The Sims 4 Won't Have Pools Because its Too Much Work, Says EA

[Covarr]

He also added that pools and toddlers could be added in a post-launch patch or expansion

I'm fairly certain Rachel Franklin is a 'she' [http://www.ea.com/news/author/rachel+franklin].

That aside, it very much sounds as though the game's launch date was decided before its scope. This practice is sadly common in the AAA world, but it's still really shitty. An extra $50,000 budget and a two week delay should be easily more than enough to add these features. If it needs more than that, you've got a production pipeline problem that really needs worked out.

P.S. Thanks

 

[MasterOfHisOwnDomain]

Eh, who am I kidding. People will eat this shit up and EA will get away. They win again.

Unfortunately the amount of ardent, passionate fans of the series -- the kind who are up in arms about this decision -- is almost certainly vastly outweighed by ordinary users who have no idea at all about this furor and will lap it up.

 

[lacktheknack]

It's okay, EA. I understand. I just won't be buying The Sims 4 because it's too much money for too little features.

This.

Also, everyone saying "Modders will fix it in a day" make me sad. Clearly, none of you have ever interacted with the massive fart joke that is the Sims Modding scene.

 

[Glaice]

So, you say you're just too lazy to implement these new systems right EA? Watch you churn this out 3-6 months later as part of some expansion pack..

 

[DTWolfwood]

My god they really do think we are idiots. O wells here's hoping the game bombs.

I have no investment in this franchise so i would be a non-factor in its success or hopefully lack there of.

 

[Elfgore]

Well then, I guess The Sims 4 isn't worth an early purchase, or until it drops to twenty or thirty bucks with an expansion pack included. I've got The Sims 3 with over half the interesting expansions to keep me occupied.

They try to hide behind "too much work", but well all know why they're doing this. They gotta make their cash-cow even more fatter.

 

[dragongit]

Like how SimCity couldn't have offline mode? WHOPS guess it could. And you EA... one of the biggest gaming companies in the whole damn world, you could spend 500 million on an MMO, but you can't find 10 people who can program a pool?

 

[Zacharious-khan]

EA's production strategy is interesting. It seems to be do whatever the hell you want until release date and everything we do after that is dlc

 

[zerragonoss]

Guys its pools and toddlers, yes they will sell them back later as that is how the sims works and always has been, but sometimes things do actually get cut to allow development to focus on things that matter. so unless these items are secretly super high demand in the sims and EA knows they have a cash cow I am giving them this one. I know your all conditioned to treat a standard PR response as bull shit but sometime they are true I mean its freaking pools and toddlers.

 

[creamy5000]

EA should drop the 4 just like they dropped the number off of Simcity. Because you know it is going to be a broken piece of crap when it comes out. And the "New Tech" is going to get blamed for that too.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

awwww... poor itty bitty EA, it is indeed too much work for good little EA, afterall they are only the biggest fucking third party publisher around


too much work? more like, not enough day one DLC

 

[chocolate pickles]

"The fact is, we owe you a clearer explanation for why pools and toddlers will not be in The Sims 4 at launch," executive producer Rachel Franklin wrote in a new blog post.

"It begins with the fact that we think we can make a fuck-ton more money releasing these features to you in expansion packs."

"So the bottom line is that when we sat down and looked at everything we wanted to do for this game, we realized we wanted to do the same shit we'd been doing since the first Sims game, dick on the consumer base because we can and ultimately do as little work as possible".

Fixed some of the quotes for you

 

[Erttheking]

A lot of developers apparently have decided that doing their job is just too hard nowdays haven't they?

 

[Johnson McGee]

"The fact is, we owe you a clearer explanation for why pools and toddlers will not be in The Sims 4 at launch, [and that explanation is that we didn't finish the game in time LOL.]"

 

[RedDeadFred]

So basically: "we know that you guys really liked having these features before, but we think there'd be too much value in the game if we didn't charge you for them separately now."

Watch it be on-disk DLC. Oh I would laugh...

I've never cared about these games, but this really is bullshit. Charging for new things that have never been in the games previously is fine, but charging for something that you've had before seems ludicrous.

