<blockquote><hr>
I realize that TC3 is a test city and that we should expect all kinds of things. But, I'm not grasping that since Luc seen a lot of sims typing that for some reason a lot of sims typing is a bad thing. We have no true direction that we should be taking in this city, so as sims we take the direction that gives us the most benefit in game. Diversity is cool I get tired of doing the same old thing myself, but it is my choice if I choose to do so isn't it?
Speaking for myself.....if there is a direction that EA wants me to take as tester then please guide me to do so, otherwise let me do what I wish. There was a time when all sims did for money was to go to money houses that were giving payouts, but thats very limited in TC3, as a whole, so sims tend to do what most others are doing to gain funds that is the same in the real world, you go where the money is.
I have created CC as that is something new that, IMO, they wanted us to test out. I have worked to the top of a sim job as they took down the ability to make to much funds on job objects, multiple or single type. If they dont want us making tons of money on one money object, or at a certain sim job, then what do they want us making funds with? The city is to new for most to get decent funds at every sim money object,and or every sim job (which is technically impossible as you can have only one job type at a time) and have the sim skills to do so and survive on payout from same. So what do they want us to do to gain in game funds to survive, shop, build,etc? Tell us/me what will give me/us these things and I will try it, but know that my goal in game is not to be a poor sim or one who has every single skill maxed out just to survive.
And, so what if sims feel or are told that to be able to serenade is a good thing what's wrong with that? I say, like it or not being able to serenade is a plus, whether it is singing to help guests, or just to make friends. I tell people, who ask me, what should a newbie do, that they should skill for whatever direction they plan to go in the long run. If a skill house is what they want then yes, I do advise them to learn to sing and cook. If a money house then if its one type of payout object they wish to have I say learn the skilll needed to do that, but I also advise them to learn some cooking and some creativity, etc etc. The thing is to do what you want to do to get what you hope to gain. And if a sim in a house who is skilling or in a house that is money or what ever and they need social they can get it others way then just having someone sing to them, but in the same token I dont see the harm in hosts singing to sims who ask for it. It is all a choice, hosts dont have to sing, they dont have to cook, and for that matter they dont even have to be nice to their guests, but if they want guests on a regular basis then these are things that keep the guests coming back. I have come not to expect anything from a host of any type of lot as they dont have to do anything for me that they choose not to do, but at the same time if they do something for me I do my best to say thanks most of the time, in some way shape or fashion. I will also not remain as long on a lot where I dont have access to food, buffet or cooked, and if there is no way to gain fun or energy, but that is my choice. And, for me, a good host will state that they dont sing for you social needs and what options are available at their lot for sim needs, otherwise I may leave to gain the things my sim needs to survive what other choice would I have?
[/ QUOTE ]
You raise some very important points.
There are some things that we all need to understand. First of all:
This is a business first, and a game second - the job of the devs is to make the game interesting enough for enough people to want to pay to play - to create a compelling (or even reasonable) profit for EA. Without the profit there is no incentive for EA to continue hosting. So.... the game is promoted with various "improvements", including "cash-in, cash-out"
The loyalties of the devs are probably more toward the "game" aspect (since many are 'original' developers) while the loyalties of EA are solidly on the side of "business".
This does NOT mean the devs intentions are totally altruistic - no, as much as they work for the "game", they are under the control of the "business" people and must do as they are told (just as the rest of us). And if they are told to emphasize the business aspect of the "game" - that is what they will do.
This brings us to "balance";
The devs must attempt to balance the "game" and "business" so that one does not dominate and cause the loss of the other.
So, they look for a good "balance point".
Ideally, this would be where a player makes exactly enough from game objects to satisfy his/her needs.
But this is not practical from either a "game" OR "business" aspect.
A balance point must be found that allows players to earn enough money to take care of expenses, with a little left over to gradually improve their life, but not so much that they have a large "excess" that can be converted (cash-out) to RL cash (and cut into profits). Also, if the "excess" is small, the player tends to spend it on game items (furniture, clothes, accessories, etc), rather than saving it for conversion.
In addition, if the excess is small, the player may become impatient to acquire a certain something in the game and opt to buy simoleons from EA for RL money (cash-in).
This is what the devs are doing now - searching for that balance point by tweaking payouts.
The problem is NOT that they are trying to find that point, but 'how'.
We are in a virtual "beta test" of EALand. If they push too hard, it may cause key players to move on and potentially have a severe and negative impact on the eventual opening (people talk on forums, ya know).
Cutting payouts to the bone, thus 'over-balancing' in favor of "business" could easily be a major factor (tho not the only one) in making up one's mind to stay or go.
They need to make the adjustments without seeming to pick our pockets or scripting our play.
