TS2 Wasn't Ready for Release. ALPHAVILLE TIMES SPECIAL REPORT: SIMS 2 WAS NOT READY FOR RELEASE. With a lawsuit on them, It's no wonder why The Sims 2, Electronic Arts newest "Sims" franchise game, is a flop. In the lawsuit, it says employees were not paid for overtime pay, and worked verry long hours (9 AM-10 PM). along with some Saturday evenings off (After 6:30 PM). However, the game has many bugs and glitches in it, just a few to mention: "Invisible Bug"-Objects will turn invissible and cant be deleted "Nanny Bug" - Where the nanny will just feed your simbaby no matter what they need. "Jump Bug"- Causing a LOT of problems. After reading the lawsuit, I concluded, to make players happy and to rake in the cash, Electronic Arts released an unfinished, untested game. Mabye the new Expansion Pack will contain hacks to correct the bugs.
You present a highly biased view of a story that admits it is based upon a "rant" in a blog by, allegedly, "the spouse of an EA employee". You seem far too satisfied with your few bugs as a "big stick" for the bashing of corporate capitalism. I think you have just jumped onto a bandwagon that hasn't got a full complement of wheels. EA is a money making business. Period. It makes its money by selling games software. It can only continue to make money if (and only if) it continues to make happy bunnies of the people who buy their wares. You cannot please all the people all the time. Obviously they ain't pleasing you ... or maybe you think capitalism stinks. Either way I wonder why you bought the game? I don't even rate the nanny as a bug. I think the Nanny is a deliberate nuisance and she is easily controlled. The jump bug is something I have yet to encounter, but then I haven't really tried to keep any my sims alive that long.
Out of everything inside the game, I view those bugs are significant, but not completely detrimental to gameplay. I haven't been affected by any of those bugs yet, and haven't seen anything that has caused those bugs to my games. I however, do think if Maxis was Rushed originally by EA, they wouldn't have pushed the game back in Spring 2004. Remember it got delayed and the entire community was in an uproar? Now the game was released in fall and people are still complaining about small trivial bugs? Gees, what do they want? A perfect game?
maybe the bugs are in the operator (hint hint), i have yet to experience any of these myself. Nobody & nothing is "perfect" i agree with manager josh, stop complaining and just enjoy the game. Don't like it? Don't buy it! I love the Sims 2, it is an awsome game, unfinished or not. So get over it. Shelly P.S. Fire the nanny & hire another one, she's just lazy.
People *do* want perfect games. And they want the games out "bugs and all" (which is a quote from someone who was complaining about how Maxis had put off the release for so long.) The bugs are real, but there are workarounds. For example, if you look in the modding section, JM Pescado has a workaround hack for the jump bug. I've talked to professional game testers (including those who *design* the game tests, although not for Maxis) and they unanimously say that the bugs we've been experiencing (especially the jump bug) was one that wouldn't have been found during testing. The guy who designs game tests said that even knowing the cause now, he doubts that any of the usual types of tests that they do for games could have found it. For one thing, the jump bug is most common in long running games, and the longest testing that they do tends to be only a single shift of 8 hours. Most tests are much shorter than that. Yet some people don't get hit by the jump bug until they've played several generations. (I didn't get it until I'd been playing for more than 200 hours.) We expect so much out of our games, and yet we really give so little for them considering the number of hours that we get to enjoy them. (It's probably one of the cheapest entertainments around when you look at how many hours of fun one can get for the US$50 the game costs.)
Welcome to the world of game development. I've worked in the industry for 10 years now and have yet to hear of a company that pays overtime. Occasionally, bonuses are offered for completion of a project but overtime pay is unheard of. Employees are also expected to work whatever hours neccessary to get the project complete on time, especially in the final few months. 9am to 10pm with Saturday evenings off doesn't seem particularly harsh for an end of project push compared to some projects I've known. These kind of hours (and far worse) are the norm, not the exception.
Pssh. You know, computers have gotten cheaper. In 1980, you had to shell out in excess of $3000, in 1980 bucks, for one. Now you can have one many times better for less than $800. Yet for some reason, they have the nerve to charge $50, MORE than they did before, for software today. Do you really believe games are that much more enjoyable and provide that much more fun? In the old days, I could enjoy a game for months, or even years. Some of them I still enjoy. Nowadays, rare is it that a game can last longer than a week.
The reason why the price of games has increased is because the industry has completely changed since the 1980's and development budgets have skyrocketed as a result of the type of games now produced. In the old days many games were produced for little or no cost by one man teams of 'bedroom programmers'. Some of the old classics were written in a day or even a couple of hours. Nowadays, the games market demands high quality 3D graphics and open-ended gameplay, something that requires far larger teams of specialized employees. Dev teams now include specialized fields such as environment and character artists, animators, game designers, storyboarders, concept artists etc. etc. There are also (sadly) many levels of (usually overpaid) management to deal with the larger teams. Game development is now an expensive business due to this growth and this is reflected in the price charged for the product on the shelf.
