spend years fighting EA in court. Especially since it's considered a niche market.
Lol, you can perfectly make a life simulator without violating any of EA's copyrights. EA owns The Sims, not the genre.
And yes, a serious direct Sims competitor cannot be made by a small team, let alone one guy or two
If you want toddlers and want them to be noticed or added, just boycott the game yourself eventually the money, sales and complaining will increase so bad that they'd probably just give in
In reality, for every person who doesn't buy the base game there are at least 3 others who will. And I suspect all that will happen when the complaints increase and the sales decline, is that Maxis will drop the pc version of the Sims 4 like a hot potato and come up with a mobile/tablet version of The Sims similar to The Sims Freeplay, only it won't be based in real time, but it will be heavily quest based.
That's when Maxis becomes labelled a Mad Man and I'm sure no one is going to the phone app for Sims 4 or anything more, sims free play is just enough. That'd just be the end of the franchise... why would you continue supporting a franchise and there's well over tons of people for play in the game, but the play isn't added? instead they introduce," were limited, certain funds." then why develop this game? if you invest more then your sales would go up and you'd have enough money to fix your engine and the game. It's all business, they don't give no dam. Sims 3 got as much stuff on the 2nd going onto the 3rd year. Game lacks hell of bad.
My point is... your just saying deal with it because it might end the whole game? well Ig that's the case.
No, I'm not saying "deal with it", even though you think that's what I'm saying. What I AM saying is that realistically, a boycott won't work, since players keep buying the base game; either those players who couldn't afford it at the time of release, or waited until there was a sale, or new players who run across it online and decide to give it a go. Every one of those is a sale and money in EA's pocket.
And I'm also saying that EA's reaction isn't necessarily going to be: "Oops, we messed up, we'd better get to work on The Sims 5". If EA wants to move the game in another direction, then the decline in sales would be the perfect excuse for them saying that the fans have lost interest in the PC version so let's move on to the online mobile/tablet version. That's what I'm saying.
And you're right. If you want to make money, you have to be willing to spend money. EA needs to be willing to invest in this game if it wants the sales to go up and to see fans start liking the game again to the point where they're willing to spend the money on it again.
Some of us are still boycotting--at least 500 of us in this forum. And honestly, it's not even boycotting! We're just not buying a game we don't want! Please don't assume that we're all idiots who feel compelled to buy stuff we don't like If the numbers of fans buying the game is high because the fans like TS4, then that works out for EA--and it might result in massive disappointment for us in the long run for having to sit out this entire iteration, but high sales sure don't mean players who dislike the game are being suckered.
EA isn't getting a dime from me until I get improved family play and toddlers. I don't even play this game anymore (playing TS2). When they deliver the game that I enjoy, I will buy all of the EPs and SPs and GPs, and I will throw my full support into the game. For me this is the whole point of being a squeaky wheel about the family play and toddler issues. After all, why complain if there is no chance whatsoever of TS4 (or TS5) successfully carrying on this franchise?
Unfortunately, you're helping to kill the series.
What has EA done in the past with video game series that lost a lot of sales? It's killed them. Most video game companies do that. It's easier to just drop a series than to try to figure out where it went wrong. So, most just kill a failing series.
No, no. That's EAs failing. Their vision. They are offering a game that is so limited that it doesn't appeals to the widest possible fan base.
I'm not supporting that kind of games. I won't pay for a bad game to fund a future game we know nothing about. And Maxis being moved under the purview of EA Mobile doesn't bode for a great TS5, does it?
Scroll down and read the rest of my comments.
My view on it is this: If you're boycotting the game, you are helping kill it. Because you are actively and intentionally engaging in an antagonistic relationship with EA where your wants are part of the list of demands for hostilities to cease. That never works out well.
If you walked away from the game because you don't like it? That's on EA for not managing to sell to you.
I didn't buy it because there is nothing in it for me to like. Sorry, I don't see the difference in boycotting and not liking it.. It has the same outcome, it's on EA to manage to sell to "both parties" which they, as it seems, fail to do.
They have to step up their game for one simple reason: Their competition is no longer other video game makers. It's guys like him. And guys like him are perfectly happy to step up and take a slice out of their market share.
And guys like him are also perfectly aware that they are incapable of making a life simulator that directly competes against The Sims in any serious fashion, which is why no one is making them
Nah. No one is making them because EA is sue-happy about their copyright. It's easier to just not make it than to spend years fighting EA in court. Especially since it's considered a niche market.
Lol, you can perfectly make a life simulator without violating any of EA's copyrights. EA owns The Sims, not the genre.
And yes, a serious direct Sims competitor cannot be made by a small team, let alone one guy or two
Go ahead and try it without violating the copyrights of one of the other companies. Let me know how long it is before you get a Cease and Desist Notice. Then tell me if you're really willing to spend the lawyer fees to fight it. And, yeah, that's how EA keeps competitors off the market.
And, actually, Sims series is made by a small team, last I saw anything on it. Has been for a few games now. But, now they're going to have to compete increasingly with the perception that an individual or couple of individuals can do the job better, which is growing because of games like the one I linked earlier. Even if it's not truly possible, that doesn't matter as long as the perception exists.
And, actually, Sims series is made by a small team, last I saw anything on it.
Lol well over 200 full-time employees at EA worked on TS4 base game (you can check the game credits), and that doesn't even include work outsourced/done at other EA studios.
Here's a photo of the current employees at The Sims Studio from their Christmas video. Not what I would call "a small team."
You're vastly underestimating the amount of work needed to make a game like TS4. The reason that no one is making a competitor isn't because of any copyright issues; it's because it's an extremely risky project that requires a huge investment (i.e. tens of millions of dollars).
Then don't financially support it. Just don't boycott it is all I'm saying. Be a lost sale instead; be the customer they want back, not the thorn in their side they try to ignore.
You have no idea how accounting actually works. As I am someone that went to school for it for five years. EA's accountants couldn't care less if someone likes the Sims 4 or not or any of the other "noise" of customers blaming other customers just like them. All they care about is the bottom line. SimCity 2013 sold over 2 million copies and the game still shut down. It wasn't the customers' fault, but EA's and Maxis' decision. Whether the same befalls the Sims series will be on Maxis and EA again. What money the Sims 4 doesn't go back into the Sims but to all of EA's games. Check out this article how EA traded the Sims 4 budget for Titanfall: http://simsvip.com/2014/01/29/ea-trades-off-the-sims-4-for-titanfall/ Anyway, your dollar or whatever currency doesn't make you any more or less important than any other Simmer and it is not guaranteed to go into the future of the Sims. According to finances, you are just a small figure of profit for EA, not only Maxis. Nothing more, nothing less. Financial statements don't single out individual customers especially for a company as big as EA. Anyway, only "hypocrisy" I see is coming is telling customers to leave forums and the game completely and in the same breath tell them not to boycott the game. In both cases, it is encouraging customers not to spend money on the Sims 4 which isn't helping the Gurus at all.
Sims 4 players said there are enough fans to financially support the Sims 4 and have bragged about it for over a year now. If so, they can prove it with their actions, not just their words that is happening and not blame other Simmers for whatever happens to the Sims 4. The whole blaming Simmers in the same financial position as them is getting old and comes off as very naive. If Simmers truly love and want to support the Sims 4, tell as many other people about the game. Get people to buy the game instead of constantly telling others not to play, buy, or be apart of the Sims 4 community. But don't blame customers that don't want to invest further in the Sims 4. People have already bought the base game. Any expansion thereafter is not mandatory, but completely optional to purchase. It never has been and never will be. But if you think the Sims 4 can't stand on its base game alone as far as entertainment value and relies on expansions, then I guess Sims games have finally reached its quantity over quality point now. Will Wright said expansions were supposed to make Sims smarter, but so far it is coming off in a shallow way of just making them prettier with each pack. It is more than understandable some are bored by this change of direction. There is only so much frosting you can add to a cake before it starts to topple over with an unstable base of a cake. Some are happy with frosting and that is great. Others just want more substantial cake aka game mechanics. In the end everyone is a Simmer. Accept that there will be loss in potential sales because of customer dissatisfaction and there will be sales with customer satisfaction. It's how businesses work. Product that doesn't live to expectations will always result in loss of potential profits. It is never the customer's fault, but the businesses' poor judgement of missing who their target markets are and lack of keeping customer retention rates up. Good article on that. https://www.helpscout.net/blog/customer-retention-strategies-that-work/ It is also common knowledge that 80 percent of your future profits will come from just 20 percent of your existing customers. So Maxis can continue to ignore their existing Sims community if they want. It will just mean a 80% drop of future profits for them. Anyway the Sims 4 isn't a bad game, it is just not a relatable game to every Simmer at this point. Hopefully it appeals to more Simmers in the future.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
And, actually, Sims series is made by a small team, last I saw anything on it.
Lol well over 200 full-time employees at EA worked on TS4 base game (you can check the game credits), and that doesn't even include work outsourced/done at other EA studios.
Here's a photo of the current employees at The Sims Studio from their Christmas video. Not what I would call "a small team."
You're vastly underestimating the amount of work needed to make a game like TS4. The reason that no one is making a competitor isn't because of any copyright issues; it's because it's an extremely risky project that requires a huge investment (i.e. tens of millions of dollars).
Ah. See? I was working on inaccurate information. Thanks for the correction.
Now, I wonder something... Why is it, if 200 people worked on it, I see games produced by 20 people on Steam that are rated as crap, yet contain on-par graphics and far more content?
I fully accept that there is a lot of money involved. But I also know that there's very small studios doing projects larger than this with smaller budgets. And the perception that is creating is what Sims 5 has to compete against.
Then don't financially support it. Just don't boycott it is all I'm saying. Be a lost sale instead; be the customer they want back, not the thorn in their side they try to ignore.
You have no idea how accounting actually works. As I am someone that went to school for it for five years. EA's accountants couldn't care less if someone likes the Sims 4 or not or any of the other "noise" of customers blaming other customers just like them. All they care about is the bottom line. SimCity 2013 sold over 2 million copies and the game still shut down. It wasn't the customers' fault, but EA's and Maxis' decision. Whether the same befalls the Sims series will be on Maxis and EA again. What money the Sims 4 doesn't go back into the Sims but to all of EA's games. Check out this article how EA traded the Sims 4 budget for Titanfall: http://simsvip.com/2014/01/29/ea-trades-off-the-sims-4-for-titanfall/ Anyway, your dollar or whatever currency doesn't make you any more or less important than any other Simmer and it is not guaranteed to go into the future of the Sims. According to finances, you are just a small figure of profit for EA, not only Maxis. Nothing more, nothing less. Financial statements don't single out individual customers especially for a company as big as EA. Anyway, only "hypocrisy" I see is coming is telling customers to leave forums and the game completely and in the same breath tell them not to boycott the game. In both cases, it is encouraging customers not to spend money on the Sims 4 which isn't helping the Gurus at all.
