Old Buildings No Longer Available

GamerGD3 wrote:

Worm32 wrote:

GamerGD3 wrote:

Worm32 wrote:

tiger10036778 wrote:
You can download this game FOR FREE and progress all the way through FOR FREE. None of the premium (I.e. donut costing items) are required to progress. The whole point is that if you WANT TO you can pay for premium content and/or speed up tasks.

I choose to buy donuts occasionally because I love the game. Ihave played since june. There are games for my console that I paid £40 for that I was bored with in less than a month. I have not averaged anything like £40 per month on tsto and still look forward to playing every sjngle day! Do the math!

I totally understand what you mean, and to each his own on what they do with their money. But I just want someone to explain how EA can charge $100 (almost double a console game) for in game currency that won't even get you everything in the game. If you want a math equation, take the amount of programming and level of graphics and gameplay for a $60 console game, and compare it to the amount of programming, graphics, gameplay of TSTO for $100, and tell me how it's justified. Please someone tell me. And not just "people will pay it so they do it", a real thought out explanation of EA's philosophy on their prices.........other than greed of course.

I think if you need the answer to your question, perhaps you should look at the development teams. The $60 game probably has easily over a hundred people working on it (programmers, TESTERS, marketing people, etc). Did you see the credits?

Now compare that to TSTO, it is likely easily half of that, if not a more like a 1/4 the size (or maybe even less than 20 people), I really have no idea, but I can't imagine it has the same size team. These are programmers, and designers and they need to be paid just like the developers/designers of the $60 game. TSTO also is mostly "free" meaning the vast majority of users won't end up purchasing content on the game (more of a minority on this forum though). And those that do option for the $20 or less packages since $100 or $50 is a lot just for a good chunk of premium items. Again, none of the premium items are required to play and many can just get a few items and be completely happy.

Thank you. An actual reply that makes some sense. Although you have a valid idea on how it may work, I still have to disagree. Google how much money EA has made on TSTO since launch. I'll save you the trouble, it's $50 million. So are you telling me that small dev team saw any portion of that? No, they got paid the same amount that any other dev for any other game received. The other $49,750,000 went straight into EA's pocket for a game that takes probably 1/5 of the amount of work as one of their other titles. It's greed, plain and simple, no one just wants to admit it.

Edit:spelling

Costs are a funny thing though, there's other things like building costs/maintenance, research and development of new games/content, and all sorts of things. Companies of this size also distribute earnings to cover other departments. EA also makes console games at $60. Now what happens when a game cost $100,000,000 to make, and the sales of said game was only $20,000,000? That other cost has to come out of somewhere else. EA is not immune to flops of $60 games.

EA made FIFA 2013 for the Wii U. I think it only had somewhere around 600k in units sold, and at $60 a pop, around 36,000,000. I'm sure the development cost was probably a lot higher than that considering all the licensing fees, and costs of the people involved. A lot of these games need over a million units sold to break even from what I've read. So it just doesn't sit and not applied elsewhere within the company. EA needs profits to stay open and continue game development. Game development is expensive. With this flop on the Wii U, they are already not bringing Madden 25 and other notable sports games to the Wii U due to the audience. So they already ate those development costs and those need to be covered as a whole.

So because EA flopped on a title or two, that justifies them making up the money by price gouging, a mobile game like TSTO? I have to disagree with that. Look, EA is a billion dollar company, they aren't going anywhere. The only thing that will be the downfall of EA, is the consumer getting wise to their antics and saying enough is enough, not a few failed titles. As I said before, they have tapped into an addiction, and they are exploiting that addiction for what I believe is an unfair amount of money. No one is telling EA not to make a profit, theyre doing just fine at that, believe me. The simple answer is yes, they do it because they can. But the real question is, should they?

Worm32 wrote:
So because EA flopped on a title or two, that justifies them making up the money by price gouging, a mobile game like TSTO? I have to disagree with that. Look, EA is a billion dollar company, they aren't going anywhere. The only thing that will be the downfall of EA, is the consumer getting wise to their antics and saying enough is enough, not a few failed titles. As I said before, they have tapped into an addiction, and they are exploiting that addiction for what I believe is an unfair amount of money. No one is telling EA not to make a profit, theyre doing just fine at that, believe me. The simple answer is yes, they do it because they can. But the real question is, should they?

I do agree that the prices are unfair, and I'm also responsible for spending over $100 on donuts, but as I said I don't know their cost structure. Yes they are a huge company and also have a wide variety of games. They also have numerous games in development currently. Obviously a few flops hurt, but it's also not just money sitting, they invest in other things like their own game engines and many other things that I can't just name off the top of my head. Companies also like to give the executives huge bonuses too, so the guy behind the initial idea of TSTO that is an exec probably sees a huge bonus for it's success.

I don't think you will find anyone that says they charge fair prices, and you also aren't going to rally everyone to not get donuts either. I feel like I'm slowly withdrawing from donut purchases simply because I already paid over $100. It's true that I've played the game for over a year (longer than I can say about a number of $50-$60 games I've bought) and so it is somewhat justified. But there is a limit and I don't think I can continue financing the game when I've already spent so much, despite how much I love it and spend time on it.

unstopular wrote:
Too much whining over items that mean nothing. It's laughable.

