SIMS4 Managing Betrayal - making games sequels

Be that as it may, but a Sims game - to me - is about controlling one's Sims. In TS2 I have a lot of that, in that I can pick and choose at any time which Sim's life to change for the better or for the worse. In the unmodded TS3, I would've had only one Sim to control, which is NOT ENOUGH for me. And after every so many hours of play, I'd be forced to move my family to a new world, because the old world got too messy as a result of too many 'townies' being active, screwing rubbish up. So that's a good reason for me not to buy it.

In TS4, it's mostly about EA getting lazy, selling us less. Like no Toddlers and like Teens that are the same size and posture as adults. They just can't be bothered to make the animations for different body sizes is all. And now they want us to reward them for their laziness. Maybe, if one didn't have the experience of previous installments, TS4 would be a great game. But I *do* have previous game experience. And I'm not buying a parody to a game that I loved, just because of its name. Sure, people will buy it. It'll be a smashing hit, making EA even more inappropriately rich. And the number of Expansions will be astronomical, even greater than all the expansions of TS1, TS2, and TS3 combined (they have to, because the basegame contains so very little). But the more I hear about the (lack of) features, the less I think that the buyers will be long-time sims fans. It'll be mostly non-simmers thinking they're buying a nice present for a simming loved one, and kids who don't need to pay for their fads themselves.

I understand that people will complain, regardless of what the game looks like. Sure, it can't be the same, nor SHOULD it be. But it's good that I know about these things before the game releases, because it means that whatever happens, I will not be buying it. Because I'm happier with what I already have than I predict I would be with what I do not have yet.

I do acknowledge that there are always going to be some changes that are less palatable than others, and different ones for different people. And nobody's pointing out that there's a lot more different animations for Sims 4 sims, which I think is an important reason for having only two heights in the game. But if they had asked me, or a large number of other sims players, I think they'd have skimped on the new animations to keep the life stages and heights.

(While I'm writing this, I'm having an argument with my much younger roommate who thinks that this is a minor, cosmetic change, and can't understand why it's a major change that a person could have a strong opinion about).

It's not an automatic deal breaker for me but it makes me more skeptical.

But oh my dear I am intrigued by the build options. But oh my dear I am put off by the lack of terraforming (I don't like it in Sims City 2013 either).

While I agree that people will always find something to complain about, much of the complaints about Sims 4 isn't like that. There is a line that should not be crossed. Morrowind doesn't have horses and people were upset, but it wasn't a horse riding game. Would you buy a horse riding game without a horse and be okay with the horses coming in an expansion pack later on? This is what EA are trying to sell by producing a base game without a vital life stage.

That's a good point, @joandsarah!

Also, @ritaxis, building isn't the main goal of the game. Playing out the lives of our simmies is. Building is only a means to an end. As such, no amount of build options can persuade me to change my mind about buying this game.

(09-07-2014 10:18 AM)BoilingOil Wrote:  In TS4, it's mostly about EA getting lazy, selling us less. Like no Toddlers and like Teens that are the same size and posture as adults. They just can't be bothered to make the animations for different body sizes is all. And now they want us to reward them for their laziness.

I see this claim a lot. I haven't seen any information that suggests that the total amount of work/resources that went into TS4 is LESS than TS3 or any other sims game.

You can't assess that by just looking at the things that AREN'T in it. You have to assess it by looking at the things that ARE in it. And we actually aren't in a position to assess that as yet. However, Grant did address this point in the long post where he talked about tradeoffs that developers make. A rather obvious point: you can't put in EVERYTHING, so you have to choose between A and B.

I am certain that the amount of work that went into the emotions system and all the associated gameplay on the one hand, and art (mainly animations) on the other, was truly enormous. Same for the new multitasking and routing systems. Similarly to a lesser degree for the new CAS and build systems. The traits/aspirations system (which actually is the piece that matters most to me) is larger and deeper, and there are suggestions that the same is true for careers. And there's a lot more programming in the AI for the non-controlled sims as well; they're doing a lot more in the background than TS3 sims did (who were basically completely inert when off camera). And all the gameplay systems we know virtually nothing about, like whatever they've done with gathering. Based on everything I know about game development, I feel fairly confident that the amount of time that went into TS4 is at least as much and maybe more than what went into TS3.

