@luthienrising - I hope that you don't think I was referring to you in all my points, and I understand that there are certain things that can't be discussed.
As a comparison: TS3 was released June 2009. WA followed November 2009, Ambitions was released in June 2010, Late Night October 2010, Generations In May 2011, and Pets in October of 2011.
Even without the Pets EP, there was more than enough to keep myself busy in the game. There is no way to compare the content that we had in TS3 up to that point with what we have gotten in TS4 so far.
Now, as someone who's not a developer, I would think that if you promise me "smarter Sims", and an "improved and solid game engine", that this would take The Sims franchise to an incredible new level of gaming, with superior performance and mind blowing game play. I'm still waiting for that.
And while I'm waiting, I'm still staring at the same 36 lots altogether, set in a cartoony looking world.
So far, I don't see EA delivering on the promises made in regards to their product. 2 years into TS4, regardless of what prevents EA from talking in their contracts, we need answers from those who are allowed to talk.
"Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning." - William Henry Gates III
The only real issue I had in sims 3 was with the animal fur, which was fixed. I didn't need a mod for that.
I was opposed to simport. I shut it down and left a message on my status that I did not simport. I did unlock all of the items though with something I found on MTS. I also knew how to unlock the badges, but since I didn't care about them, I let that go.
I also turned off the store. I found it absolutely ridiculous that they were trying to sell me stuff I already owned.
I used the mailbox cheat on the zombies.
@SimmieSims I am not defending anybody (except today, it seems, myself). The only thing I have done recently that seems to annoy some people is to add some detail to the explanations that SimGurus, not me, gave about the regulations that prevent them, as a publicly traded company, from saying certain things - detail I looked up because it was a set of regulations I didn't know about, and I was interested in knowing more. It doesn't matter how much money a company has: it can't just wish away those regulations. I suppose that EA could take itself private - buy out all the stockholders - and no longer have to abide by those regulations. But then it wouldn't have that money to put into development. I've explained earlier some ways in which those regulations are in consumers' interest, not against us; I'm not going to repeat myself.
FWIW, I assume that they haven't said there will never be cars, toddlers, pets, seasons, or XYZ in the game because those things could come to the game. (The first four have also been included in surveys, and the game is only just approaching two years into what previously has been a five-year cycle.) And FWIW, we got pets two and two and half years into Sims 2 and 3, respectively; we got weather three and three and a half years in. Cars and toddlers would be similarly intensive design and development jobs, so I don't expect that if we are going to get all those things, it's going to happen all at once. Additions will likely to be spread over the life of the game, like always. I hope you get the ones you want instead of being told they're never coming.
I read the same post that Graham linked to and did you also note none of that goes fully into effect until 2018? Yes the GAP/NONGAP reporting does go into affect shortly - but the rules by what the Sims 4 is being made at present is using language not in affect until 2018 regardless. Only accounting right now has a concern - which by the way is not even covered in that writ but I was made aware of it on the Stock market and the August Conference Call for EA even before this discussion.
I noticed and I am a bit perplexed by that tbh. It seems Maxis have self-imposed this by choice rather early...?
I'm not going to hunt up the quote, but in the middle of all the stuff that offended everyone, Drake did say something about them being special in agreeance with somebody's statement of such.
@SimmieSims I am not defending anybody (except today, it seems, myself). The only thing I have done recently that seems to annoy some people is to add some detail to the explanations that SimGurus, not me, gave about the regulations that prevent them, as a publicly traded company, from saying certain things - detail I looked up because it was a set of regulations I didn't know about, and I was interested in knowing more. It doesn't matter how much money a company has: it can't just wish away those regulations. I suppose that EA could take itself private - buy out all the stockholders - and no longer have to abide by those regulations. But then it wouldn't have that money to put into development. I've explained earlier some ways in which those regulations are in consumers' interest, not against us; I'm not going to repeat myself.
FWIW, I assume that they haven't said there will never be cars, toddlers, pets, seasons, or XYZ in the game because those things could come to the game. (The first four have also been included in surveys, and the game is only just approaching two years into what previously has been a five-year cycle.) And FWIW, we got pets two and two and half years into Sims 2 and 3, respectively; we got weather three and three and a half years in. Cars and toddlers would be similarly intensive design and development jobs, so I don't expect that if we are going to get all those things, it's going to happen all at once. Additions will likely to be spread over the life of the game, like always. I hope you get the ones you want instead of being told they're never coming.
I read the same post that Graham linked to and did you also note none of that goes fully into effect until 2018? Yes the GAP/NONGAP reporting does go into affect shortly - but the rules by what the Sims 4 is being made at present is using language not in affect until 2018 regardless. Only accounting right now has a concern - which by the way is not even covered in that writ but I was made aware of it on the Stock market and the August Conference Call for EA even before this discussion.
I noticed and I am a bit perplexed by that tbh. It seems Maxis have self-imposed this by choice rather early...?
I'm not going to hunt up the quote, but in the middle of all the stuff that offended everyone, Drake did say something about them being special in agreeance with somebody's statement of such.
K, thanks. I guess I'll go back and reread!
I'm a girl who likes to play with boys, what can I say...
“Instead of putting players in the role of Luke Skywalker, or Frodo Baggins, I'd rather put them in the role of George Lucas.”Will Wright.
@mattandphilsims2 excellent video btw, thanks a lot for making it & sharing it with the community! You're absolutely right about their weird way of focusing on what their customers do / say / interpret wrong instead of on what they could actually do to fix the problems they're talking about. And yes, that "expiration date" comment really got to me as well. It was perhaps one of the most offensive sentences in there, because when my customers ask me to do something, and I don't comply for months, I don't end up turning it against them saying "look, I know this project was important to you and your concerns are valid, but hey, your whining's got an expiration date, so pay me for what I did cause I sure as plum ain't gonna do what you've asked me to do from the very beginning." .......... ?
Also I don't know who of you's been following the "Should The Sims 4 End Here" thread, but it recently got reopened after being closed, with this particularly interesting disclaimer:
I'm reopening this thread, but please keep the following in mind:
We're all here because we love The Sims, and all opinions are welcome; our only caveat is that posts must be respectfully expressed and on-topic with the thread. To make sure that a post is respectful and on-topic, go through this list of my golden rules:
If you are posting about a person in the thread, you should not click "Post comment"
If you are posting negative comments about any person or organization, you should not click "Post comment"
As much as we all love a good meme image, if that is the content of your post, you should not click "Post comment"
If your post doesn't meet this criteria, remember that not posting on a particular topic is always an option.
We will be monitoring this thread, and further disruption will probably result in it permanently being closed.
Are these people kidding us? What exactly do "negative comments about an organization" entail? Does this mean we shouldn't be critical anymore, as clearly they think a lot of us who're trying to be constructively critical (up to a point at least) are spreading negativity and being whiny customers? Afaik you're very well allowed to say something negative about EA on most other forums, but maybe I'm wrong... It says a lot about what kind of "freedom of expression" they'd prefer to see in our posts. lol
Calling people and/or the company who makes the game, or it's parent company lazy. as an example. Comments that they're only in it for the money, and so on.
You can be critical without being insulting, which is how these threads turn out (taking this one as an example). No, they don't. They're asking you to consider what will happen if the game doesn't become what you want, imo (My opinion only but people have taken it way too personally). You don't have 'freedom of expression' on a forum. It's limited to whatever that forums rules are.
To add: There's a difference between:
You plums aren't putting in what I want. Get off your lazy behinds and do it now. If you can't do it, I want to know why and I want to know why now. Don't tell me you can't say, that you'll be fired, arrested and sued. I don't want excuses. Just get it done!
and
I was thinking and I really think <feature> would be a good addition to this game because <reason>. Would you give consideration to this. Thanks
I know you weren't talking to me but I'm going to interject this. I've spent two years explaining what I think some of the shortcomings are and what could improve it for me. I've never called any one lazy...in fact to best of my ability I can't even remember saying any of the staff didn't care about what fans wanted. I'm not the only one who has done this and it's still all business as usual.
As far as EA. They are not being altruistic when they create games. They are in it for the income. They have stockholders to satisfy.
The thing that I'll say is in this case it doesn't feel like they are particularly concerned about how we, as consumers, feel. That's not a good feeling for someone who has given them money in the past and wishes the product was still good enough to keep buying from them.
Here's the thing, and part of the reason I don't get the outrage when they say that our complaints have an expiration date, which I get, they've never cared how we as consumers feel, not really. They've never gone out of their way to fix what we thought what was wrong. Ranging from 'vacation or staycation' in the first town we paid for (name escapes me) something Bay, that a whole bunch of people brought believing that it could be used as another WA world, to the hot air balloon that went up a minute amount in the air, to the store town with one nice looking lawn in winter, the cars that got stuck everywhere, the issues with Isla Paradiso and the city town (name escapes me again), which some couldn't play. And the list goes on.
Never have they once gone "Oh, yes, well, with TS3 we slipped up. We'll issue fixes. We'll do better with TS4". And now when it's confirmed that they'll only listen to the complaints for a limited time, we've got outrage, really? What? Where were you lot over the past 7 years?
The absence of toddlers and other 'missing items', along with a little bit of misunderstanding at launch isn't going to make them apologise or fix anything now either. You're mistaken if you believe it will happen if you shout loud enough.
Where were we lot - we were busy fixing our own darn games because maybe there was issues but the big difference is even the player could rework the entire game practically and fix the problems that plagued most of the worlds that had issues. As most of the issues were due to routing in many cases (holes in the maps routing grid), a couple of issues with a couple of the rabbithole buildings (remove them fixes that), and a few families with issues like the Scotts in IP (make them leave or kill them off), abandoned car issues - get rid of parking lots. But because it was possible to totally remake any world or simply make your own or move things out - rebuild - redo, in Sims 3 we did not have to live with the issues permanently. But Sims 4 - we cannot add toddlers, have proper cemeteries, or do any of the missing as they require programming in the game to fix any of Sims 4s issues - never mind be unable to do anything at all worth doing outside of you own lot. So much for the creativity the Sims is also very much known for. The Sims was a life simulation with endless creativity - it is not that any more. It's something else and definitely not fixable by the player.