Sims 4 players said there are enough fans to financially support the Sims 4 and have bragged about it for over a year now. If so, they can prove it with their actions, not just their words that is happening and not blame other Simmers for whatever happens to the Sims 4. The whole blaming Simmers in the same financial position as them is getting old and comes off as very naive. If Simmers truly love and want to support the Sims 4, tell as many other people about the game. Get people to buy the game instead of constantly telling others not to play, buy, or be apart of the Sims 4 community. But don't blame customers that don't want to invest further in the Sims 4. People have already bought the base game. Any expansion thereafter is not mandatory, but completely optional to purchase. It never has been and never will be. But if you think the Sims 4 can't stand on its base game alone as far as entertainment value and relies on expansions, then I guess Sims games have finally reached its quantity over quality point now. Will Wright said expansions were supposed to make Sims smarter, but so far it is coming off in a shallow way of just making them prettier with each pack. It is more than understandable some are bored by this change of direction. There is only so much frosting you can add to a cake before it starts to topple over with an unstable base of a cake. Some are happy with frosting and that is great. Others just want more substantial cake aka game mechanics. In the end everyone is a Simmer. Accept that there will be loss in potential sales because of customer dissatisfaction and there will be sales with customer satisfaction. It's how businesses work. Product that doesn't live to expectations will always result in loss of potential profits. It is never the customer's fault, but the businesses' poor judgement of missing who their target markets are and lack of keeping customer retention rates up. Good article on that. https://www.helpscout.net/blog/customer-retention-strategies-that-work/ It is also common knowledge that 80 percent of your future profits will come from just 20 percent of your existing customers. So Maxis can continue to ignore their existing Sims community if they want. It will just mean a 80% drop of future profits for them. Anyway the Sims 4 isn't a bad game, it is just not a relatable game to every Simmer at this point. Hopefully it appeals to more Simmers in the future.
You're right. I have no idea how accounting works.
I know how video game companies work. Not everything they do is based on accounting. You think it was accountants who decided to lift a big middle finger to everyone complaining about Diablo 3's color palette by including a hidden pony level? Or do you think it was someone who the accountant reports to? And that's from one of the less spiteful companies.
But, want an EA example? You think it was accountants who told EA to buy several small studios and immediately shut them down, taking the loss in profit from the purchase that is immediately destroyed? Or was it the guy at the top?
It's not EA's accountants who make the call. It's the people who listen to the accountants, the developers, and the marketing people. If the developers are saying something is impossible, it doesn't matter what marketing and accounting have to say. If developers are wanting to implement a feature and marketing is saying there's a group of people boycotting the game to get that feature, both developers and accounting can be overruled under the simple premise of refusing to give in to such tactics.
If you want toddlers and want them to be noticed or added, just boycott the game yourself eventually the money, sales and complaining will increase so bad that they'd probably just give in
In reality, for every person who doesn't buy the base game there are at least 3 others who will. And I suspect all that will happen when the complaints increase and the sales decline, is that Maxis will drop the pc version of the Sims 4 like a hot potato and come up with a mobile/tablet version of The Sims similar to The Sims Freeplay, only it won't be based in real time, but it will be heavily quest based.
That's when Maxis becomes labelled a Mad Man and I'm sure no one is going to the phone app for Sims 4 or anything more, sims free play is just enough. That'd just be the end of the franchise... why would you continue supporting a franchise and there's well over tons of people for play in the game, but the play isn't added? instead they introduce," were limited, certain funds." then why develop this game? if you invest more then your sales would go up and you'd have enough money to fix your engine and the game. It's all business, they don't give no dam. Sims 3 got as much stuff on the 2nd going onto the 3rd year. Game lacks hell of bad.
My point is... your just saying deal with it because it might end the whole game? well Ig that's the case.
No, I'm not saying "deal with it", even though you think that's what I'm saying. What I AM saying is that realistically, a boycott won't work, since players keep buying the base game; either those players who couldn't afford it at the time of release, or waited until there was a sale, or new players who run across it online and decide to give it a go. Every one of those is a sale and money in EA's pocket.
And I'm also saying that EA's reaction isn't necessarily going to be: "Oops, we messed up, we'd better get to work on The Sims 5". If EA wants to move the game in another direction, then the decline in sales would be the perfect excuse for them saying that the fans have lost interest in the PC version so let's move on to the online mobile/tablet version. That's what I'm saying.
And you're right. If you want to make money, you have to be willing to spend money. EA needs to be willing to invest in this game if it wants the sales to go up and to see fans start liking the game again to the point where they're willing to spend the money on it again.
Some of us are still boycotting--at least 500 of us in this forum. And honestly, it's not even boycotting! We're just not buying a game we don't want! Please don't assume that we're all idiots who feel compelled to buy stuff we don't like If the numbers of fans buying the game is high because the fans like TS4, then that works out for EA--and it might result in massive disappointment for us in the long run for having to sit out this entire iteration, but high sales sure don't mean players who dislike the game are being suckered.
EA isn't getting a dime from me until I get improved family play and toddlers. I don't even play this game anymore (playing TS2). When they deliver the game that I enjoy, I will buy all of the EPs and SPs and GPs, and I will throw my full support into the game. For me this is the whole point of being a squeaky wheel about the family play and toddler issues. After all, why complain if there is no chance whatsoever of TS4 (or TS5) successfully carrying on this franchise?
Unfortunately, you're helping to kill the series.
What has EA done in the past with video game series that lost a lot of sales? It's killed them. Most video game companies do that. It's easier to just drop a series than to try to figure out where it went wrong. So, most just kill a failing series.
No, no. That's EAs failing. Their vision. They are offering a game that is so limited that it doesn't appeals to the widest possible fan base.
I'm not supporting that kind of games. I won't pay for a bad game to fund a future game we know nothing about. And Maxis being moved under the purview of EA Mobile doesn't bode for a great TS5, does it?
Totally agree.
I'm not financially supporting poor product just because I want a better sims game in the future. Because we all know how Maxis and EA have tried to use problems some people had with previous games to remove huge amounts of features and charge the same premum price for the product. Not fixing it.
Paying for TS4 just so you get a TS5 won't mean a better game at all. There clearly isn't loyalty to customers because of the state TS4 was shipped in. Why would TS5 be any better?!
As for mobile division. No it doesn't.
Then don't financially support it. Just don't boycott it is all I'm saying. Be a lost sale instead; be the customer they want back, not the thorn in their side they try to ignore.
There really is no difference. A boycott essentially means you want to buy but their actions prevent you investing. It means they have a chance to redeem themselves with those customers. If they are so petty to further penalise their customers who have been loyal for many years they don't deserve customers at all. That would be the height of pathetic behaviour from a company and I don't believe they are so plum to act out that way. I don't believe EA are the best company but I also don't believe they are that bad either.
If you want toddlers and want them to be noticed or added, just boycott the game yourself eventually the money, sales and complaining will increase so bad that they'd probably just give in
In reality, for every person who doesn't buy the base game there are at least 3 others who will. And I suspect all that will happen when the complaints increase and the sales decline, is that Maxis will drop the pc version of the Sims 4 like a hot potato and come up with a mobile/tablet version of The Sims similar to The Sims Freeplay, only it won't be based in real time, but it will be heavily quest based.
That's when Maxis becomes labelled a Mad Man and I'm sure no one is going to the phone app for Sims 4 or anything more, sims free play is just enough. That'd just be the end of the franchise... why would you continue supporting a franchise and there's well over tons of people for play in the game, but the play isn't added? instead they introduce," were limited, certain funds." then why develop this game? if you invest more then your sales would go up and you'd have enough money to fix your engine and the game. It's all business, they don't give no dam. Sims 3 got as much stuff on the 2nd going onto the 3rd year. Game lacks hell of bad.
My point is... your just saying deal with it because it might end the whole game? well Ig that's the case.
No, I'm not saying "deal with it", even though you think that's what I'm saying. What I AM saying is that realistically, a boycott won't work, since players keep buying the base game; either those players who couldn't afford it at the time of release, or waited until there was a sale, or new players who run across it online and decide to give it a go. Every one of those is a sale and money in EA's pocket.
And I'm also saying that EA's reaction isn't necessarily going to be: "Oops, we messed up, we'd better get to work on The Sims 5". If EA wants to move the game in another direction, then the decline in sales would be the perfect excuse for them saying that the fans have lost interest in the PC version so let's move on to the online mobile/tablet version. That's what I'm saying.
And you're right. If you want to make money, you have to be willing to spend money. EA needs to be willing to invest in this game if it wants the sales to go up and to see fans start liking the game again to the point where they're willing to spend the money on it again.
Some of us are still boycotting--at least 500 of us in this forum. And honestly, it's not even boycotting! We're just not buying a game we don't want! Please don't assume that we're all idiots who feel compelled to buy stuff we don't like If the numbers of fans buying the game is high because the fans like TS4, then that works out for EA--and it might result in massive disappointment for us in the long run for having to sit out this entire iteration, but high sales sure don't mean players who dislike the game are being suckered.
EA isn't getting a dime from me until I get improved family play and toddlers. I don't even play this game anymore (playing TS2). When they deliver the game that I enjoy, I will buy all of the EPs and SPs and GPs, and I will throw my full support into the game. For me this is the whole point of being a squeaky wheel about the family play and toddler issues. After all, why complain if there is no chance whatsoever of TS4 (or TS5) successfully carrying on this franchise?
Unfortunately, you're helping to kill the series.
What has EA done in the past with video game series that lost a lot of sales? It's killed them. Most video game companies do that. It's easier to just drop a series than to try to figure out where it went wrong. So, most just kill a failing series.
No, no. That's EAs failing. Their vision. They are offering a game that is so limited that it doesn't appeals to the widest possible fan base.
I'm not supporting that kind of games. I won't pay for a bad game to fund a future game we know nothing about. And Maxis being moved under the purview of EA Mobile doesn't bode for a great TS5, does it?
Totally agree.
I'm not financially supporting poor product just because I want a better sims game in the future. Because we all know how Maxis and EA have tried to use problems some people had with previous games to remove huge amounts of features and charge the same premum price for the product. Not fixing it.
Paying for TS4 just so you get a TS5 won't mean a better game at all. There clearly isn't loyalty to customers because of the state TS4 was shipped in. Why would TS5 be any better?!
As for mobile division. No it doesn't.
Then don't financially support it. Just don't boycott it is all I'm saying. Be a lost sale instead; be the customer they want back, not the thorn in their side they try to ignore.
There really is no difference. A boycott essentially means you want to buy but their actions prevent you investing. It means they have a chance to redeem themselves with those customers. If they are so petty to further penalise their customers who have been loyal for many years they don't deserve customers at all. That would be the height of pathetic behaviour from a company and I don't believe they are so plum to act out that way. I don't believe EA are the best company but I also don't believe they are that bad either.
Here's a question for you: Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers? These are customers saying they will buy, but only if X is done. To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail.
Just stating you walked away from the game because it's missing a few things? That's different. That's a sale lost from a customer who has been loyal. Then the question becomes how to get them back, and if you are willing to do what it takes to get them back.
The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company.
Do you judge it against others of the series? Rate it against Sims 3 or Sims 2? If so, then congrats; you're not treating it like it is its own product and are treating it like it's part of a series. In which case, you would need to take your own advice, as otherwise your comment would be hypocrisy.
If you are judging it solely on its own merit, then okay. I'll concede that you do have a point. To a degree.
I'm intelligent enough to be able to compare 4 to past iterations while understanding that it's a completely different game. Does it stack up to the sequels? Nope. Not in my opinion. But I get that it's still early. I'm just not going to pay for "hope." Now, looking at this game on its own, I don't think it's solid. Forgetting that I played 2 in high school, and just about skipped 3, I'm still frustrated by the quality of the game. The bugs alone make me not want to play it.
