"KaeChan2089;c-17548000" wrote:
"LiELF;c-17547985" wrote:
"KaeChan2089;c-17547964" wrote:
"LiELF;c-17547960" wrote:
It seems to me that they just wanted to market to the next generation of Sims players for the Sims 4.
Again, I'll mention that EA just rebranded TS4 last year. People really underestimate the significance of this. It means that the game still has a while to go. It means that they are going to continue to closely watch trends for the younger potential players and try to draw them in and further expand the player base. They would not have rebranded if the game wasn't going to last a few more years. Rebranding is re-jumpstarting the franchise for new players.
I know it's not what people want to hear, but it is apparently what's happening. It's right there in front of us.
I am actually gonna laugh HARD when they add so much content to this game that it breaks and no one can play....The game engine is breaking y'all, not wise to add more content (I means years worth, sure, it can handle another SP, EP, and GP.)
Then I'm gonna sit back and say "See, we tried to tell you."
In short, this game is a mess.
I mean, they did that already with Sims 3. If you try to play it vanilla, it's a complete mess. It was abandoned in a sorry state.
So that just shows that as long as players are supporting the game and buying content, they are just going to continue to power through it until they're ready to move on.
Keep in mind too, that the more dlc added to a Sims game, any Sims game, the harder it gets to weed out bugs and fix errors. So at this point, they are most likely going to be focusing on the priority errors and the ones that are easier to correct, to keep the game running. But the little, annoying bugs or the ones that need more time and resources? Some of those may never get fixed.
That's one reason why I am afraid of more DLC, the game has SO much bugs now, and it will just be even more bugger with MORE bugs the more they add.
True. And this is also a really good argument for planning Sims games for five year increments maximum and then moving on. It would mean less room for newer, more creative packs, but it might be better for maintaining stability. They could also finally take that step forward and complete the base game a little better than they have been with weather, activities, a deep behavioral/personality system AI, world manipulation, and play options. If they actually packed the EPs better in future games, they wouldn't need to stretch the game's life out. I'd even be willing to pay a little more for EPs if they felt really full like they used to. Charging the same as 20 years ago is understandably underpriced, and could be a big factor in why EPs never feel like they have enough.
