Since The Sims 4 base game has less content and is less immersive than The Sims 3 base game I'll just be sticking with The Sims 3. If EA wanted to stop making these games all they had to do is tell us
EA: "If The Sims 4 Isn't Successful, There Won't be a Sims 5"
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
To be fair, if it's your ball then you should be able to call the shots with it. When I buy a car, I don't expect family and friends to be driving it whenever they feel like it. When I buy something, it's for MY enjoyment first and foremost. People using this stupid analogy since Cliffy B said it. And all Cliffy B has done is betray his original fanbase ie the Unreal community to appease console gamers ie Gears of War.RicoADF said:
Technically that's true but the saying is that when someone does a hissy fit they 'take the ball and go home', this is a publisher's equivalent. I've used and heard that saying since I was a kid, it's not a new saying. I also don't like 'Cliffy B' and think his recent games are boring since he sold out and turned on his customers.Artaneius said:
Captcha - "I love you" - Ok take it slowly captcha, we just met......
I'm not entirely sure what the outrage here is. Isn't this true of like every franchise ever to exist. If the previous one isn't successful then there isn't a new one, that's sort of how it goes doesn't it?
Am I missing something here? I mean that, if I'm missing something let me know. It just seems like it's a rather obvious statement to make and the anger over it seems a bit misplaced.
Am I missing something here? I mean that, if I'm missing something let me know. It just seems like it's a rather obvious statement to make and the anger over it seems a bit misplaced.
The anger is there for two reasons. First, because each of the previous Sims games have been successful, so people think that cancelling a previously profitable series because of one unsuccessful game is short-sighted. The other reason is because EA is saying this, so it must be bad.DeimosMasque said:
No, no, no! When they mean successful, they mean highest grossing game of all time. The only way for big name companies to stay afloat these days is to triple sales every new release! Market projections say that they should sell 30x more copies of the game then there are PC owners. And if they dont reach that projected sales figure, its a commercial failure that will crash the economy!ticklefist said:
But in all seriousness, this is just EA and Maxis blowing smoke out their bum. Until the official sales numbers come in, they can claim whatever they want, and we cannot argue with them about it. This could be the best selling Sims to date, and we wouldnt know. But they dug their own grave by removing content, and releasing a game that is a general downgrade from the Sims 3. And now they think they can threaten us by saying there wont be a next Sims game when this one was under par.
Good the less EA has to sell the better we all are. If they keep it up maybe they will run out of things to sell! One more dumb media corp down the drain...hopefully...
EA keeps killing off franchises... why?
Doesn't it see that it is itself the common thread between dozens of fantastically popular franchises being killed?
It's like a guy who gets a new sexy girlfriend every few years, murders her, and then complains "Why can't it have a stable relationship?"
Doesn't it see that it is itself the common thread between dozens of fantastically popular franchises being killed?
It's like a guy who gets a new sexy girlfriend every few years, murders her, and then complains "Why can't it have a stable relationship?"
Why should people let logic stop a good old fashioned "let's hate EA!" session?TKretts3 said:
Nothing against the writers of The Escapist, guys, but these are the types of articles people upset about "games journalism" should be complaining about, if you ask me. While it provides a link to the original source for greater context most of these people know the majority of their readers aren't going to go to the source. So the article has to be as snappy as it can to draw as much attention as it can, even at the cost of properly representing the actual conversation which took place. But hey, it's what the readers want, so that's what the writers keep putting out.
OT: I'll echo the people who say "Of course they're not working on The Sims 5." The Sims has long been known for its excessive expansion pack business model, and anybody who didn't think the same thing would happen with 4 was likely just fooling themselves. I've got very few doubts that The Sims 4 will eventually be a pretty good game, it's just something of a shame that they have apparently made the base experience so dire.
What makes more sense? Not buying it unless it is up to your standards. That, I'm not arguing. But to me, it is asinine to expect a company to make a sequel to a game that underperformed, describing it as "holding the series hostage" when a producer expresses concerns about making a sequel to a game that underperformed.Bindal said:
You want to vote with your wallet? More power to you. That's how gamers should have their voices heard. However, if you are going to vote with your wallet, don't get upset when the publisher decides "This game isn't selling, so we won't waste our time with a sequel". Sure, YOU may be thinking "I'm going to boycott this game because it isn't up to my standards," but that's not what the stockholders see. All they see is that the game isn't selling. It sucks, but that's what happens.