 

[frobalt]

Wow, so women AND toddlers bankrupt you if you try to render them? Golly gee, these are some scary times in video gaming where rendering anyone that isn't a white adult man suddenly makes all the money fly out of your wallet.

Please tell me you're joking and aren't actually dense enough for this to be serious?

I mean, lumping not wanting to put toddlers in with not wanting to put females in is just ridiculous.

This is the sims. Not putting in toddlers is like Activision saying guns are too hard to add to COD.

It seems now everything is "so expensive" it's getting fucking ridiculous. The sims have always had pools and toddlers. Its a basic feature.

The game is all about growing up and the progress of time. How the sims interact. Its also about making your dream house which includes a fucking pool.

The sims without a life state and without pools is like COD without guns and no multiplayer.

The fact they say "its too hard" is fucking ridiculous. They had these features in the Sims 1, when EA wasn't as big or rich. This fad only exists because Ubisoft got away with it.

How can sims 1 EA afford this, and 2014 EA can't? How can 2010 EA afford that AND MORE but 2014 EA can't?

Its ridiculous because this is ridiculous.

I agree that it's ridiculous. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if EA charge for it as DLC.

You saying it's equivalent to not adding a playable female character to Assassins Creed is also ridiculous.

 

[alj]

Pathetic does not even begin to cover it, you spend all that time putting in unique walking animations but you don't have time to do a pool? Get your priorities right. I am no lonver of the sims but do people care that much about the walking animation of the sims? Is the game not about building a nice home/town with people in it, not about how Mrs Barnstaple from No. 37 walks ?

 

[senordesol]

Guys its pools and toddlers, yes they will sell them back later as that is how the sims works and always has been, but sometimes things do actually get cut to allow development to focus on things that matter. so unless these items are secretly super high demand in the sims and EA knows they have a cash cow I am giving them this one. I know your all conditioned to treat a standard PR response as bull shit but sometime they are true I mean its freaking pools and toddlers.

First: The entire conceit of the Sims is to build your dream home with your dream family. That's the entire point of the game, to cut those particular corners after they've been a series stable for so long...is questionable at best. I mean the excuse they gave was: "look at how many emotions and walk cycles we have!!!"

Are they really expecting me to swallow that I had to give up a major luxury feature (a feature that damn near every 'dream home' would include) just so they could render different 'amused' and 'bemused' animations? Because THAT is expansion pack level crap right there.

And even if we were to concede 'hey, it's just toddlers and pools', I'd argue: it's just toddlers and pools *now*. What else, I wonder, is in store? What other content have they cut that they've yet to tell us about? Instruments? House Parties? The awesome radio stations?

See there's something sorely lacking from a lot of the industry these days: it's called PROFESSIONAL PRIDE. It's the idea that no matter what happens, if we're going to do a thing; we're going to do it RIGHT. We're going to do it the best we can, so that when we put that box on a shelf and ask $60 for it, we know that when the customer picks it up; it'll be worth every penny to him.

Yeah, maybe it was a tiny corner to cut; but they're still cutting corners! Yet, despite the corner cutting, you KNOW they're going to ask full price.

Now maybe this stuff isn't a big deal to you, and that's okay. It really is. But some people want the money they part with to be earned, and chucking beloved features of a major franchise is a poor POOR way to go about that.

 

[Trude]

I guess they didn't want to program a thousand ways of drowning your Sims in a pool.

 

[BX3]

*Reads title* "What...?"
*Clicks and reads article* "Oooohhh, so you mean deadlines."

The removal of toddlers is no skin off of my ass. The removal of pools however... is also no skin off my ass, BUT the removal of pools and this explanation basically confirms something I was afraid of since first hearing about this game's existence. No pools means no means for your Sims to cool off, which means your Sims have no need to cool off, which ultimately means... no weather. Once again, they refused to put weather into the base game. Which means, "Sims 4: Seasons" is going to be a thing... and that makes me quite unhappy.

I guess I'm sticking with Sims 3 then. Shame... I was really excited about Maxis being back, and I really wanted to try out the new emotion system and how they would handle worlds, but all that isn't worth it if I can literally predict the boring expansion packs they'll be releasing in the coming years. Seasons, University, Night Clubbing and Magic n' Shit, along with 1 or 2 expansions and a bunch of Stuff packs no one actually wants.