Look around your bedroom, same can be said for almost everything in there I'm guessing. :wink: Excellent retort BTW

Worm32 wrote:

So because EA flopped on a title or two, that justifies them making up the money by price gouging, a mobile game like TSTO? I have to disagree with that. Look, EA is a billion dollar company, they aren't going anywhere. The only thing that will be the downfall of EA, is the consumer getting wise to their antics and saying enough is enough, not a few failed titles. As I said before, they have tapped into an addiction, and they are exploiting that addiction for what I believe is an unfair amount of money. No one is telling EA not to make a profit, theyre doing just fine at that, believe me. The simple answer is yes, they do it because they can. But the real question is, should they?

Hey, why are you supporting them at all? Don't play their game, don't post on their forum, etc....

You sit here and whine and whine about the big bag company, and yet you won't simply put your money where your mouth is and walk away.

They charge what they want to charge. For the last 20 years, I've bought Apple computers because that was my choice. Was I getting double the computer for double the price. Of course not! You think a Ferrari doesn't get you from A to B the same basic way as a Ford? People pay premiums for things because they want to. If you don't, fine, but don't complain that people are "being taken advantage of."

Worm32 wrote:
Google how much money EA has made on TSTO since launch. I'll save you the trouble, it's $50 million. So are you telling me that small dev team saw any portion of that? No, they got paid the same amount that any other dev for any other game received. The other $49,750,000 went straight into EA's pocket for a game that takes probably 1/5 of the amount of work as one of their other titles.

Edit:spelling

You don't know that. You have no idea how much the royalty is for TSTO, what the programmers are paid, their bonus structure, EA's overhead costs-- in short, you don't know anything. But you somehow feel qualified to comment. Not sticking up for EA because I don't know anything about the company's financials, just saying you don't either. I do know the stock sucks, so maybe they aren't exactly rolling in cash to the extent you suspect.

If tpyou create a time mechine you can get em for free

shaygitz wrote:

Worm32 wrote:
Google how much money EA has made on TSTO since launch. I'll save you the trouble, it's $50 million. So are you telling me that small dev team saw any portion of that? No, they got paid the same amount that any other dev for any other game received. The other $49,750,000 went straight into EA's pocket for a game that takes probably 1/5 of the amount of work as one of their other titles.

Edit:spelling

You don't know that. You have no idea how much the royalty is for TSTO, what the programmers are paid, their bonus structure, EA's overhead costs-- in short, you don't know anything. But you somehow feel qualified to comment. Not sticking up for EA because I don't know anything about the company's financials, just saying you don't either. I do know the stock sucks, so maybe they aren't exactly rolling in cash to the extent you suspect.

+1

I've been attempting to explain that, but thanks for the quicker route. Sometimes I miss the big picture explanation.

glenjamin8 wrote:
Of course all the additional things in the game are optional but any standard gamer is going to want them. The same goes for any fan of The Simpsons. The likes of Otto, Sideshow Mel, and Dr. Nick are relatively important charactera that everybody wants to have in their town. Charging ridiculous amounts of money per character is crazy. There should have been an optional premium account where instead players pay a set price of $10, €20, or $50 for unlimited donuts to purchase any characters/buildings the once. You don't see many PS3 or XBox games like Fifa saying you have to pay 'X' amount for certains teams or players, or GTA charging for certain weapons or cars. People have payed tens of dollars in order to have everything so far and they'll continue to pay for any future releases.

People need to stop comparing console games to mobile games. it is an entirely different business model.

GamerGD3 wrote:

shaygitz wrote:

Worm32 wrote:
Google how much money EA has made on TSTO since launch. I'll save you the trouble, it's $50 million. So are you telling me that small dev team saw any portion of that? No, they got paid the same amount that any other dev for any other game received. The other $49,750,000 went straight into EA's pocket for a game that takes probably 1/5 of the amount of work as one of their other titles.

Edit:spelling

You don't know that. You have no idea how much the royalty is for TSTO, what the programmers are paid, their bonus structure, EA's overhead costs-- in short, you don't know anything. But you somehow feel qualified to comment. Not sticking up for EA because I don't know anything about the company's financials, just saying you don't either. I do know the stock sucks, so maybe they aren't exactly rolling in cash to the extent you suspect.

+1

I've been attempting to explain that, but thanks for the quicker route. Sometimes I miss the big picture explanation.

I never claimed to KNOW EXACTLY every financial detail of EA's cost for this game. What I do know is EA reported ( look it up yourselves ) that they have made $50 million on this game. I never once said they should not sell premium items. Of course they should, all games do, I've never disputed that, but look at the amount they are charging for the content (and effort) comparable to 99% of other games. Please just compare it to other companies. and not only that, compare it to other EA titles and the content they get for their money. You're being ripped off here Simpsons Fans. Do the homework for yourself, don't trust random internet guy.

True no one knows cost,overhead, marketing,development costs, etc., but anyone with the slightest bit of common sense can see what is going on here.

I have done a little homework on this. Comparing the prices of premium stuff from games like Smurf's Village, and Jurrassic Park Builder, the Simpsons premium stuff is more expensive. That being said, The Simpsons is a far superior game. And all of those games make a killing for their respective companies. Smurf's Village made more money for Capcom in it's third year, than Resident Evil 6, did when it came out in the same year. I would not attribute the greediness of EA to any of this. It's just a huge money making game format, because people are willing to drop money on it.

If I owned a game company I would be stupid not to own a license for a cartoon or movie property to make a town builder. It is a ridiculously steady source of income.