Unfortunately, video game companies don't treat games like Sims 4 as though they are their own product when it comes to a series. They treat it as part of a series. It's not just The Sims 4 that they're selling, but Sims as a whole. This is their newest take on that brand; they want it to succeed. And if the brand cannot at least make enough to continue... then it is a brand they milked enough and need to be rid of.
That is unfortunate, but it really says a lot about those companies. There is more than enough valuable feedback on these forums for them to go through to get an idea about what they should include to be successful. If they see the sims brand as something to be milked and then tossed aside, this brand was doomed as soon as dollar signs replaced passion. Can't blame anyone else for that.
Now, how is it your responsibility as well? Because you're choosing to be part of the conflict leading to the failure. You're not just walking away from a product you dislike; you're actively telling a company you are not walking away from the product, but that you actively refuse to buy it until they do what you want. You've made yourself into a combatant of the company instead of a lost sale they need to court. Typically, with video game companies, this doesn't work out well; the combatants are usually ignored. Unless they are successful at killing sales, at which point the company gets its final revenge by simply sitting on the product copyright and suing anyone who tries to make a product that fills a similar niche and is close enough to that product. And, unfortunately, the law tends to be on their side on this one. And EA is one of the worse companies about this.
It's not my responsibility to carry 4 on my back. I'm a consumer. As a consumer, I either continue purchasing goods or services because I find value in them, or I close my wallet. Do you know how much money companies spend to try and figure out why people have lost interest in their products? It's because they value that knowledge. They even go so far as to research their competitors' products extensively to know what they need to improve. Good companies want to know why people are no longer interested. If you stop buying a product and never bother saying why you're no longer interested, you're as good as a fart in the wind. You've lost your voice. You're just a number.
If I'm ignored after sharing my opinions, whatever I tried. It just means I have to find something else to buy. There are more than enough indie developers I'm interested in supporting. I'm not saying "if I can't have the sims I want, no one can." EA/Maxis is saying "if you don't play this game the way we want you to, you'll be sorry." No. I won't be sorry. Ain't nobody got time for that. Let EA try to stifle the creativity of their competitors. No one is on top forever.
So, yeah. If you don't like it, just walk away, and come back if you see something you like later. But boycotting them? That's not going to help you. It never does. Because I know if I was a developer and saw you boycotting me for a feature, I would hold out on releasing that feature just to spite you. And I'm far less spiteful than EA is.
Lol, I don't care about EA or EA's spite. If they steamroll the sims because listening to the community is just too hard, again, it's on them. Also, you'll find that if developers hold out on improving their games because their fee fees got hurt, they lose a lot more than sales. That kind of attitude assures your destruction. If throwing a tantrum because you didn't get your way comes before improving what you've released, I'll know I've made the right decision.
In my opinion, if this is how the sims franchise is going to be from here on out, it's no longer for me. You go ahead and support it. Maybe your money will be enough, maybe it won't. We won't know anything until 5... or the lack of.
You're right. I have no idea how accounting works.
I know how video game companies work. Not everything they do is based on accounting. You think it was accountants who decided to lift a big middle finger to everyone complaining about Diablo 3's color palette by including a hidden pony level? Or do you think it was someone who the accountant reports to? And that's from one of the less spiteful companies.
But, want an EA example? You think it was accountants who told EA to buy several small studios and immediately shut them down, taking the loss in profit from the purchase that is immediately destroyed? Or was it the guy at the top?
It's not EA's accountants who make the call. It's the people who listen to the accountants, the developers, and the marketing people. If the developers are saying something is impossible, it doesn't matter what marketing and accounting have to say. If developers are wanting to implement a feature and marketing is saying there's a group of people boycotting the game to get that feature, both developers and accounting can be overruled under the simple premise of refusing to give in to such tactics.
Well I doubt EA's CEO even reads forums. But yeah management looks at the figures and makes the ultimate decision what to do. They don't keep track of who the Sims fans are. Maxis does with their events, but EA doesn't. So ultimately the who "sides" debate doesn't matter from an accounting perspective. All that matters is the bottom line. Kind of sad the Sims 4 wasn't mentioned in the last quarter. The Sims Freeplay is still doing well. http://investor.ea.com/results.cfm But yeah if you want to keep track of how the Sims 4 is doing, that is probably the most accurate link to keep track of it since it displays EA's financial statements and presentation notes. I always love reading them. I doubt developers even read that boycott thread. It got closed from forums fast, so mods were probably the only ones that looked at it. It's silly to stress about it since there is a high chance it is being ignored. What people do with their wallets is a personal decision whether they purchase the Sims 4 or not. Silly to guilt trip people about it. You or I don't work for EA, so whatever profits or losses they incur is not our responsibility or worry. It is on EA and Maxis how much the Sims 4 makes or breaks. Maxis controls the content and EA the budget it seems. As far as the whole talk about boycotting, I'm pretty sure it follows under lobbyism and might be against forum rules, so might need to have a mod clarify on even mentioning the subject.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
There really is no difference. A boycott essentially means you want to buy but their actions prevent you investing. It means they have a chance to redeem themselves with those customers. If they are so petty to further penalise their customers who have been loyal for many years they don't deserve customers at all. That would be the height of pathetic behaviour from a company and I don't believe they are so plum to act out that way. I don't believe EA are the best company but I also don't believe they are that bad either.
Here's a question for you: Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers? These are customers saying they will buy, but only if X is done. To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail.
Just stating you walked away from the game because it's missing a few things? That's different. That's a sale lost from a customer who has been loyal. Then the question becomes how to get them back, and if you are willing to do what it takes to get them back.
The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company.
"Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers?"
Because money talks. Nobody likes losing money... especially large, publicly traded companies. Now, if it's not worth it for them to put the time and resources into getting these customers back, that's another issue entirely.
"To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail."
Uh, no. That's not blackmailing in this particular case. It's having certain expectations or standards and being vocal about that as a consumer. Is it blackmail to tell a car company you won't be buying cars from them until the number of recalls drop and they stop overcharging for cup holders? Not really. I believe they call that the free market.
"The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company."
No, there is no difference. Especially to EA. EA is far too big to have that sort of relationship to begin with. Do you really think a company that large actually cares about a lone person's opinion about them? They've been voted worst company in America twice in a row and have kept on truckin' since. Loyal customers who bought 4 are no different than curious, first time buyers. Now, what does tend to get the attention of large companies is a decent sized group of consumers with the same grievances.
I'm intelligent enough to be able to compare 4 to past iterations while understanding that it's a completely different game. Does it stack up to the sequels? Nope. Not in my opinion. But I get that it's still early. I'm just not going to pay for "hope." Now, looking at this game on its own, I don't think it's solid. Forgetting that I played 2 in high school, and just about skipped 3, I'm still frustrated by the quality of the game. The bugs alone make me not want to play it.
And I'm intelligent enough to recognize what you're trying to do there. But, let's not pursue that. It would get nasty, and neither of us wants that.
Let's be honest: If you want a game without major bugs, you probably stopped playing at Sims 2. No game that's come out since then and had any real complexity has lacked them. Just ask about the random bug that drops people from a lethal height when you load an area in Skyrim. Yeah, nothing like coming out of a mine to watch everyone in town die.
That is unfortunate, but it really says a lot about those companies. There is more than enough valuable feedback on these forums for them to go through to get an idea about what they should include to be successful. If they see the sims brand as something to be milked and then tossed aside, this brand was doomed as soon as dollar signs replaced passion. Can't blame anyone else for that.
Every brand is to be milked and then, when you can milk it no more, toss it aside. That is the reality of business. The key is how you make certain you can still milk it.
And, enough feedback? Yeah. Just like there was on the Sims 3 forums. The problem is... which feedback do they listen to? The people happy with the game? The people who left it? The people unhappy who haven't left? The boycotters? And even if they pick one of those groups, they still have all of the subgroups to pay attention to.
Pick a single Sims 4 feature, then check the old threads discussing it from 2013. Assuming they're all intact, I'm willing to bet that no matter the feature, you'll find someone who supported it. That even includes some of what is missing. And, yeah, there were people calling for an emotions system in the lead-up to Sims 4. But, you'll also find people like me saying some of those features are bad ideas. And some of the missing items are bad ideas to be missing. Tell me, should they have listened to people like me instead of who they did?
That's the problem with saying they should listen to the community; they do. The community isn't united in what it asks for, even on the subject of toddlers, and they have to pick which group wins out. Sometimes, they pick the wrong group. And even when they do pick a group, most of the suggestions are so vague as to allow just about anything.
It's not my responsibility to carry 4 on my back. I'm a consumer. As a consumer, I either continue purchasing goods or services because I find value in them, or I close my wallet. Do you know how much money companies spend to try and figure out why people have lost interest in their products? It's because they value that knowledge. They even go so far as to research their competitors' products extensively to know what they need to improve. Good companies want to know why people are no longer interested. If you stop buying a product and never bother saying why you're no longer interested, you're as good as a fart in the wind. You've lost your voice. You're just a number.
If I'm ignored after sharing my opinions, whatever I tried. It just means I have to find something else to buy. There are more than enough indie developers I'm interested in supporting. I'm not saying "if I can't have the sims I want, no one can." EA/Maxis is saying "if you don't play this game the way we want you to, you'll be sorry." No. I won't be sorry. Ain't nobody got time for that. Let EA try to stifle the creativity of their competitors. No one is on top forever.
If you don't want to carry Sims 4 on your back, then don't carrying it on your back. Because by boycotting, you (not you in specific; just the general you) are still engaging yourself in financial responsibility for the game's success by hinging whether or not you buy on a particular feature. You are still a financial stake in the game's success or failure by your own choice to make your purchase hinge on something and actively participate in a boycott.
Lol, I don't care about EA or EA's spite. If they steamroll the sims because listening to the community is just too hard, again, it's on them. Also, you'll find that if developers hold out on improving their games because their fee fees got hurt, they lose a lot more than sales. That kind of attitude assures your destruction. If throwing a tantrum because you didn't get your way comes before improving what you've released, I'll know I've made the right decision.
And yet the developers most known for spiteful actions are the ones most rolling in dough. Bethesda, Square-Enix, Blizzard, Nintendo, Microsoft, Valve... Notice how many of those I'm mentioning are also the biggest names in gaming? Yet they take spiteful actions all of the time, some of which are incredibly hurtful to games, and continue to bring in the dough. They're not even worried about sales in some cases; Nintendo has had two consoles flop and still hasn't slowed down on some of what they do. Nintendo literally doesn't care.
So, yeah, I don't think they're even remotely worried. After all, EA has a lot of good company in acting that way.
Here's a question for you: Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers? These are customers saying they will buy, but only if X is done. To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail.
Just stating you walked away from the game because it's missing a few things? That's different. That's a sale lost from a customer who has been loyal. Then the question becomes how to get them back, and if you are willing to do what it takes to get them back.
The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company.
I fail to understand what you are trying to say here, blackmail?
EA is not my best friend I have to be loyal to. It's a company that makes games for profit. Thats it. And being a loyal customer for over 15 years didn't result in that I got a game I was hoping for.