It's also confirmed now that there'll be multiple worlds at release (unlike TS3), and more content in terms of clothing and objects than ANY previous Sims game (TS3 was incredibly sparse at release so I believe it). We've seen a ton of new objects that haven't been in the game before, like the playground equipment and the rocket ship.

So yeah, I don't buy the "laziness" argument: there's just no way you can support it with evidence. That doesn't make it false, but to be convincing you have to at least consider the other side of the equation (all the new stuff that's in), and propose a formula to weigh it against whatever isn't in so a comparison can be made

Even if that could be done (it can't be done by us, we'll never have all the relevant data), and it were found that, say, fewer person-hours were spent on TS4 than TS3... characterizing the difference as "laziness" is, IMO, lazy It sounds like you think the devs are taking long coffee breaks. On the contrary, EA is notorious for exploiting workers; I have heard that programmers who work for EA have to log their time by 6 minute intervals daily. Here I would go to bat for the developers and suggest that every one of them is working at least as hard as the devs on the other games have, and if there are fewer person-hours, that is about cheapness -- the amount of time the company is willing to pay for -- or profit margin -- what ratio they are aiming for between income and expenditures, aka greed -- and has no relation whatsoever to laziness.

However, what I THINK you are expressing, and what many others have expressed, is that they think bad choices were made: they would have prioritized potential features differently. That's a completely different question, and here it comes back to what people like and what they don't like, which is different for every player. However... I still think it is premature to evaluate, before we know all of what IS in the game as well as what isn't. And that really won't happen, realistically, till release. So yeah... not trying to convince anybody to buy the game; the rational course is to wait till release or a few weeks after, when all the information really WILL be out there, and then decide.

It may sound like I am going to bat for TS4. I'm not; I'm withholding judgment. (I'll buy it anyway, btw Haven't preordered it, but probably will a week or so before release. That's because I'm curious, and have enough money to spend the cash to satisfy my curiosity. The question is whether I will stick with it.) But I'm just looking for more logic and rationality in the discussion >< And the "laziness" argument really does not fly.

@Srikandi - to answer your question about marketing. I do think it is fair to judge a product based on bad marketing because bad marketing demonstrates poor judgement--like the series of missteps throughout the development of this game.

I also reckon that trying to compare the TS4 marketing campaign to a poorly composed Coca-cola jingle is impossible. Keep in mind tens of thousands of units were sold in late August with the promise of a Spring release and more information about the game forthcoming... and not only was the delivery date for these $60/70 purchases delayed (without a date at that time), but there was a gag order on all information, publicised lay-offs, and disgruntled (fired?) employees stating that TS4 development was FUBAR'd and then being disappeared on the net along with their posts. One might not like the Cola jingle, but you know and trust the product. You said yourself that TS4 is a new game, so while we know the franchise, we do not know the product. And we are happy with whichever flavour of the Sims we already have so there is no need to take an almost $60/70 risk without incentive.

I think the days of "SIMS...!! Must.Buy.Now" are over for EA. They can't just rely on the brand name, but then again...with the anticipated 5 million dollar roll out of units day one, what do I know?!

Srikandi -

to be fair, there are two types of laziness - laziness in effort, and laziness in planning. EA are definitely guilty of the second. They spent most of the time when running with developing sims as an online game until oct 2013, then had to chuck it all out. Basically they skipped a huge section of the SDLC where you actually do a cost/benefit analysis of the resources required. It IS laziness of thought to skip the planning stage and run with just the one choice. And it costs more money doing that.

Then once they realised that it wasn't going to work (which anyone who actually played the game could have told them) - they have compressed the rest of the SDLC into a much shorter time - Basically 9 months, when every other time, they developed the next version in parallel with the current game for over 2 years to make sure it was working. Again they are skipping steps, to throw out a product much earlier than it will actually be ready for.

TS4 is a new game, you're right about that - but EA has abused the trust and loyalty that Maxis built up with Sims1 and 0.5 Sims2, with the way they treat their customers. And the company that are marketing/making the game is not new and has a bad reputation.

