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.
Some of us would rather improve the series than kill it. Sims series is not the only one that has had a major misstep in its history. Just take a look at the Final Fantasy series. Luckily, if things go as I hope, Sims 5 will be a course correction... but only if it exists. If it doesn't, then congrats... you just ruined the series for everyone when you had a chance to fix it.
I've seen successful video game boycotts. They never get what they want.
i've seen a few comments like this before.. the "point" is that some of us like the game. or at least don't want to see the franchise die.
not saying anyone should buy the game if they don't want it - it's fine if you don't like the game, obviously. i just don't get the "if i can't have it, nobody can!" mentality some players have where they'd rather the game die than live on for those of us that do enjoy it.
I don't understand how people can say that simmers who are unhappy with 4 and don't want to spend anymore money on it until it improves, are killing the game. That's incredibly silly. The Sims 4 isn't an investment in 5. It's its own product. And right now, I don't think it's worth spending money on. That's neither my fault, nor the fault of anyone else who feels like 4 isn't where it needs to be.
If the sims franchise dies, it's completely on EA and Maxis. Simple. We didn't ask for them to scrape a game together using parts from a failed online project and then give it a premium price. That was all them. When a company feels that transparency or interacting with their community on a frequent basis isn't a priority, it's their own fault for crashing and burning. No one else's. I refuse to take responsibility for a company's failure. Especially a company that's worth so much and has the resources to do better.
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.
Edit: @Jarsie9 Yes! Wonderfully put post. Thank you.
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.
i've seen a few comments like this before.. the "point" is that some of us like the game. or at least don't want to see the franchise die.
not saying anyone should buy the game if they don't want it - it's fine if you don't like the game, obviously. i just don't get the "if i can't have it, nobody can!" mentality some players have where they'd rather the game die than live on for those of us that do enjoy it.
Yes, you are. That's exactly what you're saying. You and Tanyarubirose. The implication here is that if we don't keep on throwing our money at Maxis and supporting TS4 by buying the DLC, we're just being selfish and killing the game for those who like it.
Actually, not what I'm saying at all.
I'm saying that if you're intentionally boycotting the game to force it to improve, you are killing the game. Because, when successful, that's exactly how those boycotts don't turn out. It's a delayed purchase strategy that becomes a written-off sale. After all, they don't have to make the game; they can just cancel it and sit on the copyright for 75 years.
If you're just unhappy and not spending money, that's a different matter. That's a lost sale. And they make efforts to recover those.
It's a difference in response. The boycott path, if successful, leads to the spiteful approach of just killing the series and sitting on the copyright. Both sides are at fault for it, since both sides took actions that were intended to force the other to submit to their viewpoint. And the reason why it tends to fail? It's basically trying to threaten the company, using the threat of not making money.
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.
Some of us would rather improve the series than kill it. Sims series is not the only one that has had a major misstep in its history. Just take a look at the Final Fantasy series. Luckily, if things go as I hope, Sims 5 will be a course correction... but only if it exists. If it doesn't, then congrats... you just ruined the series for everyone when you had a chance to fix it.
I've seen successful video game boycotts. They never get what they want.
i've seen a few comments like this before.. the "point" is that some of us like the game. or at least don't want to see the franchise die.
not saying anyone should buy the game if they don't want it - it's fine if you don't like the game, obviously. i just don't get the "if i can't have it, nobody can!" mentality some players have where they'd rather the game die than live on for those of us that do enjoy it.
I don't understand how people can say that simmers who are unhappy with 4 and don't want to spend anymore money on it until it improves, are killing the game. That's incredibly silly. The Sims 4 isn't an investment in 5. It's its own product. And right now, I don't think it's worth spending money on. That's neither my fault, nor the fault of anyone else who feels like 4 isn't where it needs to be.
If the sims franchise dies, it's completely on EA and Maxis. Simple. We didn't ask for them to scrape a game together using parts from a failed online project and then give it a premium price. That was all them. When a company feels that transparency or interacting with their community on a frequent basis isn't a priority, it's their own fault for crashing and burning. No one else's. I refuse to take responsibility for a company's failure. Especially a company that's worth so much and has the resources to do better.
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.
Edit: @Jarsie9 Yes! Wonderfully put post. Thank you.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think you're terribly mistaken here. You're acting like EA will note the boycotting and say 'WE DON'T NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS!' but that's just a crazy over simplification of the issue. The boycott is simply a visible way for players to explain to EA why they are losing those sales. "I am not buying more content, because I am not satisfied with the direction this franchise is going. I dislike x features, and would like to see the game go in x direction." Is this a combative stance with the company?? How is it any better to simply not buy, not mention anything, and walk away? People are being vocal, and/or not buying because they feel that the company is killing the franchise. If the company loses enough sales due to this new direction, it would be foolhardy of them to simply throw away a game when they can look to movements such as the boycott, or the family play thread, or a hundred other examples of former fans, who still LOVE the idea of the sims, and who would VERY HAPPILY return and spend their money if only xyz would change in game. If the company I work for started losing money because of unhappy customers, their go-to move would not be to stop offering a previously profitable/popular service, it would be to ask those unhappy customers, "What can we do to win you back? Where did we go wrong?" A company that does not respond to it's customer's desires is one doomed to fail, and that failure rests on the shoulders of Maxis and EA, not us.
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.
i've seen a few comments like this before.. the "point" is that some of us like the game. or at least don't want to see the franchise die.
not saying anyone should buy the game if they don't want it - it's fine if you don't like the game, obviously. i just don't get the "if i can't have it, nobody can!" mentality some players have where they'd rather the game die than live on for those of us that do enjoy it.
Yes, you are. That's exactly what you're saying. You and Tanyarubirose. The implication here is that if we don't keep on throwing our money at Maxis and supporting TS4 by buying the DLC, we're just being selfish and killing the game for those who like it.
Actually, not what I'm saying at all.
I'm saying that if you're intentionally boycotting the game to force it to improve, you are killing the game. Because, when successful, that's exactly how those boycotts don't turn out. It's a delayed purchase strategy that becomes a written-off sale. After all, they don't have to make the game; they can just cancel it and sit on the copyright for 75 years.
If you're just unhappy and not spending money, that's a different matter. That's a lost sale. And they make efforts to recover those.
It's a difference in response. The boycott path, if successful, leads to the spiteful approach of just killing the series and sitting on the copyright. Both sides are at fault for it, since both sides took actions that were intended to force the other to submit to their viewpoint. And the reason why it tends to fail? It's basically trying to threaten the company, using the threat of not making money.