This could be seen as blackmailing their customers though since there aren't any other life simulation games out there (yet) “We're not working on Sims 5. We're not thinking about Sims 5. If Sims 4 isn't successful, there won't be a Sims 5.”
Here's a question for you: Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers? These are customers saying they will buy, but only if X is done. To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail.
Just stating you walked away from the game because it's missing a few things? That's different. That's a sale lost from a customer who has been loyal. Then the question becomes how to get them back, and if you are willing to do what it takes to get them back.
The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company.
I fail to understand what you are trying to say here, blackmail?
EA is not my best friend I have to be loyal to. It's a company that makes games for profit. Thats it. And being a loyal customer for over 15 years didn't result in that I got a game I was hoping for.
This could be seen as blackmailing their customers though since there aren't any other life simulation games out there (yet) “We're not working on Sims 5. We're not thinking about Sims 5. If Sims 4 isn't successful, there won't be a Sims 5.”
End of the day, they don't know you from me. So, some stranger coming up and saying "I'll only pay you if you do X" isn't going to go over well; neither one of us are anyone important that they have to listen to.
Being a loyal customer for 15 years is no guarantee they know who you are.
And, while that statement can come across as blackmail, it's probably also harsh reality. They own the Sims series; if they want to kill it due to lack of sales, it's their legal right to do so. That doesn't mean we have to like it, but end of the day we have to deal with that.
Now, I provide a simple strategy for this: Don't boycott them. Just state you're a lost sale, and why. Don't state you'll only buy the game if X happens. State that a lack of X is ultimately why you didn't buy the game. Then, they can't point to you and say you're hostile and should be ignored.
Here's a question for you: Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers? These are customers saying they will buy, but only if X is done. To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail.
Just stating you walked away from the game because it's missing a few things? That's different. That's a sale lost from a customer who has been loyal. Then the question becomes how to get them back, and if you are willing to do what it takes to get them back.
The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company.
I fail to understand what you are trying to say here, blackmail?
EA is not my best friend I have to be loyal to. It's a company that makes games for profit. Thats it. And being a loyal customer for over 15 years didn't result in that I got a game I was hoping for.
This could be seen as blackmailing their customers though since there aren't any other life simulation games out there (yet) “We're not working on Sims 5. We're not thinking about Sims 5. If Sims 4 isn't successful, there won't be a Sims 5.”
End of the day, they don't know you from me. So, some stranger coming up and saying "I'll only pay you if you do X" isn't going to go over well; neither one of us are anyone important that they have to listen to.
Being a loyal customer for 15 years is no guarantee they know who you are.
And, while that statement can come across as blackmail, it's probably also harsh reality. They own the Sims series; if they want to kill it due to lack of sales, it's their legal right to do so. That doesn't mean we have to like it, but end of the day we have to deal with that.
Now, I provide a simple strategy for this: Don't boycott them. Just state you're a lost sale, and why. Don't state you'll only buy the game if X happens. State that a lack of X is ultimately why you didn't buy the game. Then, they can't point to you and say you're hostile and should be ignored.
You would expect that, after 15 years of making the Sims series, they know exactly what's important to the community and what's not..
It seems they are still clueless about that. They don't have to know every single person, but 15 years of making a game, with tons of feedback and suggestions, it's pretty sad that it seems they don't even get what the community loves and what the community hates.
This is not a new game, this is the 4th generation of the game. They can do better, but to me it seems like they don't really want to.
And Rachel's vision isn't helping neither. I still think she is not the right person for the position she is in now, and yes, that shows. It perfectly shows.
And I'm intelligent enough to recognize what you're trying to do there. But, let's not pursue that. It would get nasty, and neither of us wants that.
Let's be honest: If you want a game without major bugs, you probably stopped playing at Sims 2. No game that's come out since then and had any real complexity has lacked them. Just ask about the random bug that drops people from a lethal height when you load an area in Skyrim. Yeah, nothing like coming out of a mine to watch everyone in town die.
I was just saying that I'm able to step back and see 4 for what it is (to me). You know, that I'm not a hypocrite like you implied. Want to keep things civil? Watch how you talk to me.
Well, to be honest, I only play a few casual indie games here and there; I'm not a hardcore gamer by any means. I've never played Skyrim ether. If I can't compare 4 to past sim games, I don't really think it's fair to compare 4's bugs to issues had in other unrelated games. I spent my money on 4, so I want it to work properly. If it can't, then there's no reason for me to spend more on it.
Every brand is to be milked and then, when you can milk it no more, toss it aside. That is the reality of business. The key is how you make certain you can still milk it.
And, enough feedback? Yeah. Just like there was on the Sims 3 forums. The problem is... which feedback do they listen to? The people happy with the game? The people who left it? The people unhappy who haven't left? The boycotters? And even if they pick one of those groups, they still have all of the subgroups to pay attention to.
Pick a single Sims 4 feature, then check the old threads discussing it from 2013. Assuming they're all intact, I'm willing to bet that no matter the feature, you'll find someone who supported it. That even includes some of what is missing. And, yeah, there were people calling for an emotions system in the lead-up to Sims 4. But, you'll also find people like me saying some of those features are bad ideas. And some of the missing items are bad ideas to be missing. Tell me, should they have listened to people like me instead of who they did?
That's the problem with saying they should listen to the community; they do. The community isn't united in what it asks for, even on the subject of toddlers, and they have to pick which group wins out. Sometimes, they pick the wrong group. And even when they do pick a group, most of the suggestions are so vague as to allow just about anything.
Well, if they've gotten all there is to get from the sims and choose to toss it aside, it can't be helped. I just don't want to hear how it was the fault of dissatisfied simmers because they didn't try hard enough to like it.
Yeah, it's difficult to try and figure out what the people want if you're left to shuffle through pages and pages of threads and posts. That's what surveys are for. You find what's most important to different groups, if there's a lot of overlap, you figure out how to please players with different play styles who want the same thing. There are ways to go about it, I just don't know if they're actually doing it. Sure they send out a few surveys about possible expansions and stuff, but I don't think they ask for information about game improvements.
Also, it's not just which ideas they listen to, it's how they execute them. A brilliant idea isn't worth anything if you can't bother implementing it correctly. I don't blame people who asked for emotions for 4. I blame Maxis for cutting corners when putting them in 4.
If you don't want to carry Sims 4 on your back, then don't carrying it on your back. Because by boycotting, you (not you in specific; just the boycotters) are still engaging yourself in financial responsibility for the game's success by hinging whether or not you buy on a particular feature. You are still a financial stake in the game's success or failure by your own choice to make your purchase hinge on something and actively participate in a boycott.
I have 0 financial stake in this game's success or failure. I'm just sitting here, watching to see what happens. If I find something I like in 4, yay. If not, I've saved money that I can put towards something else. It's really not a big deal for me.
And yet the developers most known for spiteful actions are the ones most rolling in dough. Bethesda, Square-Enix, Blizzard, Nintendo, Microsoft, Valve... Notice how many of those I'm mentioning are also the biggest names in gaming? Yet they take spiteful actions all of the time, some of which are incredibly hurtful to games, and continue to bring in the dough. They're not even worried about sales in some cases; Nintendo has had two consoles flop and still hasn't slowed down on some of what they do. Nintendo literally doesn't care.
So, yeah, I don't think they're even remotely worried. After all, EA has a lot of good company in acting that way.
Well, I think it's silly to cut off your nose to spite your face, but I'm not a bitter game developer so what do I know. I think this just strengthens my point. Should EA take offense that 4 didn't get the proper praise and toss it aside because [random reason], I personally won't lose any sleep over it. It wasn't my call. I guess if companies like these are so easily offended, then it should be expected, right? It's in their nature.
Here's a question for you: Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers? These are customers saying they will buy, but only if X is done. To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail.
Just stating you walked away from the game because it's missing a few things? That's different. That's a sale lost from a customer who has been loyal. Then the question becomes how to get them back, and if you are willing to do what it takes to get them back.
The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company.
I fail to understand what you are trying to say here, blackmail?
EA is not my best friend I have to be loyal to. It's a company that makes games for profit. Thats it. And being a loyal customer for over 15 years didn't result in that I got a game I was hoping for.
This could be seen as blackmailing their customers though since there aren't any other life simulation games out there (yet) “We're not working on Sims 5. We're not thinking about Sims 5. If Sims 4 isn't successful, there won't be a Sims 5.”
End of the day, they don't know you from me. So, some stranger coming up and saying "I'll only pay you if you do X" isn't going to go over well; neither one of us are anyone important that they have to listen to.
Being a loyal customer for 15 years is no guarantee they know who you are.
And, while that statement can come across as blackmail, it's probably also harsh reality. They own the Sims series; if they want to kill it due to lack of sales, it's their legal right to do so. That doesn't mean we have to like it, but end of the day we have to deal with that.
Now, I provide a simple strategy for this: Don't boycott them. Just state you're a lost sale, and why. Don't state you'll only buy the game if X happens. State that a lack of X is ultimately why you didn't buy the game. Then, they can't point to you and say you're hostile and should be ignored.
You would expect that, after 15 years of making the Sims series, they know exactly what's important to the community and what's not..
It seems they are still clueless about that. They don't have to know every single person, but 15 years of making a game, with tons of feedback and suggestions, it's pretty sad that it seems they don't even get what the community loves and what the community hates.
This is not a new game, this is the 4th generation of the game. They can do better, but to me it seems like they don't really want to.
And Rachel's vision isn't helping neither. I still think she is not the right person for the position she is in now, and yes, that shows. It perfectly shows.
I would expect that, if I hadn't tried to do the same thing during the Sims 3 era. In the end? I spend years in the Ideas and Feedback section and still couldn't give you a coherent summary of what the community wanted.
And it's the same way with toddlers in this game. Does the community want them? Does it want them patched in? Will it accept an EP? Will that EP be devoted entirely to toddlers, or Generations redone? Yeah, I could give you a summary of what groups want... but at the end of the day, I would barely be able to say that toddlers are a popular request, let alone give any coherent details about the other questions. And this is coming from someone who spends most of their time online; imagine how the developers, who probably spend a mere handful of hours every week on the forums, would feel.
And, yes, they can make a good game. My hope is they do for Sims 5.
Guys it's sooooo simple. A simulation game worked on by so many people and we're still limited. What money are they running off? It seems like a " couldn't or could " possibility when it comes to adding things fans want into their game. People are still buying the game and therefore, they're still making money off of the TS4.
Believe it or not.. but half of the things fans ask for on this public forum specifically for Ts4 has ALWAYS been responded with " can't talk on future content " or " were limited, maybe one day " literately EVERYTIME.
I was just saying that I'm able to step back and see 4 for what it is (to me). You know, that I'm not a hypocrite like you implied. Want to keep things civil? Watch how you talk to me.
Well, to be honest, I only play a few casual indie games here and there; I'm not a hardcore gamer by any means. I've never played Skyrim ether. If I can't compare 4 to past sim games, I don't really think it's fair to compare 4's bugs to issues had in other unrelated games. I spent my money on 4, so I want it to work properly. If it can't, then there's no reason for me to spend more on it.
I am being civil. I stated two possibilities in the beginning, let you reply, and then commented I knew what you were doing with your reply and it would be uncivil to discuss it. Because I knew that any reply I gave to it would only be offensive by my own judgement, given what I said in the post prior. I tried to go the neutral route that implied nothing, but obviously did not succeed. Shall we agree to avoid discussing it further?
