@bethyGrace For me those renders reveal everything concerning this subject. If renders have to lie about something, that something just might be not such a good idea.
"bethyGrace;c-17374948" wrote:
"Camkat;c-17374667" wrote:
The thing is, if they did flesh out teenagers more, they could stand to make more money. You bet they would make some sort of teenager stuff pack if they changed their height and had to make them new clothes. You'd think being EA, they'd be all over the more money aspect of this. Sure it would take some money to develop but the stuff pack they would sell after could likely pay for it.
Yes, exactly.
When I hear the Guru's say that they don't devote resources to family gameplay because "not many people play with families" it really grinds my gears and makes me mad...
Maybe we would, if there was more gameplay??
Shouldn't the team see that data and go, "oh wow, we're losing the family players. How can we improve this and fix it? How can we get people playing with toddlers, kids and teens more?"
#JustSaying
Yes, good adition, that remark. People defend their playing style and rightly so, but there’s indeed been this official statement about one particular playing style.
It’s a chicken or the egg thing of course. I don’t know if the official statement refers to Sims 4 only? Must be, because as long as I remember I’ve seen people playing families in the Sims 3 stories I followed (to a point where I’d often go “I’d wait with that pregnancy because once your sims have a child it will be all about that, just like in real life; enjoy life for a bit first, explore what there is to explore”). Sims 2 is so very much loved in general because of its family focus. If the statistics show Sims 4 players aren’t family players, one could wonder if it’s the players or perhaps rather the game. Looking at statistics is one thing, interpreting them another.