And to quote quite a few people 'You shouldn't have to use mods, or go through a whole bunch of fixes to make the game playable'. You can't have it both ways. It's either ultra awesome that you've got to jump a bazillion hoops to make a game more playable, or it's terrible and shouldn't happen. Also, if you're using mods or a bazillion fixes then it's not the game you actually like but the mods (and fixes) that change it.
We can argue the genre of game another time.
And you shouldn't but what's your point? The company fails at some points, we apparently agree on that. The games however differ in quality, possibilities and opportunities.
Fun fact: this whole situation about similarities of 'Outdoor retreat' and 'Perfect patio' was even more ridiculous here, in Russia, because they were translated like 'in the backyard' and 'courtyard' so we were just told straight that we were about to get another kind of an yard
Wish I saw myself how the forum reacted to the announce of OR.
@luthienrising - I hope that you don't think I was referring to you in all my points, and I understand that there are certain things that can't be discussed.
As a comparison: TS3 was released June 2009. WA followed November 2009, Ambitions was released in June 2010, Late Night October 2010, Generations In May 2011, and Pets in October of 2011.
Even without the Pets EP, there was more than enough to keep myself busy in the game. There is no way to compare the content that we had in TS3 up to that point with what we have gotten in TS4 so far.
Now, as someone who's not a developer, I would think that if you promise me "smarter Sims", and an "improved and solid game engine", that this would take The Sims franchise to an incredible new level of gaming, with superior performance and mind blowing game play. I'm still waiting for that.
And while I'm waiting, I'm still staring at the same 36 lots altogether, set in a cartoony looking world.
So far, I don't see EA delivering on the promises made in regards to their product. 2 years into TS4, regardless of what prevents EA from talking in their contracts, we need answers from those who are allowed to talk.
Simple question, but I really need food and TV for a bit. What if they never do? What are your options. You can't make them talk, no matter how much you nag them to do so, so then what?
Fun fact: this whole situation about similarities of 'Outdoor retreat' and 'Perfect patio' was even more ridiculous here, in Russia, because they were translated like 'in the backyard' and 'courtyard' so we were just told straight that we were about to get another kind of an yard
Wish I saw myself how the forum reacted to the announce of OR.
Simple question, but I really need food and TV for a bit. What if they never do? What are your options. You can't make them talk, no matter how much you nag them to do so, so then what?
then they lose players, fanbase and future trust. Most people upset in this topic are on the verge of never even considering purchasing another sims 4 product and would probably be very much more skeptical of The sims 5.
@SimmieSims I am not defending anybody (except today, it seems, myself). The only thing I have done recently that seems to annoy some people is to add some detail to the explanations that SimGurus, not me, gave about the regulations that prevent them, as a publicly traded company, from saying certain things - detail I looked up because it was a set of regulations I didn't know about, and I was interested in knowing more. It doesn't matter how much money a company has: it can't just wish away those regulations. I suppose that EA could take itself private - buy out all the stockholders - and no longer have to abide by those regulations. But then it wouldn't have that money to put into development. I've explained earlier some ways in which those regulations are in consumers' interest, not against us; I'm not going to repeat myself.
FWIW, I assume that they haven't said there will never be cars, toddlers, pets, seasons, or XYZ in the game because those things could come to the game. (The first four have also been included in surveys, and the game is only just approaching two years into what previously has been a five-year cycle.) And FWIW, we got pets two and two and half years into Sims 2 and 3, respectively; we got weather three and three and a half years in. Cars and toddlers would be similarly intensive design and development jobs, so I don't expect that if we are going to get all those things, it's going to happen all at once. Additions will likely to be spread over the life of the game, like always. I hope you get the ones you want instead of being told they're never coming.
I read the same post that Graham linked to and did you also note none of that goes fully into effect until 2018? Yes the GAP/NONGAP reporting does go into affect shortly - but the rules by what the Sims 4 is being made at present is using language not in affect until 2018 regardless. Only accounting right now has a concern - which by the way is not even covered in that writ but I was made aware of it on the Stock market and the August Conference Call for EA even before this discussion.
I noticed and I am a bit perplexed by that tbh. It seems Maxis have self-imposed this by choice rather early...?
My impression is that there's been a phasing in of the regulations. I didn't see in what I read what portions were older, what were not-till-2018. And I do have the impression that it's pretty common to not wait till the last minute to switch systems, and that once you have, you have. That's as much as I know about the situation, though. Most of what I've seen written up in the business press has been larger-scale issues around the process of getting to new standards in the first place.
EA CREATOR NETWORK MEMBER — Want to be notified of patches, new Broken Mods threads, and urgent Sims 4 news? Follow me at https://www.patreon.com/luthienrising.
@SimGuruDrake Yo! Just thought I'd pop in to kind of respond especially in regards to toddlers and content requested by players,
The Sims over the years have become more and more interactive with players, taking into consideration what they would like to see in the game via forums and other social media which is a great thing. It's really nice to be able to voice what we like and dislike about the game that we have been fans of for years. However, I feel like there is a slight disconnect between developers and the players especially when it comes to toddlers. What the players are wanting at this point, after 2 years is at-least a reason as to why toddlers can't be implemented.
It could be that the work schedules for the teams in the office have already been planned for working on 'X' expansion packs/stuff packs, and squeezing in time for toddlers could slow the work pace down meaning less content to put out? It could be that creating code for the toddlers could potentially mean a complete re-write of the whole game which would take huge amounts of time, bug fixing and team effort? It could be creating the 3D models, a-long with the code, rigging and making idle, object and sim interaction animations would also take massive amounts of team time and effort that can't be squeezed in at this time? It could be that the game engine would cause problems and struggle with adding toddlers at this stage of the game?
Just something like this would quench the thirst of a-lot of players' worries and actually give us an insight on what is and isn't possible within the game, which could possibly make our requests a little more realistic for the developers. I know that you don't work in development which is why you can't tell us these things, and it's nice that you're meeting with the right people to discuss and provide clearer answers. Maybe it would be good for each department to have their own communicator guru so then more questions would be able to be answered? Not only that but it could take the weight off of your shoulders.
I understand maybe the team don't want to be too transparent with players in fear that they will dislike what they have to say and will no longer buy The Sims, I know the image of the game is important for business which is completely understandable. Although transparency between yourselves and the players, especially The Sims fans who are some of the most dedicated people in gaming can be beneficial and actually keep the trust of those who feel they are left in the dark.
I found this very interesting interview with Will Wright, and his answers, even though not related to TS4, summarize my frustration with the current iteration.
"I'm a games designer, I don't want to be a storyteller. I want to be a story-enabler. I think that the stories that the players create or tell are so much more interesting. I like the idea of games as a form of creative expression from the player's point of view. So the player feels very excited in investing themselves into creativity."
"We want a large space for possibilities, but it has to be dramatically interesting. You know, I could give you a paint program, and the creative possibilities are endless, but it's not very fun, or meaningful for the player."
When you take over somebody else's invention, then you should stick to the core vision for that product, and if you decide to deviate, then it's simply not the same product anymore, regardless of what name you use. TS4 has lost the core of Will Wright's vision, and without much to do for me in the game, it feels like an overhaul of TS at its core, that is supposed to appeal to a Kardashian generation. Dress up, and take a selfie. There is definitely nothing meaningful for me as a player.
"Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning." - William Henry Gates III
@SimmieSims I am not defending anybody (except today, it seems, myself). The only thing I have done recently that seems to annoy some people is to add some detail to the explanations that SimGurus, not me, gave about the regulations that prevent them, as a publicly traded company, from saying certain things - detail I looked up because it was a set of regulations I didn't know about, and I was interested in knowing more. It doesn't matter how much money a company has: it can't just wish away those regulations. I suppose that EA could take itself private - buy out all the stockholders - and no longer have to abide by those regulations. But then it wouldn't have that money to put into development. I've explained earlier some ways in which those regulations are in consumers' interest, not against us; I'm not going to repeat myself.
FWIW, I assume that they haven't said there will never be cars, toddlers, pets, seasons, or XYZ in the game because those things could come to the game. (The first four have also been included in surveys, and the game is only just approaching two years into what previously has been a five-year cycle.) And FWIW, we got pets two and two and half years into Sims 2 and 3, respectively; we got weather three and three and a half years in. Cars and toddlers would be similarly intensive design and development jobs, so I don't expect that if we are going to get all those things, it's going to happen all at once. Additions will likely to be spread over the life of the game, like always. I hope you get the ones you want instead of being told they're never coming.
I read the same post that Graham linked to and did you also note none of that goes fully into effect until 2018? Yes the GAP/NONGAP reporting does go into affect shortly - but the rules by what the Sims 4 is being made at present is using language not in affect until 2018 regardless. Only accounting right now has a concern - which by the way is not even covered in that writ but I was made aware of it on the Stock market and the August Conference Call for EA even before this discussion.
I noticed and I am a bit perplexed by that tbh. It seems Maxis have self-imposed this by choice rather early...?
I'm not going to hunt up the quote, but in the middle of all the stuff that offended everyone, Drake did say something about them being special in agreeance with somebody's statement of such.
Here, I will save you some time - it was in reply from SGDrake on her long post - the part to me - in this post I line - marked.
SimGuruDrake wrote: »
Phantomflex wrote: »
For me it boils down to the very fact that Maxis calls these people/sites "influencers". Are they supposed to be influencing Maxis or us?
If they are supposed to be influencing Maxis then what they say to Maxis should carry more "weight" so to speak. Are they not giving feedback on toddlers, additional color selections, supernaturals, cars, build tools, CAW, culling, etc.? Do these things not bother the influencers? This brings me to my next point. Once you decide that the opinions of a certain few carry more weight than other people you start to alienate people. It's no longer about what's best for the playerbase. It becomes about what's best for the influencers and that's not how you foster a sense of community.
If these influencers are indeed telling Maxis all of this, and/or their job is really to influence us, this whole "influencer" business then becomes condescending. As in we Sims players are not smart enough to make our own decisions about what to buy that they need community celebrities to convince us that this game is worth throwing our money into.
Either way, this whole thing comes across as being very divisive and hostile for the community.
@Phantomflex Influencers / Content Creators are normally people with very large social followings who do have an "influence" over those who follow them. The individuals who follow them trust their opinions on things like beauty products, clothing, books, art supplies, video games, etc. Companies work with these individuals because their one voice can reach hundreds of thousands of people who feel their views align with this individual.