Unfortunately, there's a very good reason to compare it to similar games: To demonstrate that asking for a modern game free of bugs that is also a game with major development is unrealistic. Which, these days, it really is. Even the studious renowned for not having bugs still have them; these days, that renown is a measure of how few bugs they have and how quickly those are fixed, not a lack of presence to begin with. That's why I never play a game on release.
Well, if they've gotten all there is to get from the sims and choose to toss it aside, it can't be helped. I just don't want to hear how it was the fault of dissatisfied simmers because they didn't try hard enough to like it.
Yeah, it's difficult to try and figure out what the people want if you're left to shuffle through pages and pages of threads and posts. That's what surveys are for. You find what's most important to different groups, if there's a lot of overlap, you figure out how to please players with different play styles who want the same thing. There are ways to go about it, I just don't know if they're actually doing it. Sure they send out a few surveys about possible expansions and stuff, but I don't think they ask for information about game improvements.
Also, it's not just which ideas they listen to, it's how they execute them. A brilliant idea isn't worth anything if you can't bother implementing it correctly. I don't blame people who asked for emotions for 4. I blame Maxis for cutting corners when putting them in 4.
I'm not saying it's the fault of dissatisfied simmers who didn't try hard enough to like it, though. I'm saying the people who are intentionally putting themselves in an antagonistic relationship with EA are partially at fault. What about the vast majority who simply left or simply refuse to buy without participating in the boycott? Well, it's not their fault; they're not taking actions that tie part of the game's income to their want or wants getting satisfied while still maintaining an active relationship with the game. So, the people who simply didn't buy are people EA didn't manage to sell to; seeing as they're uninvolved, there's no reason to blame them for something that requires an active relationship to begin with.
I have 0 financial stake in this game's success or failure. I'm just sitting here, watching to see what happens. If I find something I like in 4, yay. If not, I've saved money that I can put towards something else. It's really not a big deal for me.
Then you are not someone at fault for if the game fails. In my viewpoint, it is that simple.
Well, I think it's silly to cut off your nose to spite your face, but I'm not a bitter game developer so what do I know. I think this just strengthens my point. Should EA take offense that 4 didn't get the proper praise and toss it aside because [random reason], I personally won't lose any sleep over it. It wasn't my call. I guess if companies like these are so easily offended, then it should be expected, right? It's in their nature.
Consider their fanbases, too. WoW has people who actively try to sabotage the website as a form of protest about class balance, and let's not even discuss Diablo 3 or StarCraft 2. Nintendo... I don't even walk to talk about some of their fans; there's a good reason why apathy rules the day at that company. Microsoft... If you've played Halo multiplayer with random people, you understand. This community is downright civil. Those companies deal with communities that make war zones look peaceful.
If you want toddlers and want them to be noticed or added, just boycott the game yourself eventually the money, sales and complaining will increase so bad that they'd probably just give in
In reality, for every person who doesn't buy the base game there are at least 3 others who will. And I suspect all that will happen when the complaints increase and the sales decline, is that Maxis will drop the pc version of the Sims 4 like a hot potato and come up with a mobile/tablet version of The Sims similar to The Sims Freeplay, only it won't be based in real time, but it will be heavily quest based.
That's when Maxis becomes labelled a Mad Man and I'm sure no one is going to the phone app for Sims 4 or anything more, sims free play is just enough. That'd just be the end of the franchise... why would you continue supporting a franchise and there's well over tons of people for play in the game, but the play isn't added? instead they introduce," were limited, certain funds." then why develop this game? if you invest more then your sales would go up and you'd have enough money to fix your engine and the game. It's all business, they don't give no dam. Sims 3 got as much stuff on the 2nd going onto the 3rd year. Game lacks hell of bad.
My point is... your just saying deal with it because it might end the whole game? well Ig that's the case.
No, I'm not saying "deal with it", even though you think that's what I'm saying. What I AM saying is that realistically, a boycott won't work, since players keep buying the base game; either those players who couldn't afford it at the time of release, or waited until there was a sale, or new players who run across it online and decide to give it a go. Every one of those is a sale and money in EA's pocket.
And I'm also saying that EA's reaction isn't necessarily going to be: "Oops, we messed up, we'd better get to work on The Sims 5". If EA wants to move the game in another direction, then the decline in sales would be the perfect excuse for them saying that the fans have lost interest in the PC version so let's move on to the online mobile/tablet version. That's what I'm saying.
And you're right. If you want to make money, you have to be willing to spend money. EA needs to be willing to invest in this game if it wants the sales to go up and to see fans start liking the game again to the point where they're willing to spend the money on it again.
Some of us are still boycotting--at least 500 of us in this forum. And honestly, it's not even boycotting! We're just not buying a game we don't want! Please don't assume that we're all idiots who feel compelled to buy stuff we don't like If the numbers of fans buying the game is high because the fans like TS4, then that works out for EA--and it might result in massive disappointment for us in the long run for having to sit out this entire iteration, but high sales sure don't mean players who dislike the game are being suckered.
EA isn't getting a dime from me until I get improved family play and toddlers. I don't even play this game anymore (playing TS2). When they deliver the game that I enjoy, I will buy all of the EPs and SPs and GPs, and I will throw my full support into the game. For me this is the whole point of being a squeaky wheel about the family play and toddler issues. After all, why complain if there is no chance whatsoever of TS4 (or TS5) successfully carrying on this franchise?
Unfortunately, you're helping to kill the series.
What has EA done in the past with video game series that lost a lot of sales? It's killed them. Most video game companies do that. It's easier to just drop a series than to try to figure out where it went wrong. So, most just kill a failing series.
No, no. That's EAs failing. Their vision. They are offering a game that is so limited that it doesn't appeals to the widest possible fan base.
I'm not supporting that kind of games. I won't pay for a bad game to fund a future game we know nothing about. And Maxis being moved under the purview of EA Mobile doesn't bode for a great TS5, does it?
Totally agree.
I'm not financially supporting poor product just because I want a better sims game in the future. Because we all know how Maxis and EA have tried to use problems some people had with previous games to remove huge amounts of features and charge the same premum price for the product. Not fixing it.
Paying for TS4 just so you get a TS5 won't mean a better game at all. There clearly isn't loyalty to customers because of the state TS4 was shipped in. Why would TS5 be any better?!
As for mobile division. No it doesn't.
Then don't financially support it. Just don't boycott it is all I'm saying. Be a lost sale instead; be the customer they want back, not the thorn in their side they try to ignore.
There really is no difference. A boycott essentially means you want to buy but their actions prevent you investing. It means they have a chance to redeem themselves with those customers. If they are so petty to further penalise their customers who have been loyal for many years they don't deserve customers at all. That would be the height of pathetic behaviour from a company and I don't believe they are so plum to act out that way. I don't believe EA are the best company but I also don't believe they are that bad either.
Here's a question for you: Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers? These are customers saying they will buy, but only if X is done. To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail.
Just stating you walked away from the game because it's missing a few things? That's different. That's a sale lost from a customer who has been loyal. Then the question becomes how to get them back, and if you are willing to do what it takes to get them back.
The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company.
Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers?
Because for every customer who bought without question for up to a decade and a half that represents a huge loss in potential profits. They can think in the short term-it's their prerogative to refuse to do so. But most companies know that existing customers represent cheaper marketing and the lions share of their profit margin. In short-they have to do less to make more than with a new customer who is an unknown quantity.
www.helpscout.net/75-customer-service-facts-quotes-statistics/
Here are some key points.
A typical business hears from just 4% of it's dissatisfied customers.
On average loyal customers are worth up to 10 times as much as their first purchase.
5% probability of selling to a new customer. 60-70% probability of selling to an existing customer.
It is 6-7 times more expensive to acquire a new customer than it is to keep a current one.
Customers aren't blackmailing EA. They are clearly communicating exactly what the problems they have and how to resolve that. That's a huge benefit because it saves the company thousands of dollars in having to pay for customer engagement surveys to investigate why. They have it all in front of them so they can make their decisions based on common themes. Most companies would recognise that, appreciate it and not act like a petulant child because someone offers feedback.
If that's truly how all games companies work then it's a sad reflection on them. And zero responsibility of their customers.
There is no difference between boycotting and not buying because you aren't happy about the state of the game. Zero. You are getting hung up on a word. Those boycotting have been loyal for many years-myself since day one. It doesn't change just because I feel the product isnt up to standard this time and choose not to buy until they up the standard offered. I still bought everything for the past fifteen years. Suggesting otherwise is absurd. It's just a word-but it represents exactly the same thing.
The attitude of the company toward the customer is what you are trying to argue. You are trying to argue that EA can't accept feedback they don't like because they are vindictive and petty. You can believe that. I don't. And if you are right? That's fine. I lose nothing by discontinuing my business relationship with them. I'm not supporting an inferior product just because they don't like being told wasting their budget and time on an online game then trying to salvage and sell it under a traditional sims label caused the problems in the first place and I don't support that.
Customers should not be expected to bail out poor decisions from a multi million dollar company.
There is nothing unreasonable about having an expectation of a certain level of quality for a video game or any other product. That is not having an 'attitude'.
And I'm intelligent enough to recognize what you're trying to do there. But, let's not pursue that. It would get nasty, and neither of us wants that.
Let's be honest: If you want a game without major bugs, you probably stopped playing at Sims 2. No game that's come out since then and had any real complexity has lacked them. Just ask about the random bug that drops people from a lethal height when you load an area in Skyrim. Yeah, nothing like coming out of a mine to watch everyone in town die.
I was just saying that I'm able to step back and see 4 for what it is (to me). You know, that I'm not a hypocrite like you implied. Want to keep things civil? Watch how you talk to me.
Well, to be honest, I only play a few casual indie games here and there; I'm not a hardcore gamer by any means. I've never played Skyrim ether. If I can't compare 4 to past sim games, I don't really think it's fair to compare 4's bugs to issues had in other unrelated games. I spent my money on 4, so I want it to work properly. If it can't, then there's no reason for me to spend more on it.
Every brand is to be milked and then, when you can milk it no more, toss it aside. That is the reality of business. The key is how you make certain you can still milk it.
And, enough feedback? Yeah. Just like there was on the Sims 3 forums. The problem is... which feedback do they listen to? The people happy with the game? The people who left it? The people unhappy who haven't left? The boycotters? And even if they pick one of those groups, they still have all of the subgroups to pay attention to.
Pick a single Sims 4 feature, then check the old threads discussing it from 2013. Assuming they're all intact, I'm willing to bet that no matter the feature, you'll find someone who supported it. That even includes some of what is missing. And, yeah, there were people calling for an emotions system in the lead-up to Sims 4. But, you'll also find people like me saying some of those features are bad ideas. And some of the missing items are bad ideas to be missing. Tell me, should they have listened to people like me instead of who they did?
That's the problem with saying they should listen to the community; they do. The community isn't united in what it asks for, even on the subject of toddlers, and they have to pick which group wins out. Sometimes, they pick the wrong group. And even when they do pick a group, most of the suggestions are so vague as to allow just about anything.
Well, if they've gotten all there is to get from the sims and choose to toss it aside, it can't be helped. I just don't want to hear how it was the fault of dissatisfied simmers because they didn't try hard enough to like it.
