Goodbye for now Sims 4

"Goldmoldar;c-16409419" wrote:

"fullspiral;c-16409365" wrote:

"Sk8rblaze;c-16409349" wrote:

"DeservedCriticism;c-16409319" wrote:

"Hermitgirl;c-16409284" wrote:

"DeservedCriticism;c-16409195" wrote:

"TheGoodOldGamer;c-16409155" wrote:

"Sk8rblaze;c-16409142" wrote:

"TheGoodOldGamer;c-16409127" wrote:

"Sk8rblaze;c-16409116" wrote:

"TheGoodOldGamer;c-16409033" wrote:
Haven't done this in awhile, but I just thought I'd pop up some perspective with how well Sims 4 is doing, in comparison to Steam's top 10:

https://i.imgur.com/NIDzxyO.png

This contributes absolutely nothing to the discussion.

Are you trying to insinuate The Sims 4 is objectively good and we are all wrong for giving our feedback because more expensive games have less players than The Sims 4, which is constantly on sale and included in EA’s free games membership program? It just has no place in this thread.

And flamebaiting does? :p

Someone was mentioning how the forum should be abandoned, etc etc. As if there's some huge drop-off in players and that any perceived lack of population on this forum indicates that. It clearly doesn't. And unlike unfounded, subjective opinions on the matter, I provided evidence for mine. *shrugs*

Feel free to discount it all as corporate lying or whatever, but it's more proof than most people have with this kind of thing.

Does providing feedback really count as flamebaiting to you? I doubt The Sims 4 has feelings that will be hurt.

I don’t think there is any corporate lying in those figures, however, The Sims 4’s base game is quite cheap and accessible, which is my point.

You basically came into a feedback thread with no defense or commentary other than figures of a Steam chart composed of year old games, many older than TS4 and more expensive too, which still retain numbers in the high 5 figure range. That’s a pretty weak defense, which was not even needed in the first place.

To me, that’s trolling and baiting, and pretty disrespectful to people who spend a good amount of time trying to improve the game the way they like, in a section designed specifically for feedback. And then you say others are flame baiting?

Your post saying mine "contributes absolutely nothing to the discussion" was the flamebaiting, thanks. :p

My post did contribute. It gave perspective on the current game's success, based on the numbers we have available, along with comparisons to current competition. Disliking the game, or wishing it would suddenly fail because of that, doesn't mean that it actually is.

Also, a different perspective outside of confimation bias and tunnel vision is helpful, even if you don't like it. Take a look at my original post again. You're taking it out of context. I said nothing about discounting others opinions, did nothing to flamebait anybody. All I did was provide numbers that apparently upset you because they're higher than 0 or something, I'm not sure?

The game, and the series as a whole, isn't failing. In the past few years I've checked with this comparison, it has always been on the Top 10 levels of Steam, regardless of day, time, current sales or not. Prior to and after toddlers. Prior to and after vampires. Prior to and after MFP. You can take it or leave it as you like, but I just added some perspective outside of the current subjective narrative.

Thanks for the callout though. Now more people who would've glossed over it have seen it.

The logical fallacy of your entire argument is that it's circular logic. You argue "this game can't be bad because people like it." The bitter irony is that threads like this seek to question and critically assess why people like it and question if their fondness is warranted, suggesting it's not as good as perceived.

You are basically using the conclusion ("this game is good") as evidence to support your argument and against the proposed hypothesis, ("this game is bad") thus causing you to skim over the arguments being made since your conclusion and your reasoning are one in the same. Your own argument fails because if we followed your reasoning, it would mean a game that has good release numbers and good player satisfaction initially would have good satisfaction for all eternity with no improvement or lack thereof, because any time someone arrives arguing "hey this product is better/worse than previously perceived," your rationale is to just look at the current perception and denounce their argument outright with no understanding for potential change or acknowledgement of potential downturns/upswings/incoming problems/incoming improvements/drop in satisfaction.

In other words:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKyoSS3bwjA

So basically those that don't assess things the way you do.... Those are obviously wrong in their ability to even know what good is..... Those that can't possibly hold out for two pieces of candy, wait no scratch that .. force the hand of those that will give them not one but two pieces of candy in however many years it would take to actually turn something around are plum for continuing to support such a system that gives them a game they currently enjoy?

No, the point is to argue points regarding the quality of the game itself. Arguments such as "well some people like it" bring nothing. This does nothing to review the actual quality of X or Y feature. If I argued I can't stand how buggy retail is for example and then someone said "well X people play it and love it daily," this does nothing to address accusations that retail workers stand around doing nothing. The two are not mutually exclusive, and it is completely possible for that feature to be both a buggy mess and actively played. The argument was never about activity, it was about how the experience could be better if it were improved in the proposed way.

Every bit of criticism is a chance to acknowledge flaws and improve on them. But when people willingly try to look away and change the subject or make arguments on circular reasoning, it's little surprise that no meaningful discussion or actual improvement ever happens. And as I said in the other thread with my post you're referencing: it matters not how satisfied or unsatisfied you are with the current state of things because improvement is always welcome. The shame is that the community avoids opportunities for improvement like the plague while willingly giving in when EA wants invitations to do less.

Well said.

If you’re here in this forum, and you provide constructive feedback, I’d argue you’re probably a bigger fan than one that just throws the game away.

I truly feel anyone who is active in this feedback thread with constructive criticism does not want this game to fail. I know I don’t. I simply want the game to be better than ever, and engaging in a discussion with other fans is a wonderful way to come up with some great ideas on how that can be achieved.

To ignore all of that, and throw a screenshot of how well the game is doing is just a blatant slap in the face. If not baiting and troll-like, it’s just plain rude to what we are trying to do — communicate with EA and discuss ways to make the franchise better.

I can throw a screenshot of how well it's NOT doing though.....

Why is it that my sim, when directed to tell a story to another sim, does it through a wall? And her with her back turned?

https://i.imgur.com/dzy6d4J.png

Why, I ask, is he not going out to the room where she is and engaging with her face to face? How, I ask, is this good, or immersive?

I do not see it as good but it would be immersive if it was done the right way.