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.
Some of us would rather improve the series than kill it. Sims series is not the only one that has had a major misstep in its history. Just take a look at the Final Fantasy series. Luckily, if things go as I hope, Sims 5 will be a course correction... but only if it exists. If it doesn't, then congrats... you just ruined the series for everyone when you had a chance to fix it.
I've seen successful video game boycotts. They never get what they want.
i've seen a few comments like this before.. the "point" is that some of us like the game. or at least don't want to see the franchise die.
not saying anyone should buy the game if they don't want it - it's fine if you don't like the game, obviously. i just don't get the "if i can't have it, nobody can!" mentality some players have where they'd rather the game die than live on for those of us that do enjoy it.
I don't understand how people can say that simmers who are unhappy with 4 and don't want to spend anymore money on it until it improves, are killing the game. That's incredibly silly. The Sims 4 isn't an investment in 5. It's its own product. And right now, I don't think it's worth spending money on. That's neither my fault, nor the fault of anyone else who feels like 4 isn't where it needs to be.
If the sims franchise dies, it's completely on EA and Maxis. Simple. We didn't ask for them to scrape a game together using parts from a failed online project and then give it a premium price. That was all them. When a company feels that transparency or interacting with their community on a frequent basis isn't a priority, it's their own fault for crashing and burning. No one else's. I refuse to take responsibility for a company's failure. Especially a company that's worth so much and has the resources to do better.
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.
Edit: @Jarsie9 Yes! Wonderfully put post. Thank you.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think you're terribly mistaken here. You're acting like EA will note the boycotting and say 'WE DON'T NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS!' but that's just a crazy over simplification of the issue. The boycott is simply a visible way for players to explain to EA why they are losing those sales. "I am not buying more content, because I am not satisfied with the direction this franchise is going. I dislike x features, and would like to see the game go in x direction." Is this a combative stance with the company?? How is it any better to simply not buy, not mention anything, and walk away? People are being vocal, and/or not buying because they feel that the company is killing the franchise. If the company loses enough sales due to this new direction, it would be foolhardy of them to simply throw away a game when they can look to movements such as the boycott, or the family play thread, or a hundred other examples of former fans, who still LOVE the idea of the sims, and who would VERY HAPPILY return and spend their money if only xyz would change in game. If the company I work for started losing money because of unhappy customers, their go-to move would not be to stop offering a previously profitable/popular service, it would be to ask those unhappy customers, "What can we do to win you back? Where did we go wrong?" A company that does not respond to it's customer's desires is one doomed to fail, and that failure rests on the shoulders of Maxis and EA, not us.
Exactly right. It's really not such a hard concept.
Customers are not responsible for mistakes EA/Maxis made in development and any suggestion otherwise is absurd.
I couldn't care less if games companies behave poorly towards customers. It's totally irrelevant to how I experience something as a customer and whether I choose to invest. I don't lower my expectations just because they have a record of that behaviour.
All that means is the companies involved have some serious work to do if their industry is seen as such a poor example of customer experiences and service. What a poor reflection that has on the industry!
@sparkfairy1 i think the problem with ea/maxi and the lack of toddlers was the following 1 the change of plan mid concept of the game and second the fact that the allowed funds budget for the game devlopment was not big engough for the addition of toddlers in the game in order to have toddlers 1 the budget would of had to be larger and second the sims4 woukld of had to berealise in 2015 or in the current year we are in so when the game was realise september 2 2014 they add reach there deadline at least thats what i think
If you went the sims5 to remain offline feel free to sign this petition http://chng.it/gtfHPhHK please note that it is also to keep the gallery
I agree @friendlysimmers but the deadline was self imposed. They wasted a lot of time and money on the Olympus plan and I don't believe customers should suffer this much for that mistake. EA/Maxis shouldn't have passed all the problems our way. They didn't communicate that is what happened and instead tried to hide it and it's still having repercussions for customers a year and a half after release. In my opinion that's not a good experience for customers.
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.
i've seen a few comments like this before.. the "point" is that some of us like the game. or at least don't want to see the franchise die.
not saying anyone should buy the game if they don't want it - it's fine if you don't like the game, obviously. i just don't get the "if i can't have it, nobody can!" mentality some players have where they'd rather the game die than live on for those of us that do enjoy it.
Yes, you are. That's exactly what you're saying. You and Tanyarubirose. The implication here is that if we don't keep on throwing our money at Maxis and supporting TS4 by buying the DLC, we're just being selfish and killing the game for those who like it.
Actually, not what I'm saying at all.
I'm saying that if you're intentionally boycotting the game to force it to improve, you are killing the game. Because, when successful, that's exactly how those boycotts don't turn out. It's a delayed purchase strategy that becomes a written-off sale. After all, they don't have to make the game; they can just cancel it and sit on the copyright for 75 years.
If you're just unhappy and not spending money, that's a different matter. That's a lost sale. And they make efforts to recover those.
It's a difference in response. The boycott path, if successful, leads to the spiteful approach of just killing the series and sitting on the copyright. Both sides are at fault for it, since both sides took actions that were intended to force the other to submit to their viewpoint. And the reason why it tends to fail? It's basically trying to threaten the company, using the threat of not making money.
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.
Some of us would rather improve the series than kill it. Sims series is not the only one that has had a major misstep in its history. Just take a look at the Final Fantasy series. Luckily, if things go as I hope, Sims 5 will be a course correction... but only if it exists. If it doesn't, then congrats... you just ruined the series for everyone when you had a chance to fix it.
I've seen successful video game boycotts. They never get what they want.
i've seen a few comments like this before.. the "point" is that some of us like the game. or at least don't want to see the franchise die.
not saying anyone should buy the game if they don't want it - it's fine if you don't like the game, obviously. i just don't get the "if i can't have it, nobody can!" mentality some players have where they'd rather the game die than live on for those of us that do enjoy it.
I don't understand how people can say that simmers who are unhappy with 4 and don't want to spend anymore money on it until it improves, are killing the game. That's incredibly silly. The Sims 4 isn't an investment in 5. It's its own product. And right now, I don't think it's worth spending money on. That's neither my fault, nor the fault of anyone else who feels like 4 isn't where it needs to be.
If the sims franchise dies, it's completely on EA and Maxis. Simple. We didn't ask for them to scrape a game together using parts from a failed online project and then give it a premium price. That was all them. When a company feels that transparency or interacting with their community on a frequent basis isn't a priority, it's their own fault for crashing and burning. No one else's. I refuse to take responsibility for a company's failure. Especially a company that's worth so much and has the resources to do better.