Yeah, it's difficult to try and figure out what the people want if you're left to shuffle through pages and pages of threads and posts. That's what surveys are for. You find what's most important to different groups, if there's a lot of overlap, you figure out how to please players with different play styles who want the same thing. There are ways to go about it, I just don't know if they're actually doing it. Sure they send out a few surveys about possible expansions and stuff, but I don't think they ask for information about game improvements.
Also, it's not just which ideas they listen to, it's how they execute them. A brilliant idea isn't worth anything if you can't bother implementing it correctly. I don't blame people who asked for emotions for 4. I blame Maxis for cutting corners when putting them in 4.
If you don't want to carry Sims 4 on your back, then don't carrying it on your back. Because by boycotting, you (not you in specific; just the boycotters) are still engaging yourself in financial responsibility for the game's success by hinging whether or not you buy on a particular feature. You are still a financial stake in the game's success or failure by your own choice to make your purchase hinge on something and actively participate in a boycott.
I have 0 financial stake in this game's success or failure. I'm just sitting here, watching to see what happens. If I find something I like in 4, yay. If not, I've saved money that I can put towards something else. It's really not a big deal for me.
And yet the developers most known for spiteful actions are the ones most rolling in dough. Bethesda, Square-Enix, Blizzard, Nintendo, Microsoft, Valve... Notice how many of those I'm mentioning are also the biggest names in gaming? Yet they take spiteful actions all of the time, some of which are incredibly hurtful to games, and continue to bring in the dough. They're not even worried about sales in some cases; Nintendo has had two consoles flop and still hasn't slowed down on some of what they do. Nintendo literally doesn't care.
So, yeah, I don't think they're even remotely worried. After all, EA has a lot of good company in acting that way.
Well, I think it's silly to cut off your nose to spite your face, but I'm not a bitter game developer so what do I know. I think this just strengthens my point. Should EA take offense that 4 didn't get the proper praise and toss it aside because [random reason], I personally won't lose any sleep over it. It wasn't my call. I guess if companies like these are so easily offended, then it should be expected, right? It's in their nature.
If you want toddlers and want them to be noticed or added, just boycott the game yourself eventually the money, sales and complaining will increase so bad that they'd probably just give in
In reality, for every person who doesn't buy the base game there are at least 3 others who will. And I suspect all that will happen when the complaints increase and the sales decline, is that Maxis will drop the pc version of the Sims 4 like a hot potato and come up with a mobile/tablet version of The Sims similar to The Sims Freeplay, only it won't be based in real time, but it will be heavily quest based.
That's when Maxis becomes labelled a Mad Man and I'm sure no one is going to the phone app for Sims 4 or anything more, sims free play is just enough. That'd just be the end of the franchise... why would you continue supporting a franchise and there's well over tons of people for play in the game, but the play isn't added? instead they introduce," were limited, certain funds." then why develop this game? if you invest more then your sales would go up and you'd have enough money to fix your engine and the game. It's all business, they don't give no dam. Sims 3 got as much stuff on the 2nd going onto the 3rd year. Game lacks hell of bad.
My point is... your just saying deal with it because it might end the whole game? well Ig that's the case.
No, I'm not saying "deal with it", even though you think that's what I'm saying. What I AM saying is that realistically, a boycott won't work, since players keep buying the base game; either those players who couldn't afford it at the time of release, or waited until there was a sale, or new players who run across it online and decide to give it a go. Every one of those is a sale and money in EA's pocket.
And I'm also saying that EA's reaction isn't necessarily going to be: "Oops, we messed up, we'd better get to work on The Sims 5". If EA wants to move the game in another direction, then the decline in sales would be the perfect excuse for them saying that the fans have lost interest in the PC version so let's move on to the online mobile/tablet version. That's what I'm saying.
And you're right. If you want to make money, you have to be willing to spend money. EA needs to be willing to invest in this game if it wants the sales to go up and to see fans start liking the game again to the point where they're willing to spend the money on it again.
Some of us are still boycotting--at least 500 of us in this forum. And honestly, it's not even boycotting! We're just not buying a game we don't want! Please don't assume that we're all idiots who feel compelled to buy stuff we don't like If the numbers of fans buying the game is high because the fans like TS4, then that works out for EA--and it might result in massive disappointment for us in the long run for having to sit out this entire iteration, but high sales sure don't mean players who dislike the game are being suckered.
EA isn't getting a dime from me until I get improved family play and toddlers. I don't even play this game anymore (playing TS2). When they deliver the game that I enjoy, I will buy all of the EPs and SPs and GPs, and I will throw my full support into the game. For me this is the whole point of being a squeaky wheel about the family play and toddler issues. After all, why complain if there is no chance whatsoever of TS4 (or TS5) successfully carrying on this franchise?
Unfortunately, you're helping to kill the series.
What has EA done in the past with video game series that lost a lot of sales? It's killed them. Most video game companies do that. It's easier to just drop a series than to try to figure out where it went wrong. So, most just kill a failing series.
No, no. That's EAs failing. Their vision. They are offering a game that is so limited that it doesn't appeals to the widest possible fan base.
I'm not supporting that kind of games. I won't pay for a bad game to fund a future game we know nothing about. And Maxis being moved under the purview of EA Mobile doesn't bode for a great TS5, does it?
Totally agree.
I'm not financially supporting poor product just because I want a better sims game in the future. Because we all know how Maxis and EA have tried to use problems some people had with previous games to remove huge amounts of features and charge the same premum price for the product. Not fixing it.
Paying for TS4 just so you get a TS5 won't mean a better game at all. There clearly isn't loyalty to customers because of the state TS4 was shipped in. Why would TS5 be any better?!
As for mobile division. No it doesn't.
Then don't financially support it. Just don't boycott it is all I'm saying. Be a lost sale instead; be the customer they want back, not the thorn in their side they try to ignore.
There really is no difference. A boycott essentially means you want to buy but their actions prevent you investing. It means they have a chance to redeem themselves with those customers. If they are so petty to further penalise their customers who have been loyal for many years they don't deserve customers at all. That would be the height of pathetic behaviour from a company and I don't believe they are so plum to act out that way. I don't believe EA are the best company but I also don't believe they are that bad either.
Here's a question for you: Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers? These are customers saying they will buy, but only if X is done. To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail.
Just stating you walked away from the game because it's missing a few things? That's different. That's a sale lost from a customer who has been loyal. Then the question becomes how to get them back, and if you are willing to do what it takes to get them back.
The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company.
Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers?
Because for every customer who bought without question for up to a decade and a half that represents a huge loss in potential profits. They can think in the short term-it's their prerogative to refuse to do so. But most companies know that existing customers represent cheaper marketing and the lions share of their profit margin. In short-they have to do less to make more than with a new customer who is an unknown quantity.
www.helpscout.net/75-customer-service-facts-quotes-statistics/
Here are some key points.
A typical business hears from just 4% of it's dissatisfied customers.
On average loyal customers are worth up to 10 times as much as their first purchase.
5% probability of selling to a new customer. 60-70% probability of selling to an existing customer.
It is 6-7 times more expensive to acquire a new customer than it is to keep a current one.
Customers aren't blackmailing EA. They are clearly communicating exactly what the problems they have and how to resolve that. That's a huge benefit because it saves the company thousands of dollars in having to pay for customer engagement surveys to investigate why. They have it all in front of them so they can make their decisions based on common themes. Most companies would recognise that, appreciate it and not act like a petulant child because someone offers feedback.
If that's truly how all games companies work then it's a sad reflection on them. And zero responsibility of their customers.
There is no difference between boycotting and not buying because you aren't happy about the state of the game. Zero. You are getting hung up on a word. Those boycotting have been loyal for many years-myself since day one. It doesn't change just because I feel the product isnt up to standard this time and choose not to buy until they up the standard offered. I still bought everything for the past fifteen years. Suggesting otherwise is absurd. It's just a word-but it represents exactly the same thing.
The attitude of the company toward the customer is what you are trying to argue. You are trying to argue that EA can't accept feedback they don't like because they are vindictive and petty. You can believe that. I don't. And if you are right? That's fine. I lose nothing by discontinuing my business relationship with them. I'm not supporting an inferior product just because they don't like being told wasting their budget and time on an online game then trying to salvage and sell it under a traditional sims label caused the problems in the first place and I don't support that.
Customers should not be expected to bail out poor decisions from a multi million dollar company.
There is nothing unreasonable about having an expectation of a certain level of quality for a video game or any other product. That is not having an 'attitude'.
Video game companies are rather notorious for not giving a plum about existing customers.
Take a look at Nintendo's reaction after they unleashed the Wii and ticked off so many of their existing customers: They just didn't care. And that apathy made bank for them.
Square-Enix's reply to people upset about another Final Fantasy MMO? They just don't care. And they're making bank on it.
Blizzard's reaction to fans who complained about the Diablo 3 color scheme? They not only just didn't care, but openly mocked the people complaining. And they're making bank on it.
EA's reply to customers who didn't want online features added to Sims 3? They just didn't care. And they still made bank on that game afterward. EA's attitude on a lack of toddlers in Sims 4? They just don't care. And they're still making money.
And I could go on and on, with company after company and example after example. So, grand total, your statistics and financial information don't mean anything. Because if a video game company, like EA or Nintendo, decides they can just make new customers when they alienate the old... Well, they've got a proven track record of it.
So, let's discard the studies and economics knowledge as what it truly is: Completely irrelevant to this discussion and the actions of the company at hand.
Actually, most companies don't recognize the free online feedback unless they have to. Think of how often someone has complained about Comcast online. You think Comcast cares? They know they have these people over a barrel; they only care as much as it keeps government agencies off their back.
And customers have been bailing out poor decisions from companies for a long time. Ever heard of the concept of a loss leader? It's pretty common in software. You hook people with one too-cheap product and use it to sell them other products, on which you actually make a profit. For some companies, with OS companies being the most notorious, the loss leader is everything except their primary product; the costs for the primary product pay for the research and development of those other products. And, often, those other products don't sell well enough to make back their own cost. So, did you purchase the operating system on your computer? If so, then you likely bailed out a company's poor decisions. And keep in mind it's not limited to just software and video games.
Did it occur to you that I am hung up on a word because words matter? A word can inform your thinking on how you approach something, and in turn inform someone else's thinking about how to react to it. It's like the difference between calling something fertilizer or dung; even if they're exactly the same thing, that one word difference can make a massive impact on how people react. People don't buy dung, but a lot of people buy fertilizer. And that difference can inform everything.
I should also point out I am not hung up specifically on the word, but how people act around it. Are you boycotting the game, as in telling EA that you are not going to pay unless they do what you want? Or are you someone who walked away from the game and might come back if EA does what caused you to leave it? Notice the difference in approach there? The different attitudes the two approaches have in simple summary? Which do you think a company wants to draw back in... the hostile fence-sitter trying to use money to force something to happen that might jump the fence for something tomorrow, or the customer who left entirely?
I'm arguing that EA won't accept actions they don't like. Not feedback. Different item.
There is nothing unreasonable about expecting a certain level of quality... but it is still an attitude of sorts. But, then, attitudes are not necessarily bad things; why else do you think there exists the concept of a "good attitude?"
