Why don't you speak of the small improvement ts4 brings compared to the sims 2/3 and we crave to see in both games
1) the search tool .
2) making an object bigger or smaller without having a mod for.
3) improved MOO no need omsp anymore.
4) Easy built tool. No round walls still but we're almost close to.
5) A hospital to play
6) A Prison etc.
I don't tell I am a fan of the sims 4 but these amazing stuffs must be included in the previous easily ! Except of always badmouthing on ts4 and complain about a game you play or you brought or download I don't know where, tell yourself why this game was made like this? That's a dev choice and no matter the numbers of tantrums you can do, they don't care of you.
I am a sims 3 fan and sometimes I am deceived by the game because we lack interactions between the sims, I wanted to slap a sims that was a troublemaker without fighting with I couldn't. We don't have a lot of animation as well. The toddlers are boring, we can't disable or send the cellphone and using instead of home phone, we can't care of the stray pets and even your own pets without being friends with etc.
When I am in the sims 2 I am deceived by the game too , no open world, no colourwheel , no open carreer playable, fexw or inexistant slot in objects, 90% of the cc you find are not pets and ep improved etc. (compared to the sims 3 all the new cc are improved for pets since the patch was made) Poor bodyshop no more sliders etc.
Does that mean ts2 and ts3 are also worst game ever made ? NO !
Well, going back to the original topic, I will agree that there are some things in TS4 that are missing from the previous games that might be cause for disappointment.
On the other hand, there are so many things that TS4 brought to the table that to me, it's a "wash" in terms of deciding whether it's bad or better than the previous games. And that's been true for every iteration. TS3 brought us open world, but lacked the charm of TS1 and was too heavily skewed towards family play. But...it brought us open world and casT and tons of build mode tools, interactions, and new gameplay features and careers that TS1 didn't, so what TS3 added made up for what was lost.
It's the same with TS4. It's missing things from previous iterations but by the same token, it has stuff that weren't in them, like the clubs systems, emotions, certain buy and build mode features, new abilities, new types of objects and interactions. So I don't think it's fair when people do this thing of slating one iteration of The Sims because it's lacking something from the previous games, when it also brought things that weren't available before.
Another thing is that TS4 is not a complete game. It's literally a work in progress. I never get it when people do this thing (they did it with TS2 vs TS3, too) where they'll trash one iteration that's not even close to being complete by comparing it to one that has over a dozen EPs and SPs, as well as more than a dozen new objects and venues at the store. It's like people keep misremembering that every sims game started out with the barest essentials and didn't really start to pick up several EPs later. And if you don't believe me, do this experiment--try to run any of the previous games with the base game and the base game only. (You can do this in TS3 by unchecking the packs in the launcher.) You will be so surprised at how little there was to do in each game at the very beginning.
So not only is pitting an incomplete vs a complete game unfair, it's counterproductive. The reason why TS1, TS2 and TS3 completed with so much content is that players spent the entire duration of each iteration pitching ideas. I can't find the post, but I'm pretty sure that Into the Future started out as a pitch on the old forums by a player. He posted something like, "I want a Jetsons world, and I want it laid out like this and I want it laid out like that, and I want this, this and that in the game." Same thing with Generations--it was a response to players unhappy with lack of family play. Imagine if the entire duration of TS3 no one had given suggestions and just complained about how TS3 was lacking. There would've been no Into the Future, no Generations or any of the other content that came out in TS3.
So if you're one of those people who find TS4 lacking, why not just post suggestions and feedback in the forums about what you would like to see added to make it less lacking? Instead of just making general complaints about how it's not as good as X, Y or Z because it's lacking?
Well, going back to the original topic, I will agree that there are some things in TS4 that are missing from the previous games that might be cause for disappointment.
On the other hand, there are so many things that TS4 brought to the table that to me, it's a "wash" in terms of deciding whether it's bad or better than the previous games. And that's been true for every iteration. TS3 brought us open world, but lacked the charm of TS1 and was too heavily skewed towards family play. But...it brought us open world and casT and tons of build mode tools, interactions, and new gameplay features and careers that TS1 didn't, so what TS3 added made up for what was lost.