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.
Edit: @Jarsie9 Yes! Wonderfully put post. Thank you.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think you're terribly mistaken here. You're acting like EA will note the boycotting and say 'WE DON'T NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS!' but that's just a crazy over simplification of the issue. The boycott is simply a visible way for players to explain to EA why they are losing those sales. "I am not buying more content, because I am not satisfied with the direction this franchise is going. I dislike x features, and would like to see the game go in x direction." Is this a combative stance with the company?? How is it any better to simply not buy, not mention anything, and walk away? People are being vocal, and/or not buying because they feel that the company is killing the franchise. If the company loses enough sales due to this new direction, it would be foolhardy of them to simply throw away a game when they can look to movements such as the boycott, or the family play thread, or a hundred other examples of former fans, who still LOVE the idea of the sims, and who would VERY HAPPILY return and spend their money if only xyz would change in game. If the company I work for started losing money because of unhappy customers, their go-to move would not be to stop offering a previously profitable/popular service, it would be to ask those unhappy customers, "What can we do to win you back? Where did we go wrong?" A company that does not respond to it's customer's desires is one doomed to fail, and that failure rests on the shoulders of Maxis and EA, not us.
If I'm so terribly mistaken, then why are we nearly two years in with no toddlers? Games like this typically average a 5 year run; just long enough to develop the next version. That means we're nearly 2/5ths of the way through the run. And top it all off, apparently some of the code necessary to do toddlers is already in the game.
So, given all they had to do was complete something they obviously had already started, like pools, why are we still without toddlers? If they intended to do toddlers at all and had a way to do them outside of an EP, why haven't we seen them yet?
I know how video game companies operate. You know how Blizzard responded to a boycott attempt on one of their forums? They simply permabanned the people trying to start it. With the kind of ban where you can't even play your games.
Others, including EA, have flat-out ignored boycotts; this isn't even the first Sims game to get a boycott. The last one still hasn't had all of their demands met, and that was for Sims 3. You can even read their complaints for yourself here. The only demand they got met was the Store, and that was simply replaced with Sims 4 Stuff Packs. This is Year 4 of boycott efforts against EA over the Sims series. With boycott efforts now extending across two games. If they were going to listen to the boycotts, don't you think they would have started back in 2012 when it became something also done off the forums? And that's not counting the much earlier bugs boycott that started when World Adventures was released; last I checked, every single member of that either left or got banned.
And I've heard that about listening to customers and adjusting sales before where it comes to a video game company. I've heard that about not listening to customers and going under before where it comes to a video game company. I've heard it about EA (Sims 2, 3, and now 4), Nintendo (the Wii), Valve (a lot of things related to Steam and Team Fortress 2), Blizzard (bans, class balance issues, art style of Diablo 3, and so on), Bethesda (V.A.T.S., Skyrim spellcasting), Square-Enix (second half of the Final Fantasy series), and so on. Every single time I've heard it, it's turned out one way: The company and brand were still here later. The people who said it were not.
So, tell me, in what way is this boycott any different than the previous boycotts EA ignored? And the previous boycotts other video game companies have ignored? What makes this special?
And, yes, it is antagonistic. You're trying to use economic pressure to control a company's decision making. If you're not, then there's a problem with your tactics... as the boycott method of protesting was first created to do exactly that item, and is antagonistic because it is intended to exert customer control over a company they have no ownership of. After all, how would you respond if someone who didn't even work there walked into your job and threatened your paycheck unless you do what they wanted? And yet, that's exactly how a boycott is intended to work towards companies... and why it's so effective with retail chains.
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.
i've seen a few comments like this before.. the "point" is that some of us like the game. or at least don't want to see the franchise die.
not saying anyone should buy the game if they don't want it - it's fine if you don't like the game, obviously. i just don't get the "if i can't have it, nobody can!" mentality some players have where they'd rather the game die than live on for those of us that do enjoy it.
Yes, you are. That's exactly what you're saying. You and Tanyarubirose. The implication here is that if we don't keep on throwing our money at Maxis and supporting TS4 by buying the DLC, we're just being selfish and killing the game for those who like it.
Actually, not what I'm saying at all.
I'm saying that if you're intentionally boycotting the game to force it to improve, you are killing the game. Because, when successful, that's exactly how those boycotts don't turn out. It's a delayed purchase strategy that becomes a written-off sale. After all, they don't have to make the game; they can just cancel it and sit on the copyright for 75 years.
If you're just unhappy and not spending money, that's a different matter. That's a lost sale. And they make efforts to recover those.
It's a difference in response. The boycott path, if successful, leads to the spiteful approach of just killing the series and sitting on the copyright. Both sides are at fault for it, since both sides took actions that were intended to force the other to submit to their viewpoint. And the reason why it tends to fail? It's basically trying to threaten the company, using the threat of not making money.
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.
Some of us would rather improve the series than kill it. Sims series is not the only one that has had a major misstep in its history. Just take a look at the Final Fantasy series. Luckily, if things go as I hope, Sims 5 will be a course correction... but only if it exists. If it doesn't, then congrats... you just ruined the series for everyone when you had a chance to fix it.
I've seen successful video game boycotts. They never get what they want.
i've seen a few comments like this before.. the "point" is that some of us like the game. or at least don't want to see the franchise die.
not saying anyone should buy the game if they don't want it - it's fine if you don't like the game, obviously. i just don't get the "if i can't have it, nobody can!" mentality some players have where they'd rather the game die than live on for those of us that do enjoy it.
I don't understand how people can say that simmers who are unhappy with 4 and don't want to spend anymore money on it until it improves, are killing the game. That's incredibly silly. The Sims 4 isn't an investment in 5. It's its own product. And right now, I don't think it's worth spending money on. That's neither my fault, nor the fault of anyone else who feels like 4 isn't where it needs to be.
If the sims franchise dies, it's completely on EA and Maxis. Simple. We didn't ask for them to scrape a game together using parts from a failed online project and then give it a premium price. That was all them. When a company feels that transparency or interacting with their community on a frequent basis isn't a priority, it's their own fault for crashing and burning. No one else's. I refuse to take responsibility for a company's failure. Especially a company that's worth so much and has the resources to do better.
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.