..and babies outside of cribs, then we'll worry about toddlers..
Well they directly stated that CASt (we have CAS by the way, so I am assuming you mean CASt) cannot happen in Sims 4 because that had to be added as they built the game - and they explained babies needed teetering - apparently to the bassinet because of some issue with Sims 4 multi-tasking, so that is apparently out too - BUT they said before Sims 4 came out TODDLERS, like pools were a priority and promised they just needed more time... one Guru even explained why they were so time consuming to make - he said they were not hard to do, just time consuming - but again said they were a priority - and seeing they got to pools right away showed it was a priority - it's been a year - where are the promised Toddlers. They should have said apparently like they said about Open world and CASt not being possible - that toddlers don't appear to be either and I could of lived with that by not wasting a penny on Sims 4. NOOOOO, they had to assure us they were a priority and would be in the works.... so what do you expect. People trick you out of your money with falsehoods - yeah, you are going to see a lot of carrying on by all the good souls who have been deceived.
Either that or their definition of priority and mine are two separate things.
Did they really say that infants will stay in the bassinet for the duration of S4? I hadn't heard that and it greatly saddens me. I hope they at least add many interactions and can transfer the infants to swings, playmats, sitting car seat that is transferrable in the future. The car set could be put in cars if they are added and also the infant can travel with the family if they can bind them to car seats as well. Maybe they were working on only one thing at a time and after they finished pools and hottubs, they started work or stepped up work on toddlers & preteens. I am holding out hope for a free patch of toddlers & preteens and an super EP of family play that adds to all age groups. Like weather and pets, hopefully they will get here.
Comments
Lol, you can perfectly make a life simulator without violating any of EA's copyrights. EA owns The Sims, not the genre.
And yes, a serious direct Sims competitor cannot be made by a small team, let alone one guy or two
I didn't buy it because there is nothing in it for me to like. Sorry, I don't see the difference in boycotting and not liking it.. It has the same outcome, it's on EA to manage to sell to "both parties" which they, as it seems, fail to do.
Go ahead and try it without violating the copyrights of one of the other companies. Let me know how long it is before you get a Cease and Desist Notice. Then tell me if you're really willing to spend the lawyer fees to fight it. And, yeah, that's how EA keeps competitors off the market.
And, actually, Sims series is made by a small team, last I saw anything on it. Has been for a few games now. But, now they're going to have to compete increasingly with the perception that an individual or couple of individuals can do the job better, which is growing because of games like the one I linked earlier. Even if it's not truly possible, that doesn't matter as long as the perception exists.
Lol well over 200 full-time employees at EA worked on TS4 base game (you can check the game credits), and that doesn't even include work outsourced/done at other EA studios.
Here's a photo of the current employees at The Sims Studio from their Christmas video. Not what I would call "a small team."
You're vastly underestimating the amount of work needed to make a game like TS4. The reason that no one is making a competitor isn't because of any copyright issues; it's because it's an extremely risky project that requires a huge investment (i.e. tens of millions of dollars).
Sims 4 players said there are enough fans to financially support the Sims 4 and have bragged about it for over a year now. If so, they can prove it with their actions, not just their words that is happening and not blame other Simmers for whatever happens to the Sims 4. The whole blaming Simmers in the same financial position as them is getting old and comes off as very naive. If Simmers truly love and want to support the Sims 4, tell as many other people about the game. Get people to buy the game instead of constantly telling others not to play, buy, or be apart of the Sims 4 community. But don't blame customers that don't want to invest further in the Sims 4. People have already bought the base game. Any expansion thereafter is not mandatory, but completely optional to purchase. It never has been and never will be. But if you think the Sims 4 can't stand on its base game alone as far as entertainment value and relies on expansions, then I guess Sims games have finally reached its quantity over quality point now. Will Wright said expansions were supposed to make Sims smarter, but so far it is coming off in a shallow way of just making them prettier with each pack. It is more than understandable some are bored by this change of direction. There is only so much frosting you can add to a cake before it starts to topple over with an unstable base of a cake. Some are happy with frosting and that is great. Others just want more substantial cake aka game mechanics. In the end everyone is a Simmer. Accept that there will be loss in potential sales because of customer dissatisfaction and there will be sales with customer satisfaction. It's how businesses work. Product that doesn't live to expectations will always result in loss of potential profits. It is never the customer's fault, but the businesses' poor judgement of missing who their target markets are and lack of keeping customer retention rates up. Good article on that. https://www.helpscout.net/blog/customer-retention-strategies-that-work/ It is also common knowledge that 80 percent of your future profits will come from just 20 percent of your existing customers. So Maxis can continue to ignore their existing Sims community if they want. It will just mean a 80% drop of future profits for them. Anyway the Sims 4 isn't a bad game, it is just not a relatable game to every Simmer at this point. Hopefully it appeals to more Simmers in the future.
Ah. See? I was working on inaccurate information. Thanks for the correction.
Now, I wonder something... Why is it, if 200 people worked on it, I see games produced by 20 people on Steam that are rated as crap, yet contain on-par graphics and far more content?
I fully accept that there is a lot of money involved. But I also know that there's very small studios doing projects larger than this with smaller budgets. And the perception that is creating is what Sims 5 has to compete against.
You're right. I have no idea how accounting works.
I know how video game companies work. Not everything they do is based on accounting. You think it was accountants who decided to lift a big middle finger to everyone complaining about Diablo 3's color palette by including a hidden pony level? Or do you think it was someone who the accountant reports to? And that's from one of the less spiteful companies.
But, want an EA example? You think it was accountants who told EA to buy several small studios and immediately shut them down, taking the loss in profit from the purchase that is immediately destroyed? Or was it the guy at the top?
It's not EA's accountants who make the call. It's the people who listen to the accountants, the developers, and the marketing people. If the developers are saying something is impossible, it doesn't matter what marketing and accounting have to say. If developers are wanting to implement a feature and marketing is saying there's a group of people boycotting the game to get that feature, both developers and accounting can be overruled under the simple premise of refusing to give in to such tactics.
There really is no difference. A boycott essentially means you want to buy but their actions prevent you investing. It means they have a chance to redeem themselves with those customers. If they are so petty to further penalise their customers who have been loyal for many years they don't deserve customers at all. That would be the height of pathetic behaviour from a company and I don't believe they are so plum to act out that way. I don't believe EA are the best company but I also don't believe they are that bad either.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Here's a question for you: Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers? These are customers saying they will buy, but only if X is done. To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail.
Just stating you walked away from the game because it's missing a few things? That's different. That's a sale lost from a customer who has been loyal. Then the question becomes how to get them back, and if you are willing to do what it takes to get them back.
The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company.
That is unfortunate, but it really says a lot about those companies. There is more than enough valuable feedback on these forums for them to go through to get an idea about what they should include to be successful. If they see the sims brand as something to be milked and then tossed aside, this brand was doomed as soon as dollar signs replaced passion. Can't blame anyone else for that.
It's not my responsibility to carry 4 on my back. I'm a consumer. As a consumer, I either continue purchasing goods or services because I find value in them, or I close my wallet. Do you know how much money companies spend to try and figure out why people have lost interest in their products? It's because they value that knowledge. They even go so far as to research their competitors' products extensively to know what they need to improve. Good companies want to know why people are no longer interested. If you stop buying a product and never bother saying why you're no longer interested, you're as good as a fart in the wind. You've lost your voice. You're just a number.
If I'm ignored after sharing my opinions, whatever I tried. It just means I have to find something else to buy. There are more than enough indie developers I'm interested in supporting. I'm not saying "if I can't have the sims I want, no one can." EA/Maxis is saying "if you don't play this game the way we want you to, you'll be sorry." No. I won't be sorry. Ain't nobody got time for that. Let EA try to stifle the creativity of their competitors. No one is on top forever.
Lol, I don't care about EA or EA's spite. If they steamroll the sims because listening to the community is just too hard, again, it's on them. Also, you'll find that if developers hold out on improving their games because their fee fees got hurt, they lose a lot more than sales. That kind of attitude assures your destruction. If throwing a tantrum because you didn't get your way comes before improving what you've released, I'll know I've made the right decision.
That part wasn't for you, this was:
"Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers?"
Because money talks. Nobody likes losing money... especially large, publicly traded companies. Now, if it's not worth it for them to put the time and resources into getting these customers back, that's another issue entirely.
"To a lot of companies, that's not loyalty; that's blackmail."
Uh, no. That's not blackmailing in this particular case. It's having certain expectations or standards and being vocal about that as a consumer. Is it blackmail to tell a car company you won't be buying cars from them until the number of recalls drop and they stop overcharging for cup holders? Not really. I believe they call that the free market.
"The difference is entirely in the attitude of the customer and relationship with the company."
No, there is no difference. Especially to EA. EA is far too big to have that sort of relationship to begin with. Do you really think a company that large actually cares about a lone person's opinion about them? They've been voted worst company in America twice in a row and have kept on truckin' since. Loyal customers who bought 4 are no different than curious, first time buyers. Now, what does tend to get the attention of large companies is a decent sized group of consumers with the same grievances.
And I'm intelligent enough to recognize what you're trying to do there. But, let's not pursue that. It would get nasty, and neither of us wants that.
Let's be honest: If you want a game without major bugs, you probably stopped playing at Sims 2. No game that's come out since then and had any real complexity has lacked them. Just ask about the random bug that drops people from a lethal height when you load an area in Skyrim. Yeah, nothing like coming out of a mine to watch everyone in town die.
Every brand is to be milked and then, when you can milk it no more, toss it aside. That is the reality of business. The key is how you make certain you can still milk it.
And, enough feedback? Yeah. Just like there was on the Sims 3 forums. The problem is... which feedback do they listen to? The people happy with the game? The people who left it? The people unhappy who haven't left? The boycotters? And even if they pick one of those groups, they still have all of the subgroups to pay attention to.
Pick a single Sims 4 feature, then check the old threads discussing it from 2013. Assuming they're all intact, I'm willing to bet that no matter the feature, you'll find someone who supported it. That even includes some of what is missing. And, yeah, there were people calling for an emotions system in the lead-up to Sims 4. But, you'll also find people like me saying some of those features are bad ideas. And some of the missing items are bad ideas to be missing. Tell me, should they have listened to people like me instead of who they did?
That's the problem with saying they should listen to the community; they do. The community isn't united in what it asks for, even on the subject of toddlers, and they have to pick which group wins out. Sometimes, they pick the wrong group. And even when they do pick a group, most of the suggestions are so vague as to allow just about anything.
If you don't want to carry Sims 4 on your back, then don't carrying it on your back. Because by boycotting, you (not you in specific; just the general you) are still engaging yourself in financial responsibility for the game's success by hinging whether or not you buy on a particular feature. You are still a financial stake in the game's success or failure by your own choice to make your purchase hinge on something and actively participate in a boycott.
And yet the developers most known for spiteful actions are the ones most rolling in dough. Bethesda, Square-Enix, Blizzard, Nintendo, Microsoft, Valve... Notice how many of those I'm mentioning are also the biggest names in gaming? Yet they take spiteful actions all of the time, some of which are incredibly hurtful to games, and continue to bring in the dough. They're not even worried about sales in some cases; Nintendo has had two consoles flop and still hasn't slowed down on some of what they do. Nintendo literally doesn't care.