Influencers are also used as "beta testers" to get hands on with products early (like some of what I listed above) as they have built trust with the companies that work with them to not break NDA's or Embargoes and to think about not only what they personally like or don't like about something but also remarking on areas where they could improve to attract even more people to the product by thinking of some of the big sticking points that those who follow them constantly talk about.
Working with individuals who have a large reach is part of any companies strategy and it is a major part of my job to foster relationships and trust with every one of those individuals that I work with and would like to work with. The fact is that there will always be people who get more access to things than someone else. It's not done out of spite or to be "divisive" it is simply another way to not only promote the product but to empower these individuals to be the liaisons for their community and to pass along their feedback to us. They are basically like me in a way, I am your representative in studio as I am the one that takes your feedback from here to those who need to hear it. I am also the one that would flag stuff if I feel something would rub you the wrong way or needs to be clarified more because it seems confusing.
Writin_Reg wrote: »
Been thinking about this all day - and you know what burns my psyche to the core is the fact it seems these "rules" just apply to Maxis and The Sims 4 - and not EA. I find it extremely odd that we cannot even have a single answer to anything regarding future content - but EA on the other hand can go massively live - world wide with their big games - like Battlefield 4, Titanfall 2, the New Star Wars - the coming FIFA - not only with info but trailers and on top of that literally days of play with thousands of players at both the E3 private conference & 3 day event and the Gamescom 2016.
I just checked on just Titanfall 2 is slated to be released October 28th, 2016 - it was first played and viewed June 12th- the 14th, 2016 and now again for another 3 days August 16-18th. What gives on the parent company and it's numerous other studios not having the same rules as Maxis then. Seems to me they are straddling numerous quarters with all EA's game but we can't know a thing about Sims 4.
I fail to get this and I read that whole post Graham linked to. It would be a different matter if EA who owns Maxis lived under the same rules - but seems Maxis is special and has a special set of rules all to themselves.
@Writin_Reg Every one of those games you mentioned would be considered new base games. People haven't been able to purchase any of them yet and you can promote them for as much as you want for as long as you want without having to risk rev rec issues. They are in no way similar to us. We also would be completely overshadowed if we made any kind of announcement of anything when competing for air time with the likes of Battlefield, Titanfall, FIFA, and [c]especially[/b] Star Wars. We are also the only franchise under EA that releases so many different types of content so yea, in a way, we are a special butterfly. Lastly, announcements for new paid content can be announced at any time in or outside the quarter it would be released, doesn't mean it will.
sparkfairy1 wrote: »
Thank you for your response.
Honestly when plenty of customers are telling you than they consider that EA have been far from transparent (yes since you've arrived it's got slightly better and well done on that) and then the response is that you reject those concerns completely and say that EA believe they have it makes it worse for the customer who feels that way. Nowhere is there a 'sorry you feel this way, can you explain why and I'll take it to those who have the power for future decisions or road maps to try to avoid these feelings in the future'. It's a flat out rejection. This is why people feel let down by Maxis and EA. It's the total rejection of concerns because your company believes otherwise. You know how customer experiences improve? By learning about what works, what doesn't work, how different methods of communication translate in reality to the customer base by listening, taking the time to be understanding and by having an open mind to listen to what the reality is for your customers.
See it's a similar vein to your statement the other day about being negative. You told someone if they were negative then they likely wouldn't have a positive experience. I'd say this situation and similar ones come across to customers as EA having a negative attitude toward any complaints or concerns raised so when things could be learnt and handled better in the future those lessons won't be learnt because the prevailing reaction to those being raised is a negative one. When I say negative I'm talking about the rejection of some customers experiences based on how your company felt it was doing and often myths about why these concerns are raised. Another example-the 'TS3 mindset' comment in the press, the inference in another interview that people don't know what a base is like after many of them have experienced up to 4 bases!
For me, as your customer, it's experiences of rejection of concerns and complaints which have absolutely contributed to my breakdown of trust in the company, the product and the team. I wouldn't have bought the base if I didn't trust you guys to make good on what you ran out of time with and I preordered so I paid a premium to support the studio despite the issues. I was more than willing to support you and wait. But I'm beyond disappointed at the reaction to valid concerns and it has been these instances that has actually caused more damage to the situation and my trust (which you had a lot of given i supported Maxis since before The Sims existed) than the shock of the poor experience with the game. In two years this situation has turned around decades of accumulated goodwill.
sparkfairy1 wrote: »
In terms of customer service and experience when 'themes' of issues with your product or how the translation of your methods occur in real life amongst the customer base are raised unless you listen with an open mind then you'll never learn how to make the experience better for your customers. Every one of them. Doing the opposite just shows a lack of care towards the customer being dismissed. Whether the company agrees or not is beside the point. They should be striving to deal with these issues to improve the situation for all their customers.
@sparkfairy1 I wanted to address the bolded sections in the first quote and this specific portion of the second.
1. How many times have I asked people to explain why they feel the way they do? That I would take my feedback to the team? I've even reached out to several individuals in these forums privately to have a more 1:1 conversation to figure out how we can mend that relationship. Too many people here stay in the past. Yes, your opinions and concerns are valid but in a way they do have an expiration date. If someone, like myself, is speaking directly to you almost every day all day to engage and mend relationships, comment on things that they are able, to hunt for the answers to the questions they can answer for you, and are an advocate for you to fight to make sure we are being as transparent as possible and people STILL try and say that we aren't being transparent or are hiding things or are trying to find double meaning in their words than they would clearly rather stay negative than even try to let their past issues go and look to the future.
It doesn't mean they no longer care about the issues they had in the past, it's that they themselves acknowledge that they are willing to accept the olive branch being given. If they swipe it away and "scream" and "yell" about things from the past they clearly want to stay there and we can never change their minds. I spent my first year as the Community Manager working to mend relationships with those who felt disenfranchised; those individuals took up a lot of my time (including time I should have been spending with my significant other) because I felt it was important to spend my first year trying to mend relationships and really learn about what those who feel upset / completely unsatisfied were coming from so we could work towards making "peace" and starting a new. Now that my position has gotten bigger and I have to think globally I can no longer just focus on those individuals anymore.
2. That particular individual wasn't giving feedback. They were, in a way, yelling into a room and were dismissing everything I've said before. It is one thing to be frustrated and to share that frustration in a constructive and controlled manner, it's another to yell "in someone's face" and not be willing to hear anything the other side has to say.
3. As for the final quote: It is absolutely impossible to make every single person who plays our game happy. Additionally, the same mention of "unless you listen with an open mind then you'll never learn how to make the experience better for your customers" can be said for the customers as well. If you aren't willing to listen to what we say with an open mind when we are providing you with straight answers and way more insight into things then we are even obligated to give you you will never learn to trust that we are being honest with you within the constraints that we can and you won't improve the relationship with the team you say you want to have hear you. There also comes a point where you are in a lose lose situation with those who are unhappy and you simply have to move on because nothing you say or do will please them--its never something you want to do but sometimes it's more worthwhile to engage with those who are willing to provide constructive feedback over ones who just want to yell.
andre1906 wrote: »
Island Paradise and Into the Future were announced without screens and videos. They teased us for months about basketball and other things when they were marketing the base game, SimGuruGrant had to say on Twitter "Things change". Planet Coaster, Cities Skylines and even Microsoft (Windows Insider) have a open relationship with their community, announcing and showing content in development.
Grant is right, things do change in game development all the time, and those communities you gave an example for are more willing to understand the intricacies of game development and don't go attacking the devs on a personal level because those things changed in development that those teams don't have control over. If the Sims community could also ingest that and accept that game development isn't a straight line from point A to point B and is rather a very curvy line that has lots of loop-de-loops then maybe we could have an open relationship. As it is now we get shot down multiple times when we talk about what goes into making The Sims, told we are just making excuses, that the team is lazy, that the team has no heart, that the team doesn't listen, and the list goes on and on.
SimTrippy wrote: »
While that may be true, we're already two years in. Maybe they should've started working on including all the basic stuff people are actually missing instead of one SP after another. I think a lot of people could've done with far less SPs if instead they'd gotten back the content they want... but that's just an opinion of course Maybe for TS5 they should think about the kind of game development Planet Coaster & Parkitect have chosen. I like co-creation & asking the people who'll eventually buy the game to chime in & help make it what they like - instead of telling them "here you have a fabulous engine that will make all your dreams possible" only to then never add the things people say they dream of.
See the problem with only focusing on the people who, as you say, will eventually buy the game is that you completely limit yourself from appealing to a wider audience. You HAVE to think bigger to remain in this industry, you HAVE to evolve, and you CANT just focus on the ones you "know will eventually buy the game". This is why so many games on Steam Green Light / Early Access never get out of Early Access because you have too many cooks in the kitchen.
And Lastly:
Before anyone tries to say I am "blaming the customer" at some point you will have to take a hard look at yourself and wonder if anything we do will ever truly make you happy when you can clearly see we are trying our hardest to try and mend relations with you. Still refusing to acknowledge it, want to call us liars, want to make things personal, and just ultimately want to not listen or learn from the things we are telling you--a perfect example is the unwillingness to even accept or acknowledge that we gave insight into HOW we go about making games and why we don't just tell you things to just tell you and are told that we are simply making excuses, why didn't we tell you this before, etc.
With all of that I am off for the rest of the day as I am going to be on a long flight back to EARS tomorrow. I bid all of you a good evening / morning and I hope that you have a wonderful weekend
You know what her answer says to me - they could tell us about the future content - they just don't want to. And that comes right from her reply.
Also that they are "special butterflies" and do what Maxis wants to do. EA is not pulling their strings in other words as I have always said.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Influencers, to me means Maxis is expecting them to influence the populous to buy. No thanks, I never watch Let's Play (boring, old man snoring) videos, never would though I caught a few because someone ask me to take a look. Some people are funny but I go to sleep during those things. Maxis doesn't realize there is a sect of people (young people) who will say they have played a game because they watched a Youtuber do a Let's Play. lol How is that working Maxis? Did it result in money for you? I mean they think they have played it after all.
I stopped watching Let's Plays. I kept wanting to grab their mouse and slap them upside the head for playing wrong. Not worth getting bent out of shape with frustration for.
You can't play the Sims 'wrong'. It's literally impossible. There is no 'right' way when any way is a 'right' way. If you watched someone hit 'play' on a random townie household and then do nothing but let the AI do their thing, they're still not playing it 'wrong'. Different than you is not 'wrong'.