Edit: @Jarsie9 Yes! Wonderfully put post. Thank you.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think you're terribly mistaken here. You're acting like EA will note the boycotting and say 'WE DON'T NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS!' but that's just a crazy over simplification of the issue. The boycott is simply a visible way for players to explain to EA why they are losing those sales. "I am not buying more content, because I am not satisfied with the direction this franchise is going. I dislike x features, and would like to see the game go in x direction." Is this a combative stance with the company?? How is it any better to simply not buy, not mention anything, and walk away? People are being vocal, and/or not buying because they feel that the company is killing the franchise. If the company loses enough sales due to this new direction, it would be foolhardy of them to simply throw away a game when they can look to movements such as the boycott, or the family play thread, or a hundred other examples of former fans, who still LOVE the idea of the sims, and who would VERY HAPPILY return and spend their money if only xyz would change in game. If the company I work for started losing money because of unhappy customers, their go-to move would not be to stop offering a previously profitable/popular service, it would be to ask those unhappy customers, "What can we do to win you back? Where did we go wrong?" A company that does not respond to it's customer's desires is one doomed to fail, and that failure rests on the shoulders of Maxis and EA, not us.
Exactly right. It's really not such a hard concept.
Customers are not responsible for mistakes EA/Maxis made in development and any suggestion otherwise is absurd.
I couldn't care less if games companies behave poorly towards customers. It's totally irrelevant to how I experience something as a customer and whether I choose to invest. I don't lower my expectations just because they have a record of that behaviour.
All that means is the companies involved have some serious work to do if their industry is seen as such a poor example of customer experiences and service. What a poor reflection that has on the industry!
I heard the same arguments from the Sims 3 boycotts. Take a look at the link in my previous post. Then take a look at how much they were complaining about is still around. Then tell me if the idea that a boycott works has any merit.
That's why I advise walking away. Because the boycotts haven't been doing anything except providing EA with free advertising.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
Nope. Keep reading the thread. You're supposed to infer not to boycott, but to simply let your lack of purchase speak volumes.
It's a slightly different tactic, but the boycotts have already proven useless. This isn't even the first Sims game to see one. The prior one didn't get their issues the boycott was for truly dealt with 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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
Nope. Keep reading the thread. You're supposed to infer not to boycott, but to simply let your lack of purchase speak volumes.
It's a slightly different tactic, but the boycotts have already proven useless. This isn't even the first Sims game to see one. The prior one didn't get their issues the boycott was for truly dealt with either.
Hmm... maybe you missed this part in my post:
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
Let's be honest here. Maxis has not added a single piece of content to the Sims 4 that wasn't already planned. The only thing they changed was that originally it was going to be payed content. They were going to sell ghosts, basements, pools, and Star wars costumes to us. That was the plan. Now they are coasting through the remainder of Sims 4 and likely just shutting it down. It's what EA does. They make really ignorant decisions. Sims 4 isn't terrible, it's just disappointing to a large number of long time Sims fans. Any other developer would have released a toddlers, preteens, cars, and texture pack expansions within the first 6 months to keep the fans happy. Maxis has actually done little to nothing.
What's the deal with the creepy Sim in the yellow shirt, and glasses? The one right up there! I'm guessing what ever he is it starts with "serial".
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Let's be honest here. Maxis has not added a single piece of content to the Sims 4 that wasn't already planned. The only thing they changed was that originally it was going to be payed content. They were going to sell ghosts, basements, pools, and Star wars costumes to us. That was the plan. Now they are coasting through the remainder of Sims 4 and likely just shutting it down. It's what EA does. They make really ignorant decisions. Sims 4 isn't terrible, it's just disappointing to a large number of long time Sims fans. Any other developer would have released a toddlers, preteens, cars, and texture pack expansions within the first 6 months to keep the fans happy. Maxis has actually done little to nothing.
Maxis doesn't exist any more. This is all EA Mobile
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
Nope. Keep reading the thread. You're supposed to infer not to boycott, but to simply let your lack of purchase speak volumes.
It's a slightly different tactic, but the boycotts have already proven useless. This isn't even the first Sims game to see one. The prior one didn't get their issues the boycott was for truly dealt with either.
Hmm... maybe you missed this part in my post:
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
So we have no disagreement here, yeah?
No real disagreement. I'm saying "don't even use the word." Because, on some level, you're dealing with a company looking for an excuse to view those not buying as problems instead of lost customers. It makes it easier to sell their vision and spin the bad reactions they're getting. I personally wouldn't even speak about it that much; just answer on threads why you didn't buy the game and go on. It leaves them forced to accept you are a lost customer, and they need to win you back.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Boycotts recruit, try to get people involved, and try to get other customers to not shop there even if not involved in the boycott. Simply not buying and walking away typically doesn't recruit. If you deal with real-world boycotts, you'll notice something; boycotts often have people standing outside the building protesting, while those who simply refuse to buy are not showing up at all. That's why this thread is starting off with the idea of tweeting the developers about toddlers; it's a boycott, and it takes active actions to make why the boycott exists known and to disrupt things to draw attention.
This is speaking as someone who has been in effective boycotts before. Simply not buying is passive; a boycott is active. That's why using the word has an entirely different result as to how what you're doing is viewed.
And this is on the premise that EA is a video game company with a proven track record of not responding well to boycotts. Just like most video game companies don't respond well to boycotts. After all, just ask the people who Blizzard openly mocked with their Diablo 3 pony level.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
I don't think that is really necessary. They know people want those 🐸🐸🐸🐸 things and they know a lot of people are still mad and won't play/buy the game until they are added. They don't need to be hounded on the bloody anniversary of all things about it. You guys hound them on a constant basis enough already, they probably ignore everything with the word "toddler" in it, and rightly so. I'd get the ban hammer out, personally. Constant spam about them on every single thing they post anywhere probably makes them ignore you guys even more because everyone is being so 🐸🐸🐸🐸 childish about it at this point.