So, yeah, I don't think they're even remotely worried. After all, EA has a lot of good company in acting that way.
I fail to understand what you are trying to say here, blackmail?
EA is not my best friend I have to be loyal to. It's a company that makes games for profit. Thats it. And being a loyal customer for over 15 years didn't result in that I got a game I was hoping for.
This could be seen as blackmailing their customers though since there aren't any other life simulation games out there (yet) “We're not working on Sims 5. We're not thinking about Sims 5. If Sims 4 isn't successful, there won't be a Sims 5.”
End of the day, they don't know you from me. So, some stranger coming up and saying "I'll only pay you if you do X" isn't going to go over well; neither one of us are anyone important that they have to listen to.
Being a loyal customer for 15 years is no guarantee they know who you are.
And, while that statement can come across as blackmail, it's probably also harsh reality. They own the Sims series; if they want to kill it due to lack of sales, it's their legal right to do so. That doesn't mean we have to like it, but end of the day we have to deal with that.
Now, I provide a simple strategy for this: Don't boycott them. Just state you're a lost sale, and why. Don't state you'll only buy the game if X happens. State that a lack of X is ultimately why you didn't buy the game. Then, they can't point to you and say you're hostile and should be ignored.
You would expect that, after 15 years of making the Sims series, they know exactly what's important to the community and what's not..
It seems they are still clueless about that. They don't have to know every single person, but 15 years of making a game, with tons of feedback and suggestions, it's pretty sad that it seems they don't even get what the community loves and what the community hates.
This is not a new game, this is the 4th generation of the game. They can do better, but to me it seems like they don't really want to.
And Rachel's vision isn't helping neither. I still think she is not the right person for the position she is in now, and yes, that shows. It perfectly shows.
Well, to be honest, I only play a few casual indie games here and there; I'm not a hardcore gamer by any means. I've never played Skyrim ether. If I can't compare 4 to past sim games, I don't really think it's fair to compare 4's bugs to issues had in other unrelated games. I spent my money on 4, so I want it to work properly. If it can't, then there's no reason for me to spend more on it.
Well, if they've gotten all there is to get from the sims and choose to toss it aside, it can't be helped. I just don't want to hear how it was the fault of dissatisfied simmers because they didn't try hard enough to like it.
Yeah, it's difficult to try and figure out what the people want if you're left to shuffle through pages and pages of threads and posts. That's what surveys are for. You find what's most important to different groups, if there's a lot of overlap, you figure out how to please players with different play styles who want the same thing. There are ways to go about it, I just don't know if they're actually doing it. Sure they send out a few surveys about possible expansions and stuff, but I don't think they ask for information about game improvements.
Also, it's not just which ideas they listen to, it's how they execute them. A brilliant idea isn't worth anything if you can't bother implementing it correctly. I don't blame people who asked for emotions for 4. I blame Maxis for cutting corners when putting them in 4.
I have 0 financial stake in this game's success or failure. I'm just sitting here, watching to see what happens. If I find something I like in 4, yay. If not, I've saved money that I can put towards something else. It's really not a big deal for me.
Well, I think it's silly to cut off your nose to spite your face, but I'm not a bitter game developer so what do I know. I think this just strengthens my point. Should EA take offense that 4 didn't get the proper praise and toss it aside because [random reason], I personally won't lose any sleep over it. It wasn't my call. I guess if companies like these are so easily offended, then it should be expected, right? It's in their nature.
I would expect that, if I hadn't tried to do the same thing during the Sims 3 era. In the end? I spend years in the Ideas and Feedback section and still couldn't give you a coherent summary of what the community wanted.
And it's the same way with toddlers in this game. Does the community want them? Does it want them patched in? Will it accept an EP? Will that EP be devoted entirely to toddlers, or Generations redone? Yeah, I could give you a summary of what groups want... but at the end of the day, I would barely be able to say that toddlers are a popular request, let alone give any coherent details about the other questions. And this is coming from someone who spends most of their time online; imagine how the developers, who probably spend a mere handful of hours every week on the forums, would feel.
And, yes, they can make a good game. My hope is they do for Sims 5.
Believe it or not.. but half of the things fans ask for on this public forum specifically for Ts4 has ALWAYS been responded with " can't talk on future content " or " were limited, maybe one day " literately EVERYTIME.
I am being civil. I stated two possibilities in the beginning, let you reply, and then commented I knew what you were doing with your reply and it would be uncivil to discuss it. Because I knew that any reply I gave to it would only be offensive by my own judgement, given what I said in the post prior. I tried to go the neutral route that implied nothing, but obviously did not succeed. Shall we agree to avoid discussing it further?
Unfortunately, there's a very good reason to compare it to similar games: To demonstrate that asking for a modern game free of bugs that is also a game with major development is unrealistic. Which, these days, it really is. Even the studious renowned for not having bugs still have them; these days, that renown is a measure of how few bugs they have and how quickly those are fixed, not a lack of presence to begin with. That's why I never play a game on release.
I'm not saying it's the fault of dissatisfied simmers who didn't try hard enough to like it, though. I'm saying the people who are intentionally putting themselves in an antagonistic relationship with EA are partially at fault. What about the vast majority who simply left or simply refuse to buy without participating in the boycott? Well, it's not their fault; they're not taking actions that tie part of the game's income to their want or wants getting satisfied while still maintaining an active relationship with the game. So, the people who simply didn't buy are people EA didn't manage to sell to; seeing as they're uninvolved, there's no reason to blame them for something that requires an active relationship to begin with.
Then you are not someone at fault for if the game fails. In my viewpoint, it is that simple.
Consider their fanbases, too. WoW has people who actively try to sabotage the website as a form of protest about class balance, and let's not even discuss Diablo 3 or StarCraft 2. Nintendo... I don't even walk to talk about some of their fans; there's a good reason why apathy rules the day at that company. Microsoft... If you've played Halo multiplayer with random people, you understand. This community is downright civil. Those companies deal with communities that make war zones look peaceful.
Why would they want to redeem themselves to those customers?
Because for every customer who bought without question for up to a decade and a half that represents a huge loss in potential profits. They can think in the short term-it's their prerogative to refuse to do so. But most companies know that existing customers represent cheaper marketing and the lions share of their profit margin. In short-they have to do less to make more than with a new customer who is an unknown quantity.
www.helpscout.net/75-customer-service-facts-quotes-statistics/
Here are some key points.
A typical business hears from just 4% of it's dissatisfied customers.
On average loyal customers are worth up to 10 times as much as their first purchase.
5% probability of selling to a new customer. 60-70% probability of selling to an existing customer.
It is 6-7 times more expensive to acquire a new customer than it is to keep a current one.
Customers aren't blackmailing EA. They are clearly communicating exactly what the problems they have and how to resolve that. That's a huge benefit because it saves the company thousands of dollars in having to pay for customer engagement surveys to investigate why. They have it all in front of them so they can make their decisions based on common themes. Most companies would recognise that, appreciate it and not act like a petulant child because someone offers feedback.
If that's truly how all games companies work then it's a sad reflection on them. And zero responsibility of their customers.
There is no difference between boycotting and not buying because you aren't happy about the state of the game. Zero. You are getting hung up on a word. Those boycotting have been loyal for many years-myself since day one. It doesn't change just because I feel the product isnt up to standard this time and choose not to buy until they up the standard offered. I still bought everything for the past fifteen years. Suggesting otherwise is absurd. It's just a word-but it represents exactly the same thing.
The attitude of the company toward the customer is what you are trying to argue. You are trying to argue that EA can't accept feedback they don't like because they are vindictive and petty. You can believe that. I don't. And if you are right? That's fine. I lose nothing by discontinuing my business relationship with them. I'm not supporting an inferior product just because they don't like being told wasting their budget and time on an online game then trying to salvage and sell it under a traditional sims label caused the problems in the first place and I don't support that.
Customers should not be expected to bail out poor decisions from a multi million dollar company.
There is nothing unreasonable about having an expectation of a certain level of quality for a video game or any other product. That is not having an 'attitude'.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Totally and utterly yes.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Video game companies are rather notorious for not giving a plum about existing customers.
Take a look at Nintendo's reaction after they unleashed the Wii and ticked off so many of their existing customers: They just didn't care. And that apathy made bank for them.
Square-Enix's reply to people upset about another Final Fantasy MMO? They just don't care. And they're making bank on it.
Blizzard's reaction to fans who complained about the Diablo 3 color scheme? They not only just didn't care, but openly mocked the people complaining. And they're making bank on it.
EA's reply to customers who didn't want online features added to Sims 3? They just didn't care. And they still made bank on that game afterward. EA's attitude on a lack of toddlers in Sims 4? They just don't care. And they're still making money.
And I could go on and on, with company after company and example after example. So, grand total, your statistics and financial information don't mean anything. Because if a video game company, like EA or Nintendo, decides they can just make new customers when they alienate the old... Well, they've got a proven track record of it.
So, let's discard the studies and economics knowledge as what it truly is: Completely irrelevant to this discussion and the actions of the company at hand.
Actually, most companies don't recognize the free online feedback unless they have to. Think of how often someone has complained about Comcast online. You think Comcast cares? They know they have these people over a barrel; they only care as much as it keeps government agencies off their back.
And customers have been bailing out poor decisions from companies for a long time. Ever heard of the concept of a loss leader? It's pretty common in software. You hook people with one too-cheap product and use it to sell them other products, on which you actually make a profit. For some companies, with OS companies being the most notorious, the loss leader is everything except their primary product; the costs for the primary product pay for the research and development of those other products. And, often, those other products don't sell well enough to make back their own cost. So, did you purchase the operating system on your computer? If so, then you likely bailed out a company's poor decisions. And keep in mind it's not limited to just software and video games.
Did it occur to you that I am hung up on a word because words matter? A word can inform your thinking on how you approach something, and in turn inform someone else's thinking about how to react to it. It's like the difference between calling something fertilizer or dung; even if they're exactly the same thing, that one word difference can make a massive impact on how people react. People don't buy dung, but a lot of people buy fertilizer. And that difference can inform everything.
I should also point out I am not hung up specifically on the word, but how people act around it. Are you boycotting the game, as in telling EA that you are not going to pay unless they do what you want? Or are you someone who walked away from the game and might come back if EA does what caused you to leave it? Notice the difference in approach there? The different attitudes the two approaches have in simple summary? Which do you think a company wants to draw back in... the hostile fence-sitter trying to use money to force something to happen that might jump the fence for something tomorrow, or the customer who left entirely?
I'm arguing that EA won't accept actions they don't like. Not feedback. Different item.
There is nothing unreasonable about expecting a certain level of quality... but it is still an attitude of sorts. But, then, attitudes are not necessarily bad things; why else do you think there exists the concept of a "good attitude?"
Did they really say that infants will stay in the bassinet for the duration of S4? I hadn't heard that and it greatly saddens me. I hope they at least add many interactions and can transfer the infants to swings, playmats, sitting car seat that is transferrable in the future. The car set could be put in cars if they are added and also the infant can travel with the family if they can bind them to car seats as well. Maybe they were working on only one thing at a time and after they finished pools and hottubs, they started work or stepped up work on toddlers & preteens. I am holding out hope for a free patch of toddlers & preteens and an super EP of family play that adds to all age groups. Like weather and pets, hopefully they will get here.