It's the same with TS4. It's missing things from previous iterations but by the same token, it has stuff that weren't in them, like the clubs systems, emotions, certain buy and build mode features, new abilities, new types of objects and interactions. So I don't think it's fair when people do this thing of slating one iteration of The Sims because it's lacking something from the previous games, when it also brought things that weren't available before.
Another thing is that TS4 is not a complete game. It's literally a work in progress. I never get it when people do this thing (they did it with TS2 vs TS3, too) where they'll trash one iteration that's not even close to being complete by comparing it to one that has over a dozen EPs and SPs, as well as more than a dozen new objects and venues at the store. It's like people keep misremembering that every sims game started out with the barest essentials and didn't really start to pick up several EPs later. And if you don't believe me, do this experiment--try to run any of the previous games with the base game and the base game only. (You can do this in TS3 by unchecking the packs in the launcher.) You will be so surprised at how little there was to do in each game at the very beginning.
So not only is pitting an incomplete vs a complete game unfair, it's counterproductive. The reason why TS1, TS2 and TS3 completed with so much content is that players spent the entire duration of each iteration pitching ideas. I can't find the post, but I'm pretty sure that Into the Future started out as a pitch on the old forums by a player. He posted something like, "I want a Jetsons world, and I want it laid out like this and I want it laid out like that, and I want this, this and that in the game." Same thing with Generations--it was a response to players unhappy with lack of family play. Imagine if the entire duration of TS3 no one had given suggestions and just complained about how TS3 was lacking. There would've been no Into the Future, no Generations or any of the other content that came out in TS3.
So if you're one of those people who find TS4 lacking, why not just post suggestions and feedback in the forums about what you would like to see added to make it less lacking? Instead of just making general complaints about how it's not as good as X, Y or Z because it's lacking?
You must not read that much into threads. There's a lot of feedback, and a lot of it is very constructive.
I know I have shared what I would like to see on these boards, and guess what they made it. I'm speaking about apartments (I'm still burnt on them); they were probably my #1 requested paid feature because they were incredibly versatile in The Sims 2, and extremely underwhelming in The Sims 3. Naturally my feedback was "I liked The Sims 2 style over The Sims 3 and would gladly pay for apartments of equal or greater functionality to Sims 2". The apartments in CL are barely apartments. The only things that really make them appear as apartments are the close proximity of the lots and the decoration shrouding each one. That wasn't what I was asking for. I actually haven't seen any suggestions for decorative houses that are only available in limited quantities in a select world. In my opinion, that warrants criticism. Doesn't matter if I'm comparing Sims 4 to Sims 2/3 - if I feel a particular component of the game was done better in another version of the game, I will share that. We are on version 4, no reason to be throwing out vastly inferior things under the excuse of "being different". Different doesn't always mean better, and in the case of The Sims 4 it has been used repeatedly as a fallback excuse to brush off criticism.
Now before I say anything I want You to know that I do like The Sims 4 & I enjoy Playing it & I'm not a hater or anything so please don't be like this
Ok now that is out of the way let's talk about this.
The sims 4 was released in 2014 ... in the era of magnificent games like Gta V / Mortal Kombat X / Battlefield 4 etc ....
everything looked extremely good & we felt the future of gaming coming.
So when the sims 4 was announced we expected something revolutionary , Something magical to the future of The Sims franchise , specially that it's one of the most selling PC games of all times.
but when the actual game was revealed and we saw how it lacked so many features that was in previous sims games & how it didn't add anything revolutionary except for CAS creation & Build mode many of us got very disappointed including me.
I never liked the art of the Sims themselves in the game especially the hair "It grew on me a little now" & I hated how they removed amazing features like CAST & open worlds & many other things.
I wouldn't care about open world if they atleast made open neighborhood districts.
so We "The Simmers" were sitting there looking at this game & we were like .... wait what ?
Is this really The fourth installment of this game ? in 2014 ??
It was just not good enough.
The reason why The Sims 2 was sooo huge & successful is the fact that it didn't feel like a 2004 game , it was MAGIC for it's time... the game would've been released in 2008 and still was a great game because of how awesome it was & how hugely it improved from The Sims 1 to The Sims 2.
The Sims 3 was a great improvement too & it added so many things that wasn't in the sims 2 like Open worlds , CAST & cars being in the base game.