There, I said it. I can feel free and happy now.
i agree with you totally. they probably get enough of this crap. i always see this in the forums or i see it in the youtube comments even comments on the sims page whenever a new blog come up. we want toddlers we want create a style(they said it won't happen). we want pets we want seasons. i think most of us want toddlers back, like i but come on stop hounding the poor people about it. would you rather have demon toddlers like the babies were or wait till they are good enough to be in the game. primus its like the sims 3 cycle of want all over again to be honest like the seasons and university.
they're fixing their mistakes in the game like adding the gardeners in the last patch just chillax. be patient. good things happen to those who are patient. the expansion packs and game packs and a few of the stuff pack peak my interest. the expansion packs and game packs have are great. (i don't have outdoor retreat since there's no ea cards in canada. and that's how i prefer paying for things)
Been simming since the end of sims 2~Sims Gallery ID:BSAAWaifu
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
I've gone out of my way to help EA. They chose not to do anything with that and it's their prerogative. But it's not up to other customers to accuse people of not buying the game because they aren't happy with the state of it of being antagonistic and having a bad attitude. Which is the narrative you are trying to give across.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
It's not the boycott you're describing. I agree. That is also why I say that it's not a real boycott, but using the word "boycott" is technically not incorrect.
boycott play
verb boy·cott \ˈbȯi-ˌkät\
Popularity: Top 20% of words
Simple Definition of boycott
: to refuse to buy, use, or participate in (something) as a way of protesting : to stop using the goods or services of (a company, country, etc.) until changes are made
Sure there are no picket signs, but we don't need them. We only need to keep our purse strings closed to make our point. And if change occurs we'll open them back up.
Earlier when players would announce "I'm out" other players would jeer at them and imply that they wouldn't be missed. Even EA jumped on the "vocal minority doesn't matter" bandwagon in that interview and stated telemetry was driving their vision. So that is why I encouraged everyone here who refused to buy the game to share this information to show that it adds up. Are we trying to convince people to boycott, nope. Are we waving picket signs, nope. But we are refusing to buy until changes are made... and since this isn't some moral issue... the only change we need is for the game to be FUN.
EA ignoring me doesn't cost me any money. So at the end of the day, the only one who will lose out is EA--because I already don't have a game to play; there's nothing else for me to lose here in expressing my discontent with this iteration.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
I've gone out of my way to help EA. They chose not to do anything with that and it's their prerogative. But it's not up to other customers to accuse people of not buying the game because they aren't happy with the state of it of being antagonistic and having a bad attitude. Which is the narrative you are trying to give across.
Click that link I posted. Look directly at a real boycott. You'll understand exactly why.
Whether you intend it or not, things like what that link shows are what the word "boycott" conjure for a company. The replies they give are based off that image. Are they spiteful and antagonistic replies? Oh yes. But they're also the kind of replies you give when dealing with a true boycott. And by calling what you are doing a boycott, that kind of antagonistic relationship is what you're volunteering for and taking part in... even if you don't know it.
That's why I pointed out that it's antagonistic... because I know how companies respond to boycotts. It's not the mentality of people wanting to solve a problem, but the mentality of a fort under siege. Because of what real boycotts involve. Do you understand now? How would you respond if you felt under siege? Would you be friendly to those who have you under siege, or hostile? Would you be willing to take actions just to spite them?
And that is the issue at play. And why it is I spent the last few pages talking about it. Because I know what is going on and the kind of replies that happen. I've been there, on both sides of the line.
You want EA to listen to you? Fine. I'm telling you how to accomplish that. Because all they will likely do is glance at your posts and skim them; I expect them to do that with all posts not reported. If they spot you saying you boycott them? Right to the ignore pile, move on to the next. Because, realistically, that's probably all they have time for.
Yeah, it sucks. But welcome to dealing with a big corporation.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
It's not the boycott you're describing. I agree. That is also why I say that it's not a real boycott, but using the word "boycott" is technically not incorrect.
boycott play
verb boy·cott \ˈbȯi-ˌkät\
Popularity: Top 20% of words
Simple Definition of boycott
: to refuse to buy, use, or participate in (something) as a way of protesting : to stop using the goods or services of (a company, country, etc.) until changes are made
Sure there are no picket signs, but we don't need them. We only need to keep our purse strings closed to make our point. And if change occurs we'll open them back up.
Earlier when players would announce "I'm out" other players would jeer at them and imply that they wouldn't be missed. Even EA jumped on the "vocal minority doesn't matter" bandwagon in that interview and stated telemetry was driving their vision. So that is why I encouraged everyone here who refused to buy the game to share this information to show that it adds up. Are we trying to convince people to boycott, nope. Are we waving picket signs, nope. But we are refusing to buy until changes are made... and since this isn't some moral issue... the only change we need is for the game to be FUN.
EA ignoring me doesn't cost me any money. So at the end of the day, the only one who will lose out is EA--because I already don't have a game to play; there's nothing else for me to lose here in expressing my discontent with this iteration.
Technically accurate isn't going to help you any. They likely won't care. Why should they? They have hundreds of posts to read each day, and likely only a handful of hours to do it in. They probably skim everything. They see a mention of you boycotting, it conjures an image like what I linked, they toss that post or even your entire account in the ignore pile and move on. They probably don't have time to read every post. So, they have to go on what their skimming produces. I wouldn't even be surprised if the developers themselves only read preselected topics, due to how busy they are.
So, yes, how you label yourself matters. Because you cannot count on them to read why you use the label. They likely don't have the time.
It's your choice. Do you want to post things you want changed... or just complain and be ignored?
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
I've gone out of my way to help EA. They chose not to do anything with that and it's their prerogative. But it's not up to other customers to accuse people of not buying the game because they aren't happy with the state of it of being antagonistic and having a bad attitude. Which is the narrative you are trying to give across.
Click that link I posted. Look directly at a real boycott. You'll understand exactly why.
Whether you intend it or not, things like what that link shows are what the word "boycott" conjure for a company. The replies they give are based off that image. Are they spiteful and antagonistic replies? Oh yes. But they're also the kind of replies you give when dealing with a true boycott. And by calling what you are doing a boycott, that kind of antagonistic relationship is what you're volunteering for and taking part in... even if you don't know it.
That's why I pointed out that it's antagonistic... because I know how companies respond to boycotts. It's not the mentality of people wanting to solve a problem, but the mentality of a fort under siege. Because of what real boycotts involve. Do you understand now? How would you respond if you felt under siege? Would you be friendly to those who have you under siege, or hostile? Would you be willing to take actions just to spite them?
And that is the issue at play. And why it is I spent the last few pages talking about it. Because I know what is going on and the kind of replies that happen. I've been there, on both sides of the line.
You want EA to listen to you? Fine. I'm telling you how to accomplish that. Because all they will likely do is glance at your posts and skim them; I expect them to do that with all posts not reported. If they spot you saying you boycott them? Right to the ignore pile, move on to the next. Because, realistically, that's probably all they have time for.