LOL I can for the life of me figure out how you can play the Sims wrong.
I don't watch lets play as to me it is not any fun watching someone else play, I want to do the playing.
there is no wrong or right way to play, it is all up to the simmer themselves as to how they like to play.
Have fun your own way, that's the name of the game.
I found this very interesting interview with Will Wright, and his answers, even though not related to TS4, summarize my frustration with the current iteration.
"I'm a games designer, I don't want to be a storyteller. I want to be a story-enabler. I think that the stories that the players create or tell are so much more interesting. I like the idea of games as a form of creative expression from the player's point of view. So the player feels very excited in investing themselves into creativity."
"We want a large space for possibilities, but it has to be dramatically interesting. You know, I could give you a paint program, and the creative possibilities are endless, but it's not very fun, or meaningful for the player."
When you take over somebody else's invention, then you should stick to the core vision for that product, and if you decide to deviate, then it's simply not the same product anymore, regardless of what name you use. TS4 has lost the core of Will Wright's vision, and without much to do for me in the game, it feels like an overhaul of TS at its core, that is supposed to appeal to a Kardashian generation. Dress up, and take a selfie. There is definitely nothing meaningful for me as a player.
Almost every interview I've ever read has him saying something similar. One of the ones I lke is
'Games Are Really All About Freedom'
"One of the fundamental things about game design," Will Wright is saying, "is that you're actually programming two processors. There's the processor in the computer in front of you and there's the processor in the player's head."
"People really love to explore 'failure states. In fact, the failure states are really much more interesting than the success states." ~ Will Wright
@mattandphilsims2 excellent video btw, thanks a lot for making it & sharing it with the community! You're absolutely right about their weird way of focusing on what their customers do / say / interpret wrong instead of on what they could actually do to fix the problems they're talking about. And yes, that "expiration date" comment really got to me as well. It was perhaps one of the most offensive sentences in there, because when my customers ask me to do something, and I don't comply for months, I don't end up turning it against them saying "look, I know this project was important to you and your concerns are valid, but hey, your whining's got an expiration date, so pay me for what I did cause I sure as plum ain't gonna do what you've asked me to do from the very beginning." .......... ?
Also I don't know who of you's been following the "Should The Sims 4 End Here" thread, but it recently got reopened after being closed, with this particularly interesting disclaimer:
I'm reopening this thread, but please keep the following in mind:
We're all here because we love The Sims, and all opinions are welcome; our only caveat is that posts must be respectfully expressed and on-topic with the thread. To make sure that a post is respectful and on-topic, go through this list of my golden rules:
If you are posting about a person in the thread, you should not click "Post comment"
If you are posting negative comments about any person or organization, you should not click "Post comment"
As much as we all love a good meme image, if that is the content of your post, you should not click "Post comment"
If your post doesn't meet this criteria, remember that not posting on a particular topic is always an option.
We will be monitoring this thread, and further disruption will probably result in it permanently being closed.
Are these people kidding us? What exactly do "negative comments about an organization" entail? Does this mean we shouldn't be critical anymore, as clearly they think a lot of us who're trying to be constructively critical (up to a point at least) are spreading negativity and being whiny customers? Afaik you're very well allowed to say something negative about EA on most other forums, but maybe I'm wrong... It says a lot about what kind of "freedom of expression" they'd prefer to see in our posts. lol
Calling people and/or the company who makes the game, or it's parent company lazy. as an example. Comments that they're only in it for the money, and so on.
You can be critical without being insulting, which is how these threads turn out (taking this one as an example). No, they don't. They're asking you to consider what will happen if the game doesn't become what you want, imo (My opinion only but people have taken it way too personally). You don't have 'freedom of expression' on a forum. It's limited to whatever that forums rules are.
To add: There's a difference between:
You plums aren't putting in what I want. Get off your lazy behinds and do it now. If you can't do it, I want to know why and I want to know why now. Don't tell me you can't say, that you'll be fired, arrested and sued. I don't want excuses. Just get it done!
and
I was thinking and I really think <feature> would be a good addition to this game because <reason>. Would you give consideration to this. Thanks
I know you weren't talking to me but I'm going to interject this. I've spent two years explaining what I think some of the shortcomings are and what could improve it for me. I've never called any one lazy...in fact to best of my ability I can't even remember saying any of the staff didn't care about what fans wanted. I'm not the only one who has done this and it's still all business as usual.
As far as EA. They are not being altruistic when they create games. They are in it for the income. They have stockholders to satisfy.
The thing that I'll say is in this case it doesn't feel like they are particularly concerned about how we, as consumers, feel. That's not a good feeling for someone who has given them money in the past and wishes the product was still good enough to keep buying from them.
Here's the thing, and part of the reason I don't get the outrage when they say that our complaints have an expiration date, which I get, they've never cared how we as consumers feel, not really. They've never gone out of their way to fix what we thought what was wrong. Ranging from 'vacation or staycation' in the first town we paid for (name escapes me) something Bay, that a whole bunch of people brought believing that it could be used as another WA world, to the hot air balloon that went up a minute amount in the air, to the store town with one nice looking lawn in winter, the cars that got stuck everywhere, the issues with Isla Paradiso and the city town (name escapes me again), which some couldn't play. And the list goes on.
Never have they once gone "Oh, yes, well, with TS3 we slipped up. We'll issue fixes. We'll do better with TS4". And now when it's confirmed that they'll only listen to the complaints for a limited time, we've got outrage, really? What? Where were you lot over the past 7 years?
The absence of toddlers and other 'missing items', along with a little bit of misunderstanding at launch isn't going to make them apologise or fix anything now either. You're mistaken if you believe it will happen if you shout loud enough.
As for me, I was their hostage, I had no choice. I played, things broke, I picked up the pieces and I continued because Sims 3 was a great game apart from bugs and other mechanical issues. This time it's the gameplay that's the problem.
Yes I agree, I was a fighter with TS3 because it is a great game and is worth all of the hard work!
From what I'm reading around here - I guess Maxis waited long enough in their silence for regulations to come into effect and make it so they don't Have to answer.
Iirc- they did say there would be No CASt and that neighborhoods would never be open. But, I could be remembering wrong in my disappointment.
I am waiting patiently while spending my husbands hard earned money on other gaming companies. Believe it or not, I'm looking into buying a Console! :leGasp!: It's been ages since I played a console game.
@SimmieSims I am not defending anybody (except today, it seems, myself). The only thing I have done recently that seems to annoy some people is to add some detail to the explanations that SimGurus, not me, gave about the regulations that prevent them, as a publicly traded company, from saying certain things - detail I looked up because it was a set of regulations I didn't know about, and I was interested in knowing more. It doesn't matter how much money a company has: it can't just wish away those regulations. I suppose that EA could take itself private - buy out all the stockholders - and no longer have to abide by those regulations. But then it wouldn't have that money to put into development. I've explained earlier some ways in which those regulations are in consumers' interest, not against us; I'm not going to repeat myself.
FWIW, I assume that they haven't said there will never be cars, toddlers, pets, seasons, or XYZ in the game because those things could come to the game. (The first four have also been included in surveys, and the game is only just approaching two years into what previously has been a five-year cycle.) And FWIW, we got pets two and two and half years into Sims 2 and 3, respectively; we got weather three and three and a half years in. Cars and toddlers would be similarly intensive design and development jobs, so I don't expect that if we are going to get all those things, it's going to happen all at once. Additions will likely to be spread over the life of the game, like always. I hope you get the ones you want instead of being told they're never coming.
I read the same post that Graham linked to and did you also note none of that goes fully into effect until 2018? Yes the GAP/NONGAP reporting does go into affect shortly - but the rules by what the Sims 4 is being made at present is using language not in affect until 2018 regardless. Only accounting right now has a concern - which by the way is not even covered in that writ but I was made aware of it on the Stock market and the August Conference Call for EA even before this discussion.
I noticed and I am a bit perplexed by that tbh. It seems Maxis have self-imposed this by choice rather early...?
My impression is that there's been a phasing in of the regulations. I didn't see in what I read what portions were older, what were not-till-2018. And I do have the impression that it's pretty common to not wait till the last minute to switch systems, and that once you have, you have. That's as much as I know about the situation, though. Most of what I've seen written up in the business press has been larger-scale issues around the process of getting to new standards in the first place.
That booklet is a whole new law not to go into affect until 2018. Just keep in mind even that is not set in stone as these things can be amended and changed many times before they go into effective law... in otherwise until that date comes, period. They could even be tossed out - especially in the light of a major change in government. You never know - so it is rather foolish to adhere to something that does not even exist as of yet. The rest of EA does not seem to follow any of this as of yet.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
From what I'm reading around here - I guess Maxis waited long enough in their silence for regulations to come into effect and make it so they don't Have to answer.
Iirc- they did say there would be No CASt and that neighborhoods would never be open. But, I could be remembering wrong in my disappointment.
I am waiting patiently while spending my husbands hard earned money on other gaming companies. Believe it or not, I'm looking into buying a Console! :leGasp!: It's been ages since I played a console game.
Oooh, add me if you get a PS4! I'll show you the ropes.
@SimmieSims I am not defending anybody (except today, it seems, myself). The only thing I have done recently that seems to annoy some people is to add some detail to the explanations that SimGurus, not me, gave about the regulations that prevent them, as a publicly traded company, from saying certain things - detail I looked up because it was a set of regulations I didn't know about, and I was interested in knowing more. It doesn't matter how much money a company has: it can't just wish away those regulations. I suppose that EA could take itself private - buy out all the stockholders - and no longer have to abide by those regulations. But then it wouldn't have that money to put into development. I've explained earlier some ways in which those regulations are in consumers' interest, not against us; I'm not going to repeat myself.
FWIW, I assume that they haven't said there will never be cars, toddlers, pets, seasons, or XYZ in the game because those things could come to the game. (The first four have also been included in surveys, and the game is only just approaching two years into what previously has been a five-year cycle.) And FWIW, we got pets two and two and half years into Sims 2 and 3, respectively; we got weather three and three and a half years in. Cars and toddlers would be similarly intensive design and development jobs, so I don't expect that if we are going to get all those things, it's going to happen all at once. Additions will likely to be spread over the life of the game, like always. I hope you get the ones you want instead of being told they're never coming.