& if it wasn't so buggy and if sims looked better , The sims 3 would've been a perfect game as well & it was a good game for it's age.
now back to The Sims 4 .... after all the improvements that we saw in previous installments of the franchise & how each game added HUGE new features .. we expected The sims 4 to be THEBOMB.COM ! but it was totally the opposite.
with more than 90 really needed features that was removed from The Sims 3 specially "open world , CAST & toddlers" everyone was shocked & disappointed with the game.
maybe The Sims Olympus just messed everything up & if they worked on an actual "The Sims 4" from the beginning , none of this would've happened.
now game is slowly bringing back missing features like "Ghosts , Pools , Repair man etc..." but it's like a little too late ...
The Sims 4 is not a bad game after all & the fact that it sold 5 million copies proves that but maybe it's not good enough to be released in this era.
Thanks for reading & sorry if this was hard to read "Enlish is not my first language"
If You have different opinions than mine please say them in a respectful way.
have a good day
I agree with everything you've said - minus the sims in Sims 3 looking ugly, I actually like how they look. They look better to me than the sims in 4. But with that being said, I honestly think even without the open world or CASt, or vehicles, one of the biggest killers for me is that fact that playing Sims 4 is like playing a 1950's sitcom. All the thrill that were in the previous games are just gone. Remember back in Sims 2, when you're sim or sims would cloud gaze, and the ran the risk of being crushed by a satellite? Or that random chance of you sim dying when they repaired the radio.
Or how in The Sims, when you would send your family on vacation one or all of them would come down with Montezuma's revenge, and I know sims could get food poisoning in Sims 2 as well. Even in Sims 3! I one sim, even though she's a level 5 I believe in cooking, all she does in burn food, and 9 times of 10, she ends up getting her hubby and kids sick from her cooking. lol
And other aspects, like no burglary whatsoever. I loved having to have my sims get a car alarm installed in Sims 2, so that a thief wouldn't take it. I was hoping it would make a come back in Sims 3. Or just the random act of burglary period. It is no existent in Sims 4. Even when they get sick it isn't something to really worry about. I thought with GTW sickness would be similar to how it was in Sims 2, but better. I liked how your sim could get just a common cold, but then it could become the flu, or worse, pneumonia. And if you didn't take care of them - and sometimes even when you did - they'd die.
Or the guinea pig disease in Sims 1. Man, I remember my first family who got sick from it. It was a mom, dad, and their daughter. The daughter came home from school and started sneezing. Of course I had no idea what was going on, and I thought maybe she had allergies. So I deleted all the trees, flowers, and bushes off of the lot. Then the dad started sneezing too along with the mom.
So then I thought maybe they had a gas leak. lol So I deleted the stove. That's when the dad died! Then the mom! And I exited the lot without saving. This happened four times. I then moved them to a new home. Yet the mom and dad still died. At this point I have to get online and see what was going on. When I found out what was making them sick I started cracking up. After that, I made sure that the guinea pig's cage was spot less, and that no one got bit by him.
Those little things are sorely missing, and they need to be added back. I hate that my sims live in such a sterile, harm free world. Nothing bad every happens. There are no consequences to their actions. They need to bring that SPICE back to the game.
Well, going back to the original topic, I will agree that there are some things in TS4 that are missing from the previous games that might be cause for disappointment.
On the other hand, there are so many things that TS4 brought to the table that to me, it's a "wash" in terms of deciding whether it's bad or better than the previous games. And that's been true for every iteration. TS3 brought us open world, but lacked the charm of TS1 and was too heavily skewed towards family play. But...it brought us open world and casT and tons of build mode tools, interactions, and new gameplay features and careers that TS1 didn't, so what TS3 added made up for what was lost.
It's the same with TS4. It's missing things from previous iterations but by the same token, it has stuff that weren't in them, like the clubs systems, emotions, certain buy and build mode features, new abilities, new types of objects and interactions. So I don't think it's fair when people do this thing of slating one iteration of The Sims because it's lacking something from the previous games, when it also brought things that weren't available before.