Yeah, it sucks. But welcome to dealing with a big corporation.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
It's not the boycott you're describing. I agree. That is also why I say that it's not a real boycott, but using the word "boycott" is technically not incorrect.
boycott play
verb boy·cott \ˈbȯi-ˌkät\
Popularity: Top 20% of words
Simple Definition of boycott
: to refuse to buy, use, or participate in (something) as a way of protesting : to stop using the goods or services of (a company, country, etc.) until changes are made
Sure there are no picket signs, but we don't need them. We only need to keep our purse strings closed to make our point. And if change occurs we'll open them back up.
Earlier when players would announce "I'm out" other players would jeer at them and imply that they wouldn't be missed. Even EA jumped on the "vocal minority doesn't matter" bandwagon in that interview and stated telemetry was driving their vision. So that is why I encouraged everyone here who refused to buy the game to share this information to show that it adds up. Are we trying to convince people to boycott, nope. Are we waving picket signs, nope. But we are refusing to buy until changes are made... and since this isn't some moral issue... the only change we need is for the game to be FUN.
EA ignoring me doesn't cost me any money. So at the end of the day, the only one who will lose out is EA--because I already don't have a game to play; there's nothing else for me to lose here in expressing my discontent with this iteration.
Technically accurate isn't going to help you any. They likely won't care. Why should they? They have hundreds of posts to read each day, and likely only a handful of hours to do it in. They probably skim everything. They see a mention of you boycotting, it conjures an image like what I linked, they toss that post or even your entire account in the ignore pile and move on. They probably don't have time to read every post. So, they have to go on what their skimming produces. I wouldn't even be surprised if the developers themselves only read preselected topics, due to how busy they are.
So, yes, how you label yourself matters. Because you cannot count on them to read why you use the label. They likely don't have the time.
It's your choice. Do you want to post things you want changed... or just complain and be ignored?
Um... I think you're missing one big glaring factor here: most of us posted what we wanted changed when we bought the base game. However, when sales went up because of GTW (I bought it too). EA got cocky again and pretty much decided TS4 was awesomesauce and needed no other changes. Money matters more than words. The words are done so that history will show if this franchise fails that fans gave EA every chance to improve the game.
I don't really get how in one post you argue that we're killing the game, viz. taking down the #1 best-selling PC franchise as "boycotters" and in another post that we don't matter because we're "boycotters". How does your one argument align with your other?
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
I've gone out of my way to help EA. They chose not to do anything with that and it's their prerogative. But it's not up to other customers to accuse people of not buying the game because they aren't happy with the state of it of being antagonistic and having a bad attitude. Which is the narrative you are trying to give across.
Click that link I posted. Look directly at a real boycott. You'll understand exactly why.
Whether you intend it or not, things like what that link shows are what the word "boycott" conjure for a company. The replies they give are based off that image. Are they spiteful and antagonistic replies? Oh yes. But they're also the kind of replies you give when dealing with a true boycott. And by calling what you are doing a boycott, that kind of antagonistic relationship is what you're volunteering for and taking part in... even if you don't know it.
That's why I pointed out that it's antagonistic... because I know how companies respond to boycotts. It's not the mentality of people wanting to solve a problem, but the mentality of a fort under siege. Because of what real boycotts involve. Do you understand now? How would you respond if you felt under siege? Would you be friendly to those who have you under siege, or hostile? Would you be willing to take actions just to spite them?
And that is the issue at play. And why it is I spent the last few pages talking about it. Because I know what is going on and the kind of replies that happen. I've been there, on both sides of the line.
You want EA to listen to you? Fine. I'm telling you how to accomplish that. Because all they will likely do is glance at your posts and skim them; I expect them to do that with all posts not reported. If they spot you saying you boycott them? Right to the ignore pile, move on to the next. Because, realistically, that's probably all they have time for.
Yeah, it sucks. But welcome to dealing with a big corporation.
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.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
It's not the boycott you're describing. I agree. That is also why I say that it's not a real boycott, but using the word "boycott" is technically not incorrect.
boycott play
verb boy·cott \ˈbȯi-ˌkät\
Popularity: Top 20% of words
Simple Definition of boycott
: to refuse to buy, use, or participate in (something) as a way of protesting : to stop using the goods or services of (a company, country, etc.) until changes are made
Sure there are no picket signs, but we don't need them. We only need to keep our purse strings closed to make our point. And if change occurs we'll open them back up.
Earlier when players would announce "I'm out" other players would jeer at them and imply that they wouldn't be missed. Even EA jumped on the "vocal minority doesn't matter" bandwagon in that interview and stated telemetry was driving their vision. So that is why I encouraged everyone here who refused to buy the game to share this information to show that it adds up. Are we trying to convince people to boycott, nope. Are we waving picket signs, nope. But we are refusing to buy until changes are made... and since this isn't some moral issue... the only change we need is for the game to be FUN.
EA ignoring me doesn't cost me any money. So at the end of the day, the only one who will lose out is EA--because I already don't have a game to play; there's nothing else for me to lose here in expressing my discontent with this iteration.
Technically accurate isn't going to help you any. They likely won't care. Why should they? They have hundreds of posts to read each day, and likely only a handful of hours to do it in. They probably skim everything. They see a mention of you boycotting, it conjures an image like what I linked, they toss that post or even your entire account in the ignore pile and move on. They probably don't have time to read every post. So, they have to go on what their skimming produces. I wouldn't even be surprised if the developers themselves only read preselected topics, due to how busy they are.
So, yes, how you label yourself matters. Because you cannot count on them to read why you use the label. They likely don't have the time.
It's your choice. Do you want to post things you want changed... or just complain and be ignored?
Um... I think you're missing one big glaring factor here: most of us posted what we wanted changed when we bought the base game. However, when sales went up because of GTW (I bought it too). EA got cocky again and pretty much decided TS4 was awesomesauce and needed no other changes. Money matters more than words. The words are done so that history will show if this franchise fails that fans gave EA every chance to improve the game.
I don't really get how in one post you argue that we're killing the game, viz. taking down the #1 best-selling PC franchise as "boycotters" and in another post that we don't matter because we're "boycotters". How does your one argument align with your other?
Then don't spend money on it and say why... but don't call it a boycott. It's not that hard. This isn't rocket science; it's spin control.
Did you miss the part where I said the boycotts are free advertising? It was earlier in the thread and there's a lot of posts, so it's understandable if you did. Boycotts don't matter in fixing the game, but they can do a lot to sell it. Think about the last time you went to see something or bought something just because people protested it and you wanted to know why. Companies like EA count that as part of their marketing strategy. They can ignore the concerns of the boycott while still using it to draw in customers.
