Official Countdown Thread To EA Play 2020 (Cancelled)

I find it odd that Lyndsay is speaking but nothing new for the Ts4 is going to spoken about. They said that nothing NEW will be spoken about. They might show a trailer for the knitting pack maybe, especially since the last blog post mentioned they were getting close to the end of production. Idk, I'm sure they'll talk about something Sims related, whether it be a patch, or the new knitting pack.

"catloverplayer;c-17546343" wrote:

"hotpinkkt_24;c-17546261" wrote:
I find it odd that Lyndsay is speaking but nothing new for the Ts4 is going to spoken about. They said that nothing NEW will be spoken about. They might show a trailer for the knitting pack maybe, especially since the last blog post mentioned they were getting close to the end of production. Idk, I'm sure they'll talk about something Sims related, whether it be a patch, or the new knitting pack.

Now a trailer and release date for Nifty Knitting would make me happy.

They said they haven't finished animations for teaching knitting interaction, and probably other things also. Would they be making a trailer now?

@KaeChan2089 They keep saying they're not going to announce anything, so I don't think there is a reason to tune in then, no.

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.

"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.

"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.

"LiELF;c-17548075" wrote:

"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.

Honestly, I would not mind spending more money on a more robust base game.

"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 don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that they want to get new players in after all are taste change 2 I mean I'm not the same as I was 6 years ago so I think the Sims 4 should change with time to and the Sims
In general I don't think it's all bad I don't think it's all good but everything changes that's pretty much the one of the only constants in life

"comicsforlife;c-17548747" wrote:
Also another reason why then trying to bring in a newer audience doesn't bother me is because a lot of people assume that if something is made for a younger audience that you won't like it for a lot of things that just simply not true

I'm going to have to disagree with this. TS4 chases after a 'newer audience', which doesn't think nor want the things I want. It's probably a strong reason of why I think TS4 is so watered down and so immature and kiddy friendly.

ETA: So I don't spam this thread I will ask here, what did Lyndsay do at EA Play? Announce TS4 on Steam? I thought there wasn't going to be anything at all...was that what happened? I didn't watch.

"LiELF;c-17548075" wrote:

"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.

Yeah, this is basically my #1 argument for why things like weather and pets should be base game.

Aside from “come on, it’s the future, you can’t call rain a bonus feature any more”, having these major encompassing features in the base game means they get more development time before launch (because deadlines before a game is announced are much easier to move than deadlines for dlc for a game you’re trying to keep actively growing). And it also means that all OTHER dlc is developed with these gameplay interactions already in mind.

Weather is less likely to break your game’s equivalent of GeekCon or playable careers if you had rain from the start.

Honestly even if it’s only a rabbit hole in base game and we need DLC to make it playable and fleshed out, stuff like University should be incorporated at some point from the start as well. The stuff they know the game is going to need to be able to function with should be accounted before when making the base game. There’s no good reason for them to be wondering how to make this or that element fit into the game four years later. You should’ve been thinking about how that element would fit it even before the game was announced, and you should’ve programmed the game with that need for future compatibility in mind.

I mean, this is a lot of shade to throw at devs who I think are doing their absolute best with the time limits and constraints they have to work with. I’m definitely not blaming the coders. But there’s no reason for the next gen that EA couldn’t invest the budget and TIME for the kind of pre-production that anticipates these future roadblocks and plans for them. So even if we have to wait longer for it, we start with a filler game and even with DLC have a less buggy one.