I am reserving my judgement about TS4 because I haven't seen it. But at $80AUD I'm not buying it to try it either. I don't trust EA enough to give them money on a game that I may not enjoy.
But you buying TS4 just to try it - means that EA gets their money regardless of whether you play the game continuously for 49 hours or 49 minutes then chuck it.

I've seen way more unrest this time than swapping from S1->S2, and S2->S3. This is not just about managing betrayal - this is also about treating their customers with contempt and poor and lazy management of customer expectation. And for marketing guys to stuff up that much, means that the product behind it is also stuffed up that much. Because the product is never as good as the marketers say. (That's just a natural law).

(10-07-2014 01:28 AM)BoilingOil Wrote:  ...Also, @ritaxis, building isn't the main goal of the game. Playing out the lives of our simmies is. Building is only a means to an end. As such, no amount of build options can persuade me to change my mind about buying this game.

Ah, but BO? While building isn't the main goal of the game, there ARE those who's main thing is playing the game and those whose main thing is building and decorating. I'm mainly a builder. I can spend days building and (half-assed, because I do get bored with it) decorating. When I do play, it's never more than an hour or so.

The building part of TS4 intrigues me. I'd love to try it out. But I won't buy it just try it out, mainly because I can't afford to do that. But also because: TS2 has everything I could ever want or need when it comes to building. (And if something doesn't exist, I can most likely easily make it.) It may not always be pretty (those hood trees *shudders*) but I can make it prettier. I can build a house in a hill, I can build a house over water.. I can do pretty much whatever I want to. And if I can't? There's probably a mod, or something I can change, that will let me. TS1 was fun, but too restrictive for me. TS3 is just ugly- ugly enough that the game is installed but never played- and the game just sits there in it's box on the bookshelf. *TS4 WILL be given a chance at some point.. but TS2 is my baby.

*The lack of toddlers right now doesn't really bother me since I don't really play (and when I do, there aren't many children in my game) and pools? Meh, don't care for the pools anyway.

@nanashi @celebkiriedhel : You guys really grasped what I meant to say. Thank you.

Anyway, @Srikandi: If you asked an employee to make coffee for a thousand, and several hours later you come back to find no coffee, because they made sandwiches for 2000 instead, do you really applaud them for their hard work? NO, you fire them! Because those sandwiches might be the best in the world, but your cast of a thousand is not going to be caffeinated! Your employee did as much good as someone who had been sitting on their hands all that time. Or, in other words: as a LAZY person.

Teens can perform certain interactions with other teens that they can NOT do with adults - and vice versa, ofcourse. And rightfully so! But if you have no clue from their body-shape/size, which new sims you meet are teens or adults... see where this is going? And with identical bodies, they are not likely to have distinctly different wardrobes either, don't you think? No, it's going to be a frustrating game.

And no toddlers... I'm not overly fond of toddlers, but a life simulation without them is not worth the title.

And if we can't call it lazy, then I call it GREEDY: the more features you remove from the base game, the more new expansions you can plan, to make your customers pay through their noses AFTER they were tricked into buying your woefully incomplete and unsatisfying base package. No other software company has ever taken greed to this level.

@mustluvcatz: Ok granted. But is that the target of the Sims franchise? Builders? No, builders are a part of it, but they build their houses to be PLAYED. If not by themselves, then at least by others. No?

In the article I linked to the key line was this: "You actually have to betray them enough to give them something new and surprising but not so much that they disconnect..."

So in Sims3, what was the "betrayal" and the"disconnect"? The gorgeous stunning hood and the fabulous CASt (and it IS - it cannot be denied) was definitely "new and surprising" - but it turned my sims into lifeless blobs in empty community lots - and then I disconnected.

In Sims4 - I think that the multitasking and the animations are gonna be the "new and surprising" - the problem is that it seems a VERY large list of features have been omitted to deliver this. This is leading to the "disconnect" - simmers are looking at this game and seeing what has been taken away. And it does seem a lot when you see them listed.

I hope that the "solid foundation" means that future EPs will build upon the Sims4 basegame, and rather than each EP/piece of premium content almost acting as a separate system that it all links together. We get a business addon? Then I want to be able to sell the things my sim makes. We get a "Sports" addon? Then I want to see those sports reflected in the public spaces we are told we cant edit. This means that I probably wont get TS4 on release; I will wait for the first EP.