I don't know what you call what I'm boycotting or not......maybe it's just indignation on a commercial level. I don't buy and I come here and say way I'm not buying. What everyone else does is up to them.
There are companies I refuse to interact with for various reasons. Some are hiring practices, some are over what I feel are moral judgments that companies have no business in making public or saying they are part of their business but in this case it's just that I don't want to give money to someone that I feel is making a broken game.
"People really love to explore 'failure states. In fact, the failure states are really much more interesting than the success states." ~ Will Wright
Comments
I think you're terribly mistaken here. You're acting like EA will note the boycotting and say 'WE DON'T NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS!' but that's just a crazy over simplification of the issue. The boycott is simply a visible way for players to explain to EA why they are losing those sales. "I am not buying more content, because I am not satisfied with the direction this franchise is going. I dislike x features, and would like to see the game go in x direction." Is this a combative stance with the company?? How is it any better to simply not buy, not mention anything, and walk away? People are being vocal, and/or not buying because they feel that the company is killing the franchise. If the company loses enough sales due to this new direction, it would be foolhardy of them to simply throw away a game when they can look to movements such as the boycott, or the family play thread, or a hundred other examples of former fans, who still LOVE the idea of the sims, and who would VERY HAPPILY return and spend their money if only xyz would change in game. If the company I work for started losing money because of unhappy customers, their go-to move would not be to stop offering a previously profitable/popular service, it would be to ask those unhappy customers, "What can we do to win you back? Where did we go wrong?" A company that does not respond to it's customer's desires is one doomed to fail, and that failure rests on the shoulders of Maxis and EA, not us.
Exactly right. It's really not such a hard concept.
Customers are not responsible for mistakes EA/Maxis made in development and any suggestion otherwise is absurd.
I couldn't care less if games companies behave poorly towards customers. It's totally irrelevant to how I experience something as a customer and whether I choose to invest. I don't lower my expectations just because they have a record of that behaviour.
All that means is the companies involved have some serious work to do if their industry is seen as such a poor example of customer experiences and service. What a poor reflection that has on the industry!
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Repose en paix mamie tu va me manquer :
1923-2016 mamie
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
If I'm so terribly mistaken, then why are we nearly two years in with no toddlers? Games like this typically average a 5 year run; just long enough to develop the next version. That means we're nearly 2/5ths of the way through the run. And top it all off, apparently some of the code necessary to do toddlers is already in the game.
So, given all they had to do was complete something they obviously had already started, like pools, why are we still without toddlers? If they intended to do toddlers at all and had a way to do them outside of an EP, why haven't we seen them yet?
I know how video game companies operate. You know how Blizzard responded to a boycott attempt on one of their forums? They simply permabanned the people trying to start it. With the kind of ban where you can't even play your games.
Others, including EA, have flat-out ignored boycotts; this isn't even the first Sims game to get a boycott. The last one still hasn't had all of their demands met, and that was for Sims 3. You can even read their complaints for yourself here. The only demand they got met was the Store, and that was simply replaced with Sims 4 Stuff Packs. This is Year 4 of boycott efforts against EA over the Sims series. With boycott efforts now extending across two games. If they were going to listen to the boycotts, don't you think they would have started back in 2012 when it became something also done off the forums? And that's not counting the much earlier bugs boycott that started when World Adventures was released; last I checked, every single member of that either left or got banned.
And I've heard that about listening to customers and adjusting sales before where it comes to a video game company. I've heard that about not listening to customers and going under before where it comes to a video game company. I've heard it about EA (Sims 2, 3, and now 4), Nintendo (the Wii), Valve (a lot of things related to Steam and Team Fortress 2), Blizzard (bans, class balance issues, art style of Diablo 3, and so on), Bethesda (V.A.T.S., Skyrim spellcasting), Square-Enix (second half of the Final Fantasy series), and so on. Every single time I've heard it, it's turned out one way: The company and brand were still here later. The people who said it were not.
So, tell me, in what way is this boycott any different than the previous boycotts EA ignored? And the previous boycotts other video game companies have ignored? What makes this special?
And, yes, it is antagonistic. You're trying to use economic pressure to control a company's decision making. If you're not, then there's a problem with your tactics... as the boycott method of protesting was first created to do exactly that item, and is antagonistic because it is intended to exert customer control over a company they have no ownership of. After all, how would you respond if someone who didn't even work there walked into your job and threatened your paycheck unless you do what they wanted? And yet, that's exactly how a boycott is intended to work towards companies... and why it's so effective with retail chains.
I heard the same arguments from the Sims 3 boycotts. Take a look at the link in my previous post. Then take a look at how much they were complaining about is still around. Then tell me if the idea that a boycott works has any merit.
That's why I advise walking away. Because the boycotts haven't been doing anything except providing EA with free advertising.
Huh? That makes no sense
What should I infer from this comment? Buy a product I don't want because I think it suhcks?!
Nope. Keep reading the thread. You're supposed to infer not to boycott, but to simply let your lack of purchase speak volumes.
It's a slightly different tactic, but the boycotts have already proven useless. This isn't even the first Sims game to see one. The prior one didn't get their issues the boycott was for truly dealt with either.
Hmm... maybe you missed this part in my post:
So we have no disagreement here, yeah?
It's getting hung up on a word. There really is zero difference to not buying and communicating why than to boycott and telling them why.
It's all on a premise that EA are that spiteful that if customers mention that word they'll trash their own work on toddlers to spite their customers.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And if they trash their own work out of spite that is their responsibility-not that of their customers.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
Maxis doesn't exist any more. This is all EA Mobile
No real disagreement. I'm saying "don't even use the word." Because, on some level, you're dealing with a company looking for an excuse to view those not buying as problems instead of lost customers. It makes it easier to sell their vision and spin the bad reactions they're getting. I personally wouldn't even speak about it that much; just answer on threads why you didn't buy the game and go on. It leaves them forced to accept you are a lost customer, and they need to win you back.
Nah, they like money. If they can turn a profit with this game, they'll keep milking it for all its worth. And they are well aware of what will bring in more revenue to this prize cow--odds are they are working on it right now
Also, not buying something now because I don't like it doesn't mean never buying product once it's fun. I'm a collector fan.