Let's put it this way. You are the CEO of a company beholden to your shareholders. You don't make the money, you are looking at cutting staff at the very least, and possibly even shutting down studios. If you have a game that under-performs, causing you to have to let staff go, why on Earth would you make another game in the series?
Really??
Well then, PLEASE, by all means, kill that franchise! Don't do a Sims 5!
Remove yourself from the market EA; one franchise at a time.
Well then, PLEASE, by all means, kill that franchise! Don't do a Sims 5!
Remove yourself from the market EA; one franchise at a time.
No, that doesn't work, because we shouldn't have to put ourselves in anyone's position. They make the product and we damn well expect it to be worthwhile. Over-complicating it by saying we have to feel for or understand them is pointless.thebobmaster said:
The real issue here is EA has a ridiculous history of fucking up majorly (and that's why people want to hate them, because they've earned it), and that The Sims 4 is no different. Already seeming lackluster at release and not containing some important decorations to many.
EA continuously ignores the complaints and so keep making new problems, and every sarcastic and angry individual here is fucking sick of it. Fuck stockholders! Give us fucking good quality (especially since they're selling at full price with DLC) or you are gonna be scrutinised, criticised and eventually ripped to shreds.
I haven't played a sims game since the 1st one, so can't say I am overly bothered by the prospect of there not being a 5th instalment.
That said, this is a classic example of the kind of behaviour that earns EA accolades like "worst company in America". They have a hugely popular franchise, that with a little common sense and budgetary restraint would be a guaranteed cash cow, and they systematically produce sequels that introduce features no one wanted, ignoring the improvements that their customers have been asking for. Basically instead of listening to what people want and producing a game accordingly, they produce the game they think people should play and then bury their heads in the sand when the game attracts criticism.
I am all for creative integrity and the right of a creative industry to control it's output, however, that isn't what The Sims is, it is simply a sausage factory style production line designed to make money with slight variations on a basic formula.
And then we come to the EA coup de grace, whenever they produce a product that no one wants, and can't fathom why the sales don't live up to expectations they declare that it must be the customers who aren't interested in the franchise anymore, and then axe a perfectly viable series.
EA doesn't have to be named worst company in America, it IS the worst company in America.
That said, this is a classic example of the kind of behaviour that earns EA accolades like "worst company in America". They have a hugely popular franchise, that with a little common sense and budgetary restraint would be a guaranteed cash cow, and they systematically produce sequels that introduce features no one wanted, ignoring the improvements that their customers have been asking for. Basically instead of listening to what people want and producing a game accordingly, they produce the game they think people should play and then bury their heads in the sand when the game attracts criticism.
I am all for creative integrity and the right of a creative industry to control it's output, however, that isn't what The Sims is, it is simply a sausage factory style production line designed to make money with slight variations on a basic formula.
And then we come to the EA coup de grace, whenever they produce a product that no one wants, and can't fathom why the sales don't live up to expectations they declare that it must be the customers who aren't interested in the franchise anymore, and then axe a perfectly viable series.
EA doesn't have to be named worst company in America, it IS the worst company in America.
.....This is actually how I want things to work. I don't care about "The Sims" in particular, but if this means that my ongoing boycotts against Assassins Creed, Amazing Spider-Man, and anything even remotely resembling a sequel to DMC, then I take this as a step in the right direction.
Think of the precedent this could set, companies actually giving up on franchises when they lose enough fans. This could go really, really well.
Think of the precedent this could set, companies actually giving up on franchises when they lose enough fans. This could go really, really well.
Unless EA is the first company to do so. If EA does it, it's automatically a bad idea. At least, that's the impression I'm getting.OrokuSaki said:
I'm not going to lie I'm kind of glade EA are being jerks again now we can all forget any previous arguments and gang up on a malty-national corporation that doesn't care about our opinion. I'm seriously hoping that EA adds their "innovative" ideas from dungeon master to Dragon Age: Inquisition just to distract people from other topics.
Goddamn EA, stripping several features away from a game in order to hold them for ransom and then threaten to kill off the franchise if it doesn't sell well? It's like you WANT your company to tank.