Another thing is that TS4 is not a complete game. It's literally a work in progress. I never get it when people do this thing (they did it with TS2 vs TS3, too) where they'll trash one iteration that's not even close to being complete by comparing it to one that has over a dozen EPs and SPs, as well as more than a dozen new objects and venues at the store. It's like people keep misremembering that every sims game started out with the barest essentials and didn't really start to pick up several EPs later. And if you don't believe me, do this experiment--try to run any of the previous games with the base game and the base game only. (You can do this in TS3 by unchecking the packs in the launcher.) You will be so surprised at how little there was to do in each game at the very beginning.
So not only is pitting an incomplete vs a complete game unfair, it's counterproductive. The reason why TS1, TS2 and TS3 completed with so much content is that players spent the entire duration of each iteration pitching ideas. I can't find the post, but I'm pretty sure that Into the Future started out as a pitch on the old forums by a player. He posted something like, "I want a Jetsons world, and I want it laid out like this and I want it laid out like that, and I want this, this and that in the game." Same thing with Generations--it was a response to players unhappy with lack of family play. Imagine if the entire duration of TS3 no one had given suggestions and just complained about how TS3 was lacking. There would've been no Into the Future, no Generations or any of the other content that came out in TS3.
So if you're one of those people who find TS4 lacking, why not just post suggestions and feedback in the forums about what you would like to see added to make it less lacking? Instead of just making general complaints about how it's not as good as X, Y or Z because it's lacking?
You must not read that much into threads. There's a lot of feedback, and a lot of it is very constructive.
I know I have shared what I would like to see on these boards, and guess what they made it. I'm speaking about apartments (I'm still burnt on them); they were probably my #1 requested paid feature because they were incredibly versatile in The Sims 2, and extremely underwhelming in The Sims 3. Naturally my feedback was "I liked The Sims 2 style over The Sims 3 and would gladly pay for apartments of equal or greater functionality to Sims 2". The apartments in CL are barely apartments. The only things that really make them appear as apartments are the close proximity of the lots and the decoration shrouding each one. That wasn't what I was asking for. I actually haven't seen any suggestions for decorative houses that are only available in limited quantities in a select world. In my opinion, that warrants criticism. Doesn't matter if I'm comparing Sims 4 to Sims 2/3 - if I feel a particular component of the game was done better in another version of the game, I will share that. We are on version 4, no reason to be throwing out vastly inferior things under the excuse of "being different". Different doesn't always mean better, and in the case of The Sims 4 it has been used repeatedly as a fallback excuse to brush off criticism.
The real mystery is how much of the lackluster features are the devs not understanding and how much of it is engine/budget limitations. Allow me to take a crack at why you liked Sims 2's apartments:
Sims 2? You had that lobby area where there was a couple things, like maybe a lounge or a gym. You might be hanging out in your apartment and feel like working out, and then you'd see some of your neighbors already at the gym, giving you a chance to both workout and chat with them. Or maybe you just want to socialize or mooch off the neighbors, and viola, with a knock on the door you were on your way into their apartment to do those things.
In many ways, Sims 2 apartments were the humble beginnings of an "open world," just very condensed and on a small scale. You didn't have a complete open world like Sims 3, but you had a lot with ~10 sims that were all being simulated, and the building itself had a sense of community as you'd pass by your neighbors regularly or pay them visits on the fly.
Sims 3 lacked this because the lobbies were very sparse and neighbor apartments didn't actually exist, so while you had the whole open world to explore, your direct building felt very dead. Sims 4 likewise lacks this because there AREN'T any lobbies, and beyond 2-3 repetitive and very scripted actions your neighbors can perform, they're practically non-existent outside of those. Even visiting their apartment is practically the same feel as visiting a new lot since it can't be done on the fly. In both cases, the direct building itself lacks a sense of community and a sense that your neighbors have lives as involved as yours....because they don't. They disappear from existence the moment they go behind their apartment door.
If I'm wrong and you don't feel I summarized what you wanted...? Great testament to how easy miscommunication is. People naturally like things for different reasons, and without communication of why we liked things, it's easy to mess up and focus on the wrong features. Especially since let's face it, some people aren't great at communicating or perhaps lack the analytical skills needed to really pinpoint what they loved properly. That's something both the community and the gurus need to be concious of when they read feedback.