Boycotts recruit, try to get people involved, and try to get other customers to not shop there even if not involved in the boycott. Simply not buying and walking away typically doesn't recruit. If you deal with real-world boycotts, you'll notice something; boycotts often have people standing outside the building protesting, while those who simply refuse to buy are not showing up at all. That's why this thread is starting off with the idea of tweeting the developers about toddlers; it's a boycott, and it takes active actions to make why the boycott exists known and to disrupt things to draw attention.
This is speaking as someone who has been in effective boycotts before. Simply not buying is passive; a boycott is active. That's why using the word has an entirely different result as to how what you're doing is viewed.
And this is on the premise that EA is a video game company with a proven track record of not responding well to boycotts. Just like most video game companies don't respond well to boycotts. After all, just ask the people who Blizzard openly mocked with their Diablo 3 pony level.
So am I. I've already explained this @nanashi-sims the word doesn't matter-all it says is people *want* to buy but currently the situation prevents them doing so.
And I agree.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
i agree with you totally. they probably get enough of this crap. i always see this in the forums or i see it in the youtube comments even comments on the sims page whenever a new blog come up. we want toddlers we want create a style(they said it won't happen). we want pets we want seasons. i think most of us want toddlers back, like i but come on stop hounding the poor people about it. would you rather have demon toddlers like the babies were or wait till they are good enough to be in the game. primus its like the sims 3 cycle of want all over again to be honest like the seasons and university.
they're fixing their mistakes in the game like adding the gardeners in the last patch just chillax. be patient. good things happen to those who are patient. the expansion packs and game packs and a few of the stuff pack peak my interest. the expansion packs and game packs have are great. (i don't have outdoor retreat since there's no ea cards in canada. and that's how i prefer paying for things)
Okay, this is what a real boycott looks like: http://santacruz.indymedia.org/usermedia/image/2/boycott_2-12-05.jpg
Simply refusing to buy? That's not a boycott. And calling it such opens up what you have to say to be ignored. It makes you a combatant because boycotts are never truly lacking in antagonism. And the antagonism often comes from both sides.
Welcome to a healthy dose of why EA is ignoring you.
I've gone out of my way to help EA. They chose not to do anything with that and it's their prerogative. But it's not up to other customers to accuse people of not buying the game because they aren't happy with the state of it of being antagonistic and having a bad attitude. Which is the narrative you are trying to give across.
https://twitter.com/sparkfairy1
It's not the boycott you're describing. I agree. That is also why I say that it's not a real boycott, but using the word "boycott" is technically not incorrect.
boycott play
verb boy·cott \ˈbȯi-ˌkät\
Popularity: Top 20% of words
Simple Definition of boycott
: to refuse to buy, use, or participate in (something) as a way of protesting : to stop using the goods or services of (a company, country, etc.) until changes are made
Sure there are no picket signs, but we don't need them. We only need to keep our purse strings closed to make our point. And if change occurs we'll open them back up.
Earlier when players would announce "I'm out" other players would jeer at them and imply that they wouldn't be missed. Even EA jumped on the "vocal minority doesn't matter" bandwagon in that interview and stated telemetry was driving their vision. So that is why I encouraged everyone here who refused to buy the game to share this information to show that it adds up. Are we trying to convince people to boycott, nope. Are we waving picket signs, nope. But we are refusing to buy until changes are made... and since this isn't some moral issue... the only change we need is for the game to be FUN.
EA ignoring me doesn't cost me any money. So at the end of the day, the only one who will lose out is EA--because I already don't have a game to play; there's nothing else for me to lose here in expressing my discontent with this iteration.
Click that link I posted. Look directly at a real boycott. You'll understand exactly why.
Whether you intend it or not, things like what that link shows are what the word "boycott" conjure for a company. The replies they give are based off that image. Are they spiteful and antagonistic replies? Oh yes. But they're also the kind of replies you give when dealing with a true boycott. And by calling what you are doing a boycott, that kind of antagonistic relationship is what you're volunteering for and taking part in... even if you don't know it.
That's why I pointed out that it's antagonistic... because I know how companies respond to boycotts. It's not the mentality of people wanting to solve a problem, but the mentality of a fort under siege. Because of what real boycotts involve. Do you understand now? How would you respond if you felt under siege? Would you be friendly to those who have you under siege, or hostile? Would you be willing to take actions just to spite them?
And that is the issue at play. And why it is I spent the last few pages talking about it. Because I know what is going on and the kind of replies that happen. I've been there, on both sides of the line.
You want EA to listen to you? Fine. I'm telling you how to accomplish that. Because all they will likely do is glance at your posts and skim them; I expect them to do that with all posts not reported. If they spot you saying you boycott them? Right to the ignore pile, move on to the next. Because, realistically, that's probably all they have time for.
Yeah, it sucks. But welcome to dealing with a big corporation.
Technically accurate isn't going to help you any. They likely won't care. Why should they? They have hundreds of posts to read each day, and likely only a handful of hours to do it in. They probably skim everything. They see a mention of you boycotting, it conjures an image like what I linked, they toss that post or even your entire account in the ignore pile and move on. They probably don't have time to read every post. So, they have to go on what their skimming produces. I wouldn't even be surprised if the developers themselves only read preselected topics, due to how busy they are.
So, yes, how you label yourself matters. Because you cannot count on them to read why you use the label. They likely don't have the time.
It's your choice. Do you want to post things you want changed... or just complain and be ignored?
Um... I think you're missing one big glaring factor here: most of us posted what we wanted changed when we bought the base game. However, when sales went up because of GTW (I bought it too). EA got cocky again and pretty much decided TS4 was awesomesauce and needed no other changes. Money matters more than words. The words are done so that history will show if this franchise fails that fans gave EA every chance to improve the game.
I don't really get how in one post you argue that we're killing the game, viz. taking down the #1 best-selling PC franchise as "boycotters" and in another post that we don't matter because we're "boycotters". How does your one argument align with your other?
Then don't spend money on it and say why... but don't call it a boycott. It's not that hard. This isn't rocket science; it's spin control.
Did you miss the part where I said the boycotts are free advertising? It was earlier in the thread and there's a lot of posts, so it's understandable if you did. Boycotts don't matter in fixing the game, but they can do a lot to sell it. Think about the last time you went to see something or bought something just because people protested it and you wanted to know why. Companies like EA count that as part of their marketing strategy. They can ignore the concerns of the boycott while still using it to draw in customers.
There are companies I refuse to interact with for various reasons. Some are hiring practices, some are over what I feel are moral judgments that companies have no business in making public or saying they are part of their business but in this case it's just that I don't want to give money to someone that I feel is making a broken game.