I read the same post that Graham linked to and did you also note none of that goes fully into effect until 2018? Yes the GAP/NONGAP reporting does go into affect shortly - but the rules by what the Sims 4 is being made at present is using language not in affect until 2018 regardless. Only accounting right now has a concern - which by the way is not even covered in that writ but I was made aware of it on the Stock market and the August Conference Call for EA even before this discussion.
I noticed and I am a bit perplexed by that tbh. It seems Maxis have self-imposed this by choice rather early...?
My impression is that there's been a phasing in of the regulations. I didn't see in what I read what portions were older, what were not-till-2018. And I do have the impression that it's pretty common to not wait till the last minute to switch systems, and that once you have, you have. That's as much as I know about the situation, though. Most of what I've seen written up in the business press has been larger-scale issues around the process of getting to new standards in the first place.
That booklet is a whole new law not to go into affect until 2018. Just keep in mind even that is not set in stone as these things can be amended and changed many times before they go into effective law... in otherwise until that date comes, period. They could even be tossed out - especially in the light of a major change in government. You never know - so it is rather foolish to adhere to something that does not even exist as of yet. The rest of EA does not seem to follow any of this as of yet.
I might have misunderstood the phase-in bit. I doubt that any of this is getting tossed out, though - this is, IIRC, part of a set of standards that's involved complex international legislationnegotiation*. And yes, it exists. The deadline for implementation is a deadline, not a beginning. I would imagine few companies are waiting for the deadline and then hitting "go" on the new system. That can go wrong. (I've seen it happen in other kinds of regulation-change scenarios with a deadline for implementation.) I'd be concerned if I knew a company I invested in was waiting to the deadline to implement a major shift in regulatory standards that they'd had years to phase in.
I don't follow other parts of EA to know who's using this, looking at announcement times of basegame updates. (Most of what's in the regulations is going to be invisible to consumers, from what I looked at.) Which other of their products make major basegame changes that consumers would hear about in advance?
*wow. wrong word there entirely. coffee.
Post edited by luthienrising on
EA CREATOR NETWORK MEMBER — Want to be notified of patches, new Broken Mods threads, and urgent Sims 4 news? Follow me at https://www.patreon.com/luthienrising.
@SimmieSims I am not defending anybody (except today, it seems, myself). The only thing I have done recently that seems to annoy some people is to add some detail to the explanations that SimGurus, not me, gave about the regulations that prevent them, as a publicly traded company, from saying certain things - detail I looked up because it was a set of regulations I didn't know about, and I was interested in knowing more. It doesn't matter how much money a company has: it can't just wish away those regulations. I suppose that EA could take itself private - buy out all the stockholders - and no longer have to abide by those regulations. But then it wouldn't have that money to put into development. I've explained earlier some ways in which those regulations are in consumers' interest, not against us; I'm not going to repeat myself.
FWIW, I assume that they haven't said there will never be cars, toddlers, pets, seasons, or XYZ in the game because those things could come to the game. (The first four have also been included in surveys, and the game is only just approaching two years into what previously has been a five-year cycle.) And FWIW, we got pets two and two and half years into Sims 2 and 3, respectively; we got weather three and three and a half years in. Cars and toddlers would be similarly intensive design and development jobs, so I don't expect that if we are going to get all those things, it's going to happen all at once. Additions will likely to be spread over the life of the game, like always. I hope you get the ones you want instead of being told they're never coming.
I read the same post that Graham linked to and did you also note none of that goes fully into effect until 2018? Yes the GAP/NONGAP reporting does go into affect shortly - but the rules by what the Sims 4 is being made at present is using language not in affect until 2018 regardless. Only accounting right now has a concern - which by the way is not even covered in that writ but I was made aware of it on the Stock market and the August Conference Call for EA even before this discussion.
I noticed and I am a bit perplexed by that tbh. It seems Maxis have self-imposed this by choice rather early...?
I'm not going to hunt up the quote, but in the middle of all the stuff that offended everyone, Drake did say something about them being special in agreeance with somebody's statement of such.
Here, I will save you some time - it was in reply from SGDrake on her long post - the part to me - in this post I line - marked.
SimGuruDrake wrote: »
Phantomflex wrote: »
For me it boils down to the very fact that Maxis calls these people/sites "influencers". Are they supposed to be influencing Maxis or us?
If they are supposed to be influencing Maxis then what they say to Maxis should carry more "weight" so to speak. Are they not giving feedback on toddlers, additional color selections, supernaturals, cars, build tools, CAW, culling, etc.? Do these things not bother the influencers? This brings me to my next point. Once you decide that the opinions of a certain few carry more weight than other people you start to alienate people. It's no longer about what's best for the playerbase. It becomes about what's best for the influencers and that's not how you foster a sense of community.
If these influencers are indeed telling Maxis all of this, and/or their job is really to influence us, this whole "influencer" business then becomes condescending. As in we Sims players are not smart enough to make our own decisions about what to buy that they need community celebrities to convince us that this game is worth throwing our money into.
Either way, this whole thing comes across as being very divisive and hostile for the community.
@Phantomflex Influencers / Content Creators are normally people with very large social followings who do have an "influence" over those who follow them. The individuals who follow them trust their opinions on things like beauty products, clothing, books, art supplies, video games, etc. Companies work with these individuals because their one voice can reach hundreds of thousands of people who feel their views align with this individual.
Influencers are also used as "beta testers" to get hands on with products early (like some of what I listed above) as they have built trust with the companies that work with them to not break NDA's or Embargoes and to think about not only what they personally like or don't like about something but also remarking on areas where they could improve to attract even more people to the product by thinking of some of the big sticking points that those who follow them constantly talk about.
Working with individuals who have a large reach is part of any companies strategy and it is a major part of my job to foster relationships and trust with every one of those individuals that I work with and would like to work with. The fact is that there will always be people who get more access to things than someone else. It's not done out of spite or to be "divisive" it is simply another way to not only promote the product but to empower these individuals to be the liaisons for their community and to pass along their feedback to us. They are basically like me in a way, I am your representative in studio as I am the one that takes your feedback from here to those who need to hear it. I am also the one that would flag stuff if I feel something would rub you the wrong way or needs to be clarified more because it seems confusing.
Writin_Reg wrote: »
Been thinking about this all day - and you know what burns my psyche to the core is the fact it seems these "rules" just apply to Maxis and The Sims 4 - and not EA. I find it extremely odd that we cannot even have a single answer to anything regarding future content - but EA on the other hand can go massively live - world wide with their big games - like Battlefield 4, Titanfall 2, the New Star Wars - the coming FIFA - not only with info but trailers and on top of that literally days of play with thousands of players at both the E3 private conference & 3 day event and the Gamescom 2016.
I just checked on just Titanfall 2 is slated to be released October 28th, 2016 - it was first played and viewed June 12th- the 14th, 2016 and now again for another 3 days August 16-18th. What gives on the parent company and it's numerous other studios not having the same rules as Maxis then. Seems to me they are straddling numerous quarters with all EA's game but we can't know a thing about Sims 4.
I fail to get this and I read that whole post Graham linked to. It would be a different matter if EA who owns Maxis lived under the same rules - but seems Maxis is special and has a special set of rules all to themselves.
@Writin_Reg Every one of those games you mentioned would be considered new base games. People haven't been able to purchase any of them yet and you can promote them for as much as you want for as long as you want without having to risk rev rec issues. They are in no way similar to us. We also would be completely overshadowed if we made any kind of announcement of anything when competing for air time with the likes of Battlefield, Titanfall, FIFA, and [c]especially[/b] Star Wars. We are also the only franchise under EA that releases so many different types of content so yea, in a way, we are a special butterfly. Lastly, announcements for new paid content can be announced at any time in or outside the quarter it would be released, doesn't mean it will.
sparkfairy1 wrote: »
Thank you for your response.
Honestly when plenty of customers are telling you than they consider that EA have been far from transparent (yes since you've arrived it's got slightly better and well done on that) and then the response is that you reject those concerns completely and say that EA believe they have it makes it worse for the customer who feels that way. Nowhere is there a 'sorry you feel this way, can you explain why and I'll take it to those who have the power for future decisions or road maps to try to avoid these feelings in the future'. It's a flat out rejection. This is why people feel let down by Maxis and EA. It's the total rejection of concerns because your company believes otherwise. You know how customer experiences improve? By learning about what works, what doesn't work, how different methods of communication translate in reality to the customer base by listening, taking the time to be understanding and by having an open mind to listen to what the reality is for your customers.
See it's a similar vein to your statement the other day about being negative. You told someone if they were negative then they likely wouldn't have a positive experience. I'd say this situation and similar ones come across to customers as EA having a negative attitude toward any complaints or concerns raised so when things could be learnt and handled better in the future those lessons won't be learnt because the prevailing reaction to those being raised is a negative one. When I say negative I'm talking about the rejection of some customers experiences based on how your company felt it was doing and often myths about why these concerns are raised. Another example-the 'TS3 mindset' comment in the press, the inference in another interview that people don't know what a base is like after many of them have experienced up to 4 bases!
For me, as your customer, it's experiences of rejection of concerns and complaints which have absolutely contributed to my breakdown of trust in the company, the product and the team. I wouldn't have bought the base if I didn't trust you guys to make good on what you ran out of time with and I preordered so I paid a premium to support the studio despite the issues. I was more than willing to support you and wait. But I'm beyond disappointed at the reaction to valid concerns and it has been these instances that has actually caused more damage to the situation and my trust (which you had a lot of given i supported Maxis since before The Sims existed) than the shock of the poor experience with the game. In two years this situation has turned around decades of accumulated goodwill.
sparkfairy1 wrote: »
In terms of customer service and experience when 'themes' of issues with your product or how the translation of your methods occur in real life amongst the customer base are raised unless you listen with an open mind then you'll never learn how to make the experience better for your customers. Every one of them. Doing the opposite just shows a lack of care towards the customer being dismissed. Whether the company agrees or not is beside the point. They should be striving to deal with these issues to improve the situation for all their customers.
@sparkfairy1 I wanted to address the bolded sections in the first quote and this specific portion of the second.