If I'm right...? Doesn't really change the warnings posted above, but I would likewise question if the team doesn't know what people want, but often can't deliver on it. I for one am very suspicious of the fact that lobbies don't exist in Sims 4 apartments, and I personally believe that's likely an engine limitation; evidence would suggest the apartments are merely lots suspended high in the air, and that multiple story lots on the scale seen in Sims 3 simply isn't doable.
What really sucks would be if it's indeed the latter, but the Sims team refrains from communicating this to us because omg gotta uphold that image that Sims 4 is nothing but an improvement!!! Imagine if you give the SimGurus feedback and collectively they know they cannot provide you with the feature you've requested, but because the request is popular, they feel obligated to deliver. We may have seen that in City Living: very few seem happy with it's rendition of apartments, and I think had people known to expect that, they would've said don't bother with an apartment themed expansion at all. Let's say for example that dynamic Seasons is impossible for this engine, but they don't communicate that because it creates a bad image of the game, and instead we get half-baked season worlds with stagnant seasons that never change. This absolutely sucks, because had we gotten a chance to provide feedback, we may have been able to tell them we'd prefer they do it right or don't bother at all. When there's no chance to say this however, then they spend time on a half-baked feature we don't want, we only get disappointment, the image of the game looks poor anyways and everybody loses.
For everyone's sake, I hope it's just basic miscommunication. If it's engine limitations...? Then we need to be ready to compromise on some ideas and let them explore some new ones that suit the engine better; a weaker engine doesn't automatically mean the game has to be worse, it just demands a bit more creativity in steering around those limitations, which might be limited if we insist on demanding copy-paste jobs of older features from past games.....and if it's engine limitations AND miscommunication because they refuse to confess to said limitations...? Then whoo boy, we're in for one heck of a train wreck...
Well, going back to the original topic, I will agree that there are some things in TS4 that are missing from the previous games that might be cause for disappointment.
On the other hand, there are so many things that TS4 brought to the table that to me, it's a "wash" in terms of deciding whether it's bad or better than the previous games. And that's been true for every iteration. TS3 brought us open world, but lacked the charm of TS1 and was too heavily skewed towards family play. But...it brought us open world and casT and tons of build mode tools, interactions, and new gameplay features and careers that TS1 didn't, so what TS3 added made up for what was lost.
It's the same with TS4. It's missing things from previous iterations but by the same token, it has stuff that weren't in them, like the clubs systems, emotions, certain buy and build mode features, new abilities, new types of objects and interactions. So I don't think it's fair when people do this thing of slating one iteration of The Sims because it's lacking something from the previous games, when it also brought things that weren't available before.
Another thing is that TS4 is not a complete game. It's literally a work in progress. I never get it when people do this thing (they did it with TS2 vs TS3, too) where they'll trash one iteration that's not even close to being complete by comparing it to one that has over a dozen EPs and SPs, as well as more than a dozen new objects and venues at the store. It's like people keep misremembering that every sims game started out with the barest essentials and didn't really start to pick up several EPs later. And if you don't believe me, do this experiment--try to run any of the previous games with the base game and the base game only. (You can do this in TS3 by unchecking the packs in the launcher.) You will be so surprised at how little there was to do in each game at the very beginning.
So not only is pitting an incomplete vs a complete game unfair, it's counterproductive. The reason why TS1, TS2 and TS3 completed with so much content is that players spent the entire duration of each iteration pitching ideas. I can't find the post, but I'm pretty sure that Into the Future started out as a pitch on the old forums by a player. He posted something like, "I want a Jetsons world, and I want it laid out like this and I want it laid out like that, and I want this, this and that in the game." Same thing with Generations--it was a response to players unhappy with lack of family play. Imagine if the entire duration of TS3 no one had given suggestions and just complained about how TS3 was lacking. There would've been no Into the Future, no Generations or any of the other content that came out in TS3.
So if you're one of those people who find TS4 lacking, why not just post suggestions and feedback in the forums about what you would like to see added to make it less lacking? Instead of just making general complaints about how it's not as good as X, Y or Z because it's lacking?
You must not read that much into threads. There's a lot of feedback, and a lot of it is very constructive.