In the old days, a game was lucky if it managed to sell a thousand copies, too. Pssh, don't buy that argument. Computers have gotten a lot more complicated, too, from something that somebody could assemble from wires, boards, and a soldering iron, to something which now requires sophisticated clean rooms and extremely expensive semiconductor equipment. They're still cheaper.
What iffs me is that they have yet to release a patch after 2 months. Other companies, whose games rake in about 5% of the revenue of TS2 (literally, according to statistics), and developing two other games simultaneously, have the resources to release patches with page-long lists of changes and fixes within weeks. When a user-created mod comes out to fix a problem faster than the developers can correct it themselves... not a good sign. TS2, in addition to the major bugs above, is infested with hundreds of small, minor bugs which, although easily sidestepped by anyone with an ounce of determination and creativity, are nevertheless still bugs and annoyances. Granted, a game as open as this is bound to have those, but it would be nice to see them try.
They're cheaper today because of economy of scale. In 1980 computers were mostly handbuilt ... individual bits soldered onto pcbs. Nowadays the pcbs are called "cards" they are assembled by robots (after being designed by computer). The only remaining human interference in computer manufacturing is in deciding what color to make the case ... For a clever man, Fishface, you show an appallingly weak grip on simple economics.
Well, the only remaining human involvement in the actual manufacturing of game discs is... none? What you said holds true about computer manufacturers, but not the companies who actually MAKE the individual components put together by manufacturers. In today's eat-or-be-eaten competition between companies such as Intel vs. AMD, Nvidia vs. ATI, companies are forced to dump millions of dollars into R&D each year just to stay afloat. Hardware (as opposed to software and OS) competition is far fiercer these days than back then, and even with the exponentially-increasing performance leaps computers gain today, they still manage to be economically cheaper than previous versions. As opposed to video games.
Hardware companies charge plenty for their new stuff. (Just look at the prices on the Geforce 6800Ultra and ATI Radeon X800 Pro.) However, once they are no longer "new" the price can drop dramatically (especially if there is something newer and fancier out.) The same is true of software. In some places, even TS2 has gone on sale for US$40 ($10 less) because there are so many newer games which have come out since then. And you can get TS1 for about US$10 (and I suspect that once the TS2 EPs come out, they'll end up being as cheap as you can get SimCity 3000 right now.) However, if you look at the teams responsible for creating the hardware, they are still relatively small compared to the teams responsible for creating game software. The list of the team members for those reads like a movie credit list it's so long. And while it doesn't cost much to manufacture that game, you pay for the "R&D" right up front.
Sorry I am utterly unconvinced. The market for computers in 1980 was a minute fraction of what it is now. If Intel spends 50 million developing a new cpu it will make it all back in its first 200,000 sales ... after which the price drops from its atmospheric hundreds of dollar launch price tag to a discounted 'leading edge product' price of circa $150. At no stage does the thing ever cost much more than a few bucks to actually make. The earliest computers of the 70's and 80's were never sold by the million. The R & D costs were obviously massively larger than is the case today. As has already been stated. Early games software was too often knocked out by kids in an evening or two. Most of it was sold on tapes ... how many bytes on a tape, eh? Anyone remember? Not many, that's for sure. Check out the credits on any modern computer game. More names than a Hollywood blockbuster. The price has to be high because the initial sale run has to recoup the whole cost of development. In 6 months the game is in the discount bins (or packaged with an EP ... and it isn't just EA who do that!)
The fact that "new" items are expensive is not the issue: Even though the price tag of new equipment *IS* more expensive, it is STILL comparatively cheaper than it was 20 years ago! The top-of-the-line system of 1980 could cost you $3000-5000 in 1980 buckazoids. The top of the line system of 2004 costs you about $1500 in 2004 buckazoids. The top of the line video game of 1980 cost you $30-40 (1980)buckazoids. The top of the line video game of 2004 costs $50-80 (2004) buckazoids. The fact that obsolete merchandise is cheaper than new merchandise is not the issue. R&D on hardware is just as expensive, and the people involved, while fewer in number, are greater in expense. A computer engineer capable of designing a new CPU is a much more elite, and expensive, breed than a game programmer or tester: Neither of these jobs, strictly speaking, requires anything greater than a high school education. These people, while more numerous, are not as highly paid. The rank and file of a game's development staff is comparable in rank and experience to the people who simply wouldn't have made it onto the credits list at ALL for a piece of hardware: It's commonplace for the entire testing staff to make it into the credits of a game. These people rarely are individually named for hardware! The guy who fetches the freaking COFFEE often makes it onto the list of a game's credits! And this has a corresponding effect on the market for video games. If there weren't many computers, you can betcha this would cramp the market for video games. Atari made this mistake once, creating more ET cartridges than they had even sold of their consoles! Needless to say, this was a major disaster which set the video game industry back by a goodly 5-10 years. If Maxis spent 10 million developing TS2, they'd make their money back in the first 200K sales, too. 10 million bucks represents a VERY high-end video game. I don't think even TS2 had this much budget. The fact remains the same equation applies for video games as it does to computers. Yet computers get cheaper per unit, while software gets more expensive. Do you REALLY believe that something fishy is NOT occurring? TS2's actual marginal cost of production can be measured in nickels. Especially when you consider the corners often cut in a modern software production. In the *OLD* days, code ran tight: It had to be, system resources were limited. In the *OLD* days, software came with a manual big enough to render someone unconcious if you whopped him on the head with it. Nowadays, you're lucky if you *GET* a manual, let alone one which can be used even as a mere flyswatter. The marginal cost of production in software is rock bottom. At least CPUs still require small quantities of valuable materials, but software is made from plastic and cardboard. And this logic does not apply to CPUs? Like CPUs, software has a negligible marginal cost of production, if not more so. And you admit yourself that early games were knocked out by kids in an evening or two....these people were hardly paid very much for their efforts. And you know what? Nothing has changed. Game programming is still unglamorous, and EA is accused of running a sweatshop. Hardly the picture of high expense. In 6 months, your CPU is obsolete and in the discount bins, too, or packaged with budget computers and sold as a package for < $500. I fail to see why you claim this is a unique property of software that justifies its increasing price even while everything else about computers gets cheaper.
Ah but think much more environmentally friendly it is not cutting down all those trees to print giant incomprehensible manuals that no one ever read anyway. Not mention the saving in fossil fuel and tyre rubber in not having to freight all that extra tonnage all over the planet In the olden days, when we finally did get stuck and decided to look up the manual to find out "how to" we discovered that nothing of value could be discovered in a printed manual. These days software has to be self-configuring and if you need instructions to use it you ain't gonna enjoy it anyway
Incomprehensible? No one ever read? In the old days, people actually *READ* the manuals, because they were cool! Plus, they were big! And heavy! And if somebody else didn't read them, and proceeded to ask you stupid questions, you could take it and club them about the head with it!
All the Nitpicking Makes Me Sad Now, I will admit I was one of the people who was pouting when Maxis moved up the release of TS2 from Spring to Sept. And, yes, I've seen little bugs and annoyances, but nothing that has ruined gameplay for me. Of course, I have as of yet not seen the Jump Bug, but I do not use the elixir or life nor do I use the "aging Off" cheat because I want my sims to age naturally, and because I do not want the bug. As to the hard work of the programers, I have to say that unlike many of the people here, I am not skilled in this way. I do not hack, nor do I program, nor do I know any code. I think the majority of players are more like me. This does not make me stupid, just not skilled in this way. I like to think that the average player, like me, is more or less happy with the game with the exceptions of the occasional bug. And, we are intelligent enough to find patches and mods made by those who are skilled in hacking and programing. I have no need nor intention of bashing those people who worked long hours and gave us this game that I have seen likened to "computerized crack." I personally am sick to death of hearing how terrible this game is. I remember TS1 having many bugs and flaws, and I remember going online and downloading patches and mods to fix them. I have never, ever had the enjoyment playing TS1 that I have playing TS2. As I stated before, I do not have the expertise that several of you on this board do. In fact, when it comes to technical things, I feel pretty ignorant. But I also see no need to nitpick and bash the game and the people who worked so hard on it. No one is perfect, everyone makes mistakes, and it's so much easier to be an Armchair quarterback (or in this case programmer) than it is to acutally be the one working all those late nights, month after month, not seeing your own family or getting to feed your own children because you are trying to get the sims just right. I can't see badmouthing the programmers because of these little glitches. And frankly, I have stopped reading threads when I see that the subject goes from being helpful advice and starts being, "This game is terrible, Maxis's screwed up and is too lazy to fix it, why are they spending their time making decorations instead of fixing the game, blah, blah, blah." If you can fix it, than great, horray for you! If you have a complaint or an axe to grind (like Maxis wouldn't hire you or ran over your cat or something), then I'm sorry, ((((hugs)))) to you, now can we please talk about something else?? I take all this a little personally because my son (13) wants to be a video game programmer, has wanted it since he was 4. When I think of the people who make the games, I think of them as being people like him. And maybe I see them as just a little bit more human, and can forgive them more. Then again, I'm just an old lady. LOL LOL
Agree with you 100%, Kristal. People just like to choose to be miserable no matter what - perhaps because they're too stupid to realize it's their choice and they have an alternative.