1. How many times have I asked people to explain why they feel the way they do? That I would take my feedback to the team? I've even reached out to several individuals in these forums privately to have a more 1:1 conversation to figure out how we can mend that relationship. Too many people here stay in the past. Yes, your opinions and concerns are valid but in a way they do have an expiration date. If someone, like myself, is speaking directly to you almost every day all day to engage and mend relationships, comment on things that they are able, to hunt for the answers to the questions they can answer for you, and are an advocate for you to fight to make sure we are being as transparent as possible and people STILL try and say that we aren't being transparent or are hiding things or are trying to find double meaning in their words than they would clearly rather stay negative than even try to let their past issues go and look to the future.
It doesn't mean they no longer care about the issues they had in the past, it's that they themselves acknowledge that they are willing to accept the olive branch being given. If they swipe it away and "scream" and "yell" about things from the past they clearly want to stay there and we can never change their minds. I spent my first year as the Community Manager working to mend relationships with those who felt disenfranchised; those individuals took up a lot of my time (including time I should have been spending with my significant other) because I felt it was important to spend my first year trying to mend relationships and really learn about what those who feel upset / completely unsatisfied were coming from so we could work towards making "peace" and starting a new. Now that my position has gotten bigger and I have to think globally I can no longer just focus on those individuals anymore.
2. That particular individual wasn't giving feedback. They were, in a way, yelling into a room and were dismissing everything I've said before. It is one thing to be frustrated and to share that frustration in a constructive and controlled manner, it's another to yell "in someone's face" and not be willing to hear anything the other side has to say.
3. As for the final quote: It is absolutely impossible to make every single person who plays our game happy. Additionally, the same mention of "unless you listen with an open mind then you'll never learn how to make the experience better for your customers" can be said for the customers as well. If you aren't willing to listen to what we say with an open mind when we are providing you with straight answers and way more insight into things then we are even obligated to give you you will never learn to trust that we are being honest with you within the constraints that we can and you won't improve the relationship with the team you say you want to have hear you. There also comes a point where you are in a lose lose situation with those who are unhappy and you simply have to move on because nothing you say or do will please them--its never something you want to do but sometimes it's more worthwhile to engage with those who are willing to provide constructive feedback over ones who just want to yell.
andre1906 wrote: »
Island Paradise and Into the Future were announced without screens and videos. They teased us for months about basketball and other things when they were marketing the base game, SimGuruGrant had to say on Twitter "Things change". Planet Coaster, Cities Skylines and even Microsoft (Windows Insider) have a open relationship with their community, announcing and showing content in development.
Grant is right, things do change in game development all the time, and those communities you gave an example for are more willing to understand the intricacies of game development and don't go attacking the devs on a personal level because those things changed in development that those teams don't have control over. If the Sims community could also ingest that and accept that game development isn't a straight line from point A to point B and is rather a very curvy line that has lots of loop-de-loops then maybe we could have an open relationship. As it is now we get shot down multiple times when we talk about what goes into making The Sims, told we are just making excuses, that the team is lazy, that the team has no heart, that the team doesn't listen, and the list goes on and on.
SimTrippy wrote: »
While that may be true, we're already two years in. Maybe they should've started working on including all the basic stuff people are actually missing instead of one SP after another. I think a lot of people could've done with far less SPs if instead they'd gotten back the content they want... but that's just an opinion of course Maybe for TS5 they should think about the kind of game development Planet Coaster & Parkitect have chosen. I like co-creation & asking the people who'll eventually buy the game to chime in & help make it what they like - instead of telling them "here you have a fabulous engine that will make all your dreams possible" only to then never add the things people say they dream of.
See the problem with only focusing on the people who, as you say, will eventually buy the game is that you completely limit yourself from appealing to a wider audience. You HAVE to think bigger to remain in this industry, you HAVE to evolve, and you CANT just focus on the ones you "know will eventually buy the game". This is why so many games on Steam Green Light / Early Access never get out of Early Access because you have too many cooks in the kitchen.
And Lastly:
Before anyone tries to say I am "blaming the customer" at some point you will have to take a hard look at yourself and wonder if anything we do will ever truly make you happy when you can clearly see we are trying our hardest to try and mend relations with you. Still refusing to acknowledge it, want to call us liars, want to make things personal, and just ultimately want to not listen or learn from the things we are telling you--a perfect example is the unwillingness to even accept or acknowledge that we gave insight into HOW we go about making games and why we don't just tell you things to just tell you and are told that we are simply making excuses, why didn't we tell you this before, etc.
With all of that I am off for the rest of the day as I am going to be on a long flight back to EARS tomorrow. I bid all of you a good evening / morning and I hope that you have a wonderful weekend
You know what her answer says to me - they could tell us about the future content - they just don't want to. And that comes right from her reply.
Also that they are "special butterflies" and do what Maxis wants to do. EA is not pulling their strings in other words as I have always said.
Sorry I will not be posting on this topic anymore.
As far as I'm concerned, you can't sit there and be outraged now that they don't listen, if you haven't been outraged at their not listening (and they do to a degree) since the beginning of TS3. It's a contradiction in terms. Doesn't matter how awesome the game might be or not. The same solution should apply. You either stand there screaming about it, or you try and find a way of fixing it. If you can't fix it then you accept it, but you can't be outraged for something they've been doing for years.
Simple.
Erm ... really? That isn't a contradiction in terms, that's just a different way of responding to something that may've very well been going on for much longer than TS4, but is nonetheless something very, very real to people. And of course it matters how awesome the game is? Look, if a company doesn't listen to me but puts out a product decent enough for me to enjoy at least 80 to 90% of it, I'm not going to spend my time on forums complaining about bugs. That doesn't mean that when that same company, still not listening to me, puts out another product in that same series that is content-wise far less good but charged at a much higher price, I am not allowed to respond differently this time around. The "silence" isn't all we're responding to. There's nothing contradictory about that. It means that no matter what they weren't listening to the first time clearly bothered me (and many, many others) far less. You don't lose your right to have an opinion or to complain about certain company practices just because they haven't bothered you from the very first moment they started happening. That makes absolutely no sense, I'm sorry.
@SimmieSims I am not defending anybody (except today, it seems, myself). The only thing I have done recently that seems to annoy some people is to add some detail to the explanations that SimGurus, not me, gave about the regulations that prevent them, as a publicly traded company, from saying certain things - detail I looked up because it was a set of regulations I didn't know about, and I was interested in knowing more. It doesn't matter how much money a company has: it can't just wish away those regulations. I suppose that EA could take itself private - buy out all the stockholders - and no longer have to abide by those regulations. But then it wouldn't have that money to put into development. I've explained earlier some ways in which those regulations are in consumers' interest, not against us; I'm not going to repeat myself.
FWIW, I assume that they haven't said there will never be cars, toddlers, pets, seasons, or XYZ in the game because those things could come to the game. (The first four have also been included in surveys, and the game is only just approaching two years into what previously has been a five-year cycle.) And FWIW, we got pets two and two and half years into Sims 2 and 3, respectively; we got weather three and three and a half years in. Cars and toddlers would be similarly intensive design and development jobs, so I don't expect that if we are going to get all those things, it's going to happen all at once. Additions will likely to be spread over the life of the game, like always. I hope you get the ones you want instead of being told they're never coming.
I read the same post that Graham linked to and did you also note none of that goes fully into effect until 2018? Yes the GAP/NONGAP reporting does go into affect shortly - but the rules by what the Sims 4 is being made at present is using language not in affect until 2018 regardless. Only accounting right now has a concern - which by the way is not even covered in that writ but I was made aware of it on the Stock market and the August Conference Call for EA even before this discussion.
I noticed and I am a bit perplexed by that tbh. It seems Maxis have self-imposed this by choice rather early...?
My impression is that there's been a phasing in of the regulations. I didn't see in what I read what portions were older, what were not-till-2018. And I do have the impression that it's pretty common to not wait till the last minute to switch systems, and that once you have, you have. That's as much as I know about the situation, though. Most of what I've seen written up in the business press has been larger-scale issues around the process of getting to new standards in the first place.
That booklet is a whole new law not to go into affect until 2018. Just keep in mind even that is not set in stone as these things can be amended and changed many times before they go into effective law... in otherwise until that date comes, period. They could even be tossed out - especially in the light of a major change in government. You never know - so it is rather foolish to adhere to something that does not even exist as of yet. The rest of EA does not seem to follow any of this as of yet.
I might have misunderstood the phase-in bit. I doubt that any of this is getting tossed out, though - this is, IIRC, part of a set of standards that's involved complex international legislation. And yes, it exists. The deadline for implementation is a deadline, not a beginning. I would imagine few companies are waiting for the deadline and then hitting "go" on the new system. That can go wrong. (I've seen it happen in other kinds of regulation-change scenarios with a deadline for implementation.) I'd be concerned if I knew a company I invested in was waiting to the deadline to implement a major shift in regulatory standards that they'd had years to phase in.
I don't follow other parts of EA to know who's using this, looking at announcement times of basegame updates. (Most of what's in the regulations is going to be invisible to consumers, from what I looked at.) Which other of their products make major basegame changes that consumers would hear about in advance?
All their sports games for one thing - have new main game every year....
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
@SimmieSims I am not defending anybody (except today, it seems, myself). The only thing I have done recently that seems to annoy some people is to add some detail to the explanations that SimGurus, not me, gave about the regulations that prevent them, as a publicly traded company, from saying certain things - detail I looked up because it was a set of regulations I didn't know about, and I was interested in knowing more. It doesn't matter how much money a company has: it can't just wish away those regulations. I suppose that EA could take itself private - buy out all the stockholders - and no longer have to abide by those regulations. But then it wouldn't have that money to put into development. I've explained earlier some ways in which those regulations are in consumers' interest, not against us; I'm not going to repeat myself.
FWIW, I assume that they haven't said there will never be cars, toddlers, pets, seasons, or XYZ in the game because those things could come to the game. (The first four have also been included in surveys, and the game is only just approaching two years into what previously has been a five-year cycle.) And FWIW, we got pets two and two and half years into Sims 2 and 3, respectively; we got weather three and three and a half years in. Cars and toddlers would be similarly intensive design and development jobs, so I don't expect that if we are going to get all those things, it's going to happen all at once. Additions will likely to be spread over the life of the game, like always. I hope you get the ones you want instead of being told they're never coming.
I read the same post that Graham linked to and did you also note none of that goes fully into effect until 2018? Yes the GAP/NONGAP reporting does go into affect shortly - but the rules by what the Sims 4 is being made at present is using language not in affect until 2018 regardless. Only accounting right now has a concern - which by the way is not even covered in that writ but I was made aware of it on the Stock market and the August Conference Call for EA even before this discussion.
I noticed and I am a bit perplexed by that tbh. It seems Maxis have self-imposed this by choice rather early...?
My impression is that there's been a phasing in of the regulations. I didn't see in what I read what portions were older, what were not-till-2018. And I do have the impression that it's pretty common to not wait till the last minute to switch systems, and that once you have, you have. That's as much as I know about the situation, though. Most of what I've seen written up in the business press has been larger-scale issues around the process of getting to new standards in the first place.
That booklet is a whole new law not to go into affect until 2018. Just keep in mind even that is not set in stone as these things can be amended and changed many times before they go into effective law... in otherwise until that date comes, period. They could even be tossed out - especially in the light of a major change in government. You never know - so it is rather foolish to adhere to something that does not even exist as of yet. The rest of EA does not seem to follow any of this as of yet.
I might have misunderstood the phase-in bit. I doubt that any of this is getting tossed out, though - this is, IIRC, part of a set of standards that's involved complex international legislation. And yes, it exists. The deadline for implementation is a deadline, not a beginning. I would imagine few companies are waiting for the deadline and then hitting "go" on the new system. That can go wrong. (I've seen it happen in other kinds of regulation-change scenarios with a deadline for implementation.) I'd be concerned if I knew a company I invested in was waiting to the deadline to implement a major shift in regulatory standards that they'd had years to phase in.
I don't follow other parts of EA to know who's using this, looking at announcement times of basegame updates. (Most of what's in the regulations is going to be invisible to consumers, from what I looked at.) Which other of their products make major basegame changes that consumers would hear about in advance?
All their sports games for one thing - have new main game every year....
Those are new games, not updates.
(Typo. On so few words. Coffee.)
EA CREATOR NETWORK MEMBER — Want to be notified of patches, new Broken Mods threads, and urgent Sims 4 news? Follow me at https://www.patreon.com/luthienrising.
Comments
As a comparison: TS3 was released June 2009. WA followed November 2009, Ambitions was released in June 2010, Late Night October 2010, Generations In May 2011, and Pets in October of 2011.
Even without the Pets EP, there was more than enough to keep myself busy in the game. There is no way to compare the content that we had in TS3 up to that point with what we have gotten in TS4 so far.
Now, as someone who's not a developer, I would think that if you promise me "smarter Sims", and an "improved and solid game engine", that this would take The Sims franchise to an incredible new level of gaming, with superior performance and mind blowing game play. I'm still waiting for that.
And while I'm waiting, I'm still staring at the same 36 lots altogether, set in a cartoony looking world.
So far, I don't see EA delivering on the promises made in regards to their product. 2 years into TS4, regardless of what prevents EA from talking in their contracts, we need answers from those who are allowed to talk.
I was opposed to simport. I shut it down and left a message on my status that I did not simport. I did unlock all of the items though with something I found on MTS. I also knew how to unlock the badges, but since I didn't care about them, I let that go.
I also turned off the store. I found it absolutely ridiculous that they were trying to sell me stuff I already owned.
I used the mailbox cheat on the zombies.
I'm not going to hunt up the quote, but in the middle of all the stuff that offended everyone, Drake did say something about them being special in agreeance with somebody's statement of such.
K, thanks. I guess I'll go back and reread!
“Instead of putting players in the role of Luke Skywalker, or Frodo Baggins, I'd rather put them in the role of George Lucas.”Will Wright.
Wish I saw myself how the forum reacted to the announce of OR.
Simple question, but I really need food and TV for a bit. What if they never do? What are your options. You can't make them talk, no matter how much you nag them to do so, so then what?
then they lose players, fanbase and future trust. Most people upset in this topic are on the verge of never even considering purchasing another sims 4 product and would probably be very much more skeptical of The sims 5.
My impression is that there's been a phasing in of the regulations. I didn't see in what I read what portions were older, what were not-till-2018. And I do have the impression that it's pretty common to not wait till the last minute to switch systems, and that once you have, you have. That's as much as I know about the situation, though. Most of what I've seen written up in the business press has been larger-scale issues around the process of getting to new standards in the first place.
@SimGuruDrake Yo! Just thought I'd pop in to kind of respond especially in regards to toddlers and content requested by players,
The Sims over the years have become more and more interactive with players, taking into consideration what they would like to see in the game via forums and other social media which is a great thing. It's really nice to be able to voice what we like and dislike about the game that we have been fans of for years. However, I feel like there is a slight disconnect between developers and the players especially when it comes to toddlers. What the players are wanting at this point, after 2 years is at-least a reason as to why toddlers can't be implemented.
It could be that the work schedules for the teams in the office have already been planned for working on 'X' expansion packs/stuff packs, and squeezing in time for toddlers could slow the work pace down meaning less content to put out? It could be that creating code for the toddlers could potentially mean a complete re-write of the whole game which would take huge amounts of time, bug fixing and team effort? It could be creating the 3D models, a-long with the code, rigging and making idle, object and sim interaction animations would also take massive amounts of team time and effort that can't be squeezed in at this time? It could be that the game engine would cause problems and struggle with adding toddlers at this stage of the game?
Just something like this would quench the thirst of a-lot of players' worries and actually give us an insight on what is and isn't possible within the game, which could possibly make our requests a little more realistic for the developers. I know that you don't work in development which is why you can't tell us these things, and it's nice that you're meeting with the right people to discuss and provide clearer answers. Maybe it would be good for each department to have their own communicator guru so then more questions would be able to be answered? Not only that but it could take the weight off of your shoulders.
I understand maybe the team don't want to be too transparent with players in fear that they will dislike what they have to say and will no longer buy The Sims, I know the image of the game is important for business which is completely understandable. Although transparency between yourselves and the players, especially The Sims fans who are some of the most dedicated people in gaming can be beneficial and actually keep the trust of those who feel they are left in the dark.
Sorry this has turned pretty long haha
"I'm a games designer, I don't want to be a storyteller. I want to be a story-enabler. I think that the stories that the players create or tell are so much more interesting. I like the idea of games as a form of creative expression from the player's point of view. So the player feels very excited in investing themselves into creativity."
"We want a large space for possibilities, but it has to be dramatically interesting. You know, I could give you a paint program, and the creative possibilities are endless, but it's not very fun, or meaningful for the player."
When you take over somebody else's invention, then you should stick to the core vision for that product, and if you decide to deviate, then it's simply not the same product anymore, regardless of what name you use. TS4 has lost the core of Will Wright's vision, and without much to do for me in the game, it feels like an overhaul of TS at its core, that is supposed to appeal to a Kardashian generation. Dress up, and take a selfie. There is definitely nothing meaningful for me as a player.
Here, I will save you some time - it was in reply from SGDrake on her long post - the part to me - in this post I line - marked.
SimGuruDrake wrote: »
Phantomflex wrote: »
For me it boils down to the very fact that Maxis calls these people/sites "influencers". Are they supposed to be influencing Maxis or us?
If they are supposed to be influencing Maxis then what they say to Maxis should carry more "weight" so to speak. Are they not giving feedback on toddlers, additional color selections, supernaturals, cars, build tools, CAW, culling, etc.? Do these things not bother the influencers? This brings me to my next point. Once you decide that the opinions of a certain few carry more weight than other people you start to alienate people. It's no longer about what's best for the playerbase. It becomes about what's best for the influencers and that's not how you foster a sense of community.
If these influencers are indeed telling Maxis all of this, and/or their job is really to influence us, this whole "influencer" business then becomes condescending. As in we Sims players are not smart enough to make our own decisions about what to buy that they need community celebrities to convince us that this game is worth throwing our money into.
Either way, this whole thing comes across as being very divisive and hostile for the community.
@Phantomflex Influencers / Content Creators are normally people with very large social followings who do have an "influence" over those who follow them. The individuals who follow them trust their opinions on things like beauty products, clothing, books, art supplies, video games, etc. Companies work with these individuals because their one voice can reach hundreds of thousands of people who feel their views align with this individual.
Influencers are also used as "beta testers" to get hands on with products early (like some of what I listed above) as they have built trust with the companies that work with them to not break NDA's or Embargoes and to think about not only what they personally like or don't like about something but also remarking on areas where they could improve to attract even more people to the product by thinking of some of the big sticking points that those who follow them constantly talk about.
Working with individuals who have a large reach is part of any companies strategy and it is a major part of my job to foster relationships and trust with every one of those individuals that I work with and would like to work with. The fact is that there will always be people who get more access to things than someone else. It's not done out of spite or to be "divisive" it is simply another way to not only promote the product but to empower these individuals to be the liaisons for their community and to pass along their feedback to us. They are basically like me in a way, I am your representative in studio as I am the one that takes your feedback from here to those who need to hear it. I am also the one that would flag stuff if I feel something would rub you the wrong way or needs to be clarified more because it seems confusing.
Writin_Reg wrote: »
Been thinking about this all day - and you know what burns my psyche to the core is the fact it seems these "rules" just apply to Maxis and The Sims 4 - and not EA. I find it extremely odd that we cannot even have a single answer to anything regarding future content - but EA on the other hand can go massively live - world wide with their big games - like Battlefield 4, Titanfall 2, the New Star Wars - the coming FIFA - not only with info but trailers and on top of that literally days of play with thousands of players at both the E3 private conference & 3 day event and the Gamescom 2016.
I just checked on just Titanfall 2 is slated to be released October 28th, 2016 - it was first played and viewed June 12th- the 14th, 2016 and now again for another 3 days August 16-18th. What gives on the parent company and it's numerous other studios not having the same rules as Maxis then. Seems to me they are straddling numerous quarters with all EA's game but we can't know a thing about Sims 4.
I fail to get this and I read that whole post Graham linked to. It would be a different matter if EA who owns Maxis lived under the same rules - but seems Maxis is special and has a special set of rules all to themselves.
@Writin_Reg Every one of those games you mentioned would be considered new base games. People haven't been able to purchase any of them yet and you can promote them for as much as you want for as long as you want without having to risk rev rec issues. They are in no way similar to us. We also would be completely overshadowed if we made any kind of announcement of anything when competing for air time with the likes of Battlefield, Titanfall, FIFA, and [c]especially[/b] Star Wars. We are also the only franchise under EA that releases so many different types of content so yea, in a way, we are a special butterfly. Lastly, announcements for new paid content can be announced at any time in or outside the quarter it would be released, doesn't mean it will.
sparkfairy1 wrote: »
Thank you for your response.
Honestly when plenty of customers are telling you than they consider that EA have been far from transparent (yes since you've arrived it's got slightly better and well done on that) and then the response is that you reject those concerns completely and say that EA believe they have it makes it worse for the customer who feels that way. Nowhere is there a 'sorry you feel this way, can you explain why and I'll take it to those who have the power for future decisions or road maps to try to avoid these feelings in the future'. It's a flat out rejection. This is why people feel let down by Maxis and EA. It's the total rejection of concerns because your company believes otherwise. You know how customer experiences improve? By learning about what works, what doesn't work, how different methods of communication translate in reality to the customer base by listening, taking the time to be understanding and by having an open mind to listen to what the reality is for your customers.
See it's a similar vein to your statement the other day about being negative. You told someone if they were negative then they likely wouldn't have a positive experience. I'd say this situation and similar ones come across to customers as EA having a negative attitude toward any complaints or concerns raised so when things could be learnt and handled better in the future those lessons won't be learnt because the prevailing reaction to those being raised is a negative one. When I say negative I'm talking about the rejection of some customers experiences based on how your company felt it was doing and often myths about why these concerns are raised. Another example-the 'TS3 mindset' comment in the press, the inference in another interview that people don't know what a base is like after many of them have experienced up to 4 bases!
For me, as your customer, it's experiences of rejection of concerns and complaints which have absolutely contributed to my breakdown of trust in the company, the product and the team. I wouldn't have bought the base if I didn't trust you guys to make good on what you ran out of time with and I preordered so I paid a premium to support the studio despite the issues. I was more than willing to support you and wait. But I'm beyond disappointed at the reaction to valid concerns and it has been these instances that has actually caused more damage to the situation and my trust (which you had a lot of given i supported Maxis since before The Sims existed) than the shock of the poor experience with the game. In two years this situation has turned around decades of accumulated goodwill.
sparkfairy1 wrote: »
In terms of customer service and experience when 'themes' of issues with your product or how the translation of your methods occur in real life amongst the customer base are raised unless you listen with an open mind then you'll never learn how to make the experience better for your customers. Every one of them. Doing the opposite just shows a lack of care towards the customer being dismissed. Whether the company agrees or not is beside the point. They should be striving to deal with these issues to improve the situation for all their customers.
@sparkfairy1 I wanted to address the bolded sections in the first quote and this specific portion of the second.
1. How many times have I asked people to explain why they feel the way they do? That I would take my feedback to the team? I've even reached out to several individuals in these forums privately to have a more 1:1 conversation to figure out how we can mend that relationship. Too many people here stay in the past. Yes, your opinions and concerns are valid but in a way they do have an expiration date. If someone, like myself, is speaking directly to you almost every day all day to engage and mend relationships, comment on things that they are able, to hunt for the answers to the questions they can answer for you, and are an advocate for you to fight to make sure we are being as transparent as possible and people STILL try and say that we aren't being transparent or are hiding things or are trying to find double meaning in their words than they would clearly rather stay negative than even try to let their past issues go and look to the future.
It doesn't mean they no longer care about the issues they had in the past, it's that they themselves acknowledge that they are willing to accept the olive branch being given. If they swipe it away and "scream" and "yell" about things from the past they clearly want to stay there and we can never change their minds. I spent my first year as the Community Manager working to mend relationships with those who felt disenfranchised; those individuals took up a lot of my time (including time I should have been spending with my significant other) because I felt it was important to spend my first year trying to mend relationships and really learn about what those who feel upset / completely unsatisfied were coming from so we could work towards making "peace" and starting a new. Now that my position has gotten bigger and I have to think globally I can no longer just focus on those individuals anymore.
2. That particular individual wasn't giving feedback. They were, in a way, yelling into a room and were dismissing everything I've said before. It is one thing to be frustrated and to share that frustration in a constructive and controlled manner, it's another to yell "in someone's face" and not be willing to hear anything the other side has to say.
3. As for the final quote: It is absolutely impossible to make every single person who plays our game happy. Additionally, the same mention of "unless you listen with an open mind then you'll never learn how to make the experience better for your customers" can be said for the customers as well. If you aren't willing to listen to what we say with an open mind when we are providing you with straight answers and way more insight into things then we are even obligated to give you you will never learn to trust that we are being honest with you within the constraints that we can and you won't improve the relationship with the team you say you want to have hear you. There also comes a point where you are in a lose lose situation with those who are unhappy and you simply have to move on because nothing you say or do will please them--its never something you want to do but sometimes it's more worthwhile to engage with those who are willing to provide constructive feedback over ones who just want to yell.
andre1906 wrote: »
Island Paradise and Into the Future were announced without screens and videos. They teased us for months about basketball and other things when they were marketing the base game, SimGuruGrant had to say on Twitter "Things change". Planet Coaster, Cities Skylines and even Microsoft (Windows Insider) have a open relationship with their community, announcing and showing content in development.
Grant is right, things do change in game development all the time, and those communities you gave an example for are more willing to understand the intricacies of game development and don't go attacking the devs on a personal level because those things changed in development that those teams don't have control over. If the Sims community could also ingest that and accept that game development isn't a straight line from point A to point B and is rather a very curvy line that has lots of loop-de-loops then maybe we could have an open relationship. As it is now we get shot down multiple times when we talk about what goes into making The Sims, told we are just making excuses, that the team is lazy, that the team has no heart, that the team doesn't listen, and the list goes on and on.
SimTrippy wrote: »
While that may be true, we're already two years in. Maybe they should've started working on including all the basic stuff people are actually missing instead of one SP after another. I think a lot of people could've done with far less SPs if instead they'd gotten back the content they want... but that's just an opinion of course
See the problem with only focusing on the people who, as you say, will eventually buy the game is that you completely limit yourself from appealing to a wider audience. You HAVE to think bigger to remain in this industry, you HAVE to evolve, and you CANT just focus on the ones you "know will eventually buy the game". This is why so many games on Steam Green Light / Early Access never get out of Early Access because you have too many cooks in the kitchen.
And Lastly:
Before anyone tries to say I am "blaming the customer" at some point you will have to take a hard look at yourself and wonder if anything we do will ever truly make you happy when you can clearly see we are trying our hardest to try and mend relations with you. Still refusing to acknowledge it, want to call us liars, want to make things personal, and just ultimately want to not listen or learn from the things we are telling you--a perfect example is the unwillingness to even accept or acknowledge that we gave insight into HOW we go about making games and why we don't just tell you things to just tell you and are told that we are simply making excuses, why didn't we tell you this before, etc.
With all of that I am off for the rest of the day as I am going to be on a long flight back to EARS tomorrow. I bid all of you a good evening / morning and I hope that you have a wonderful weekend
You know what her answer says to me - they could tell us about the future content - they just don't want to. And that comes right from her reply.
Also that they are "special butterflies" and do what Maxis wants to do. EA is not pulling their strings in other words as I have always said.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
LOL I can for the life of me figure out how you can play the Sims wrong.
I don't watch lets play as to me it is not any fun watching someone else play, I want to do the playing.
there is no wrong or right way to play, it is all up to the simmer themselves as to how they like to play.
Have fun your own way, that's the name of the game.
Almost every interview I've ever read has him saying something similar. One of the ones I lke is
'Games Are Really All About Freedom'
"One of the fundamental things about game design," Will Wright is saying, "is that you're actually programming two processors. There's the processor in the computer in front of you and there's the processor in the player's head."
Yes I agree, I was a fighter with TS3 because it is a great game and is worth all of the hard work!
Iirc- they did say there would be No CASt and that neighborhoods would never be open. But, I could be remembering wrong in my disappointment.
I am waiting patiently while spending my husbands hard earned money on other gaming companies. Believe it or not, I'm looking into buying a Console! :leGasp!: It's been ages since I played a console game.
That booklet is a whole new law not to go into affect until 2018. Just keep in mind even that is not set in stone as these things can be amended and changed many times before they go into effective law... in otherwise until that date comes, period. They could even be tossed out - especially in the light of a major change in government. You never know - so it is rather foolish to adhere to something that does not even exist as of yet. The rest of EA does not seem to follow any of this as of yet.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Oooh, add me if you get a PS4! I'll show you the ropes.
--T
(Sorry, off topic, I know)
I might have misunderstood the phase-in bit. I doubt that any of this is getting tossed out, though - this is, IIRC, part of a set of standards that's involved complex international legislationnegotiation*. And yes, it exists. The deadline for implementation is a deadline, not a beginning. I would imagine few companies are waiting for the deadline and then hitting "go" on the new system. That can go wrong. (I've seen it happen in other kinds of regulation-change scenarios with a deadline for implementation.) I'd be concerned if I knew a company I invested in was waiting to the deadline to implement a major shift in regulatory standards that they'd had years to phase in.
I don't follow other parts of EA to know who's using this, looking at announcement times of basegame updates. (Most of what's in the regulations is going to be invisible to consumers, from what I looked at.) Which other of their products make major basegame changes that consumers would hear about in advance?
*wow. wrong word there entirely. coffee.
Sorry I will not be posting on this topic anymore.
Erm ... really? That isn't a contradiction in terms, that's just a different way of responding to something that may've very well been going on for much longer than TS4, but is nonetheless something very, very real to people. And of course it matters how awesome the game is? Look, if a company doesn't listen to me but puts out a product decent enough for me to enjoy at least 80 to 90% of it, I'm not going to spend my time on forums complaining about bugs. That doesn't mean that when that same company, still not listening to me, puts out another product in that same series that is content-wise far less good but charged at a much higher price, I am not allowed to respond differently this time around. The "silence" isn't all we're responding to. There's nothing contradictory about that. It means that no matter what they weren't listening to the first time clearly bothered me (and many, many others) far less. You don't lose your right to have an opinion or to complain about certain company practices just because they haven't bothered you from the very first moment they started happening. That makes absolutely no sense, I'm sorry.
All their sports games for one thing - have new main game every year....
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Those are new games, not updates.
(Typo. On so few words. Coffee.)