I know I have shared what I would like to see on these boards, and guess what they made it. I'm speaking about apartments (I'm still burnt on them); they were probably my #1 requested paid feature because they were incredibly versatile in The Sims 2, and extremely underwhelming in The Sims 3. Naturally my feedback was "I liked The Sims 2 style over The Sims 3 and would gladly pay for apartments of equal or greater functionality to Sims 2". The apartments in CL are barely apartments. The only things that really make them appear as apartments are the close proximity of the lots and the decoration shrouding each one. That wasn't what I was asking for. I actually haven't seen any suggestions for decorative houses that are only available in limited quantities in a select world. In my opinion, that warrants criticism. Doesn't matter if I'm comparing Sims 4 to Sims 2/3 - if I feel a particular component of the game was done better in another version of the game, I will share that. We are on version 4, no reason to be throwing out vastly inferior things under the excuse of "being different". Different doesn't always mean better, and in the case of The Sims 4 it has been used repeatedly as a fallback excuse to brush off criticism.
The real mystery is how much of the lackluster features are the devs not understanding and how much of it is engine/budget limitations. Allow me to take a crack at why you liked Sims 2's apartments:
Sims 2? You had that lobby area where there was a couple things, like maybe a lounge or a gym. You might be hanging out in your apartment and feel like working out, and then you'd see some of your neighbors already at the gym, giving you a chance to both workout and chat with them. Or maybe you just want to socialize or mooch off the neighbors, and viola, with a knock on the door you were on your way into their apartment to do those things.
In many ways, Sims 2 apartments were the humble beginnings of an "open world," just very condensed and on a small scale. You didn't have a complete open world like Sims 3, but you had a lot with ~10 sims that were all being simulated, and the building itself had a sense of community as you'd pass by your neighbors regularly or pay them visits on the fly.
Sims 3 lacked this because the lobbies were very sparse and neighbor apartments didn't actually exist, so while you had the whole open world to explore, your direct building felt very dead. Sims 4 likewise lacks this because there AREN'T any lobbies, and beyond 2-3 repetitive and very scripted actions your neighbors can perform, they're practically non-existent outside of those. Even visiting their apartment is practically the same feel as visiting a new lot since it can't be done on the fly. In both cases, the direct building itself lacks a sense of community and a sense that your neighbors have lives as involved as yours....because they don't. They disappear from existence the moment they go behind their apartment door.
If I'm wrong and you don't feel I summarized what you wanted...? Great testament to how easy miscommunication is. People naturally like things for different reasons, and without communication of why we liked things, it's easy to mess up and focus on the wrong features. Especially since let's face it, some people aren't great at communicating or perhaps lack the analytical skills needed to really pinpoint what they loved properly. That's something both the community and the gurus need to be concious of when they read feedback.
If I'm right...? Doesn't really change the warnings posted above, but I would likewise question if the team doesn't know what people want, but often can't deliver on it. I for one am very suspicious of the fact that lobbies don't exist in Sims 4 apartments, and I personally believe that's likely an engine limitation; evidence would suggest the apartments are merely lots suspended high in the air, and that multiple story lots on the scale seen in Sims 3 simply isn't doable.
What really plum would be if it's indeed the latter, but the Sims team refrains from communicating this to us because omg gotta uphold that image that Sims 4 is nothing but an improvement!!! Imagine if you give the SimGurus feedback and collectively they know they cannot provide you with the feature you've requested, but because the request is popular, they feel obligated to deliver. We may have seen that in City Living: very few seem happy with it's rendition of apartments, and I think had people known to expect that, they would've said don't bother with an apartment themed expansion at all. Let's say for example that dynamic Seasons is impossible for this engine, but they don't communicate that because it creates a bad image of the game, and instead we get half-baked season worlds with stagnant seasons that never change. This absolutely plum, because had we gotten a chance to provide feedback, we may have been able to tell them we'd prefer they do it right or don't bother at all. When there's no chance to say this however, then they spend time on a half-baked feature we don't want, we only get disappointment, the image of the game looks poor anyways and everybody loses.
For everyone's sake, I hope it's just basic miscommunication. If it's engine limitations...? Then we need to be ready to compromise on some ideas and let them explore some new ones that suit the engine better; a weaker engine doesn't automatically mean the game has to be worse, it just demands a bit more creativity in steering around those limitations, which might be limited if we insist on demanding copy-paste jobs of older features from past games.....and if it's engine limitations AND miscommunication because they refuse to confess to said limitations...? Then whoo boy, we're in for one heck of a train wreck...
For me, the joy of apartments in S2 was the genuine feeling of community that existed. I could customize and build every aspect of the complex that I wanted. To add icing to the cake, I was able to rotate throughout the households that existed in them (up to 4 full families). They could visit each other, ask the neighbours to visit, etc. Even epidemics would spread and I'd have a family sim make chicken soup and serve it to everyone.
I haven't played S4 apartments, but to my knowledge this can't be done and what was great has neither been improved nor expanded upon. All it appears to be (to me) is just a lot with limitations.
I also build apartments in 3 and am able to make them quite expansive beyond the single abode I can utilize. I have apartments with gyms, nectaries, pools, bars, and game rooms. But I agree about the emptiness. The feeling of loneliness just can't be shaken off.
Having a building that is even more limited than the first two games doesn't feel like progress. It doesn't feel worthwhile. And it will continue to spur my thoughts on what I feel could have been an improvement instead of a missed opportunity. Festivals don't fill the void. I don't utilize them in 3. Couldn't care if I ever saw them (or didn't see them) again.
I do believe it is engine limitations. It's mostly why I don't bother commenting much anymore. What's done is done. It won't change and it won't improve. Not for me. They can slap all the icing onto that stale cake all they want. but the cake will forever be stale.
Dissatisfied with Sims 4 and hoping for a better Sims 5
Well, going back to the original topic, I will agree that there are some things in TS4 that are missing from the previous games that might be cause for disappointment.
On the other hand, there are so many things that TS4 brought to the table that to me, it's a "wash" in terms of deciding whether it's bad or better than the previous games. And that's been true for every iteration. TS3 brought us open world, but lacked the charm of TS1 and was too heavily skewed towards family play. But...it brought us open world and casT and tons of build mode tools, interactions, and new gameplay features and careers that TS1 didn't, so what TS3 added made up for what was lost.
It's the same with TS4. It's missing things from previous iterations but by the same token, it has stuff that weren't in them, like the clubs systems, emotions, certain buy and build mode features, new abilities, new types of objects and interactions. So I don't think it's fair when people do this thing of slating one iteration of The Sims because it's lacking something from the previous games, when it also brought things that weren't available before.
Another thing is that TS4 is not a complete game. It's literally a work in progress. I never get it when people do this thing (they did it with TS2 vs TS3, too) where they'll trash one iteration that's not even close to being complete by comparing it to one that has over a dozen EPs and SPs, as well as more than a dozen new objects and venues at the store. It's like people keep misremembering that every sims game started out with the barest essentials and didn't really start to pick up several EPs later. And if you don't believe me, do this experiment--try to run any of the previous games with the base game and the base game only. (You can do this in TS3 by unchecking the packs in the launcher.) You will be so surprised at how little there was to do in each game at the very beginning.
So not only is pitting an incomplete vs a complete game unfair, it's counterproductive. The reason why TS1, TS2 and TS3 completed with so much content is that players spent the entire duration of each iteration pitching ideas. I can't find the post, but I'm pretty sure that Into the Future started out as a pitch on the old forums by a player. He posted something like, "I want a Jetsons world, and I want it laid out like this and I want it laid out like that, and I want this, this and that in the game." Same thing with Generations--it was a response to players unhappy with lack of family play. Imagine if the entire duration of TS3 no one had given suggestions and just complained about how TS3 was lacking. There would've been no Into the Future, no Generations or any of the other content that came out in TS3.
So if you're one of those people who find TS4 lacking, why not just post suggestions and feedback in the forums about what you would like to see added to make it less lacking? Instead of just making general complaints about how it's not as good as X, Y or Z because it's lacking?
You must not read that much into threads. There's a lot of feedback, and a lot of it is very constructive.
I know I have shared what I would like to see on these boards, and guess what they made it. I'm speaking about apartments (I'm still burnt on them); they were probably my #1 requested paid feature because they were incredibly versatile in The Sims 2, and extremely underwhelming in The Sims 3. Naturally my feedback was "I liked The Sims 2 style over The Sims 3 and would gladly pay for apartments of equal or greater functionality to Sims 2". The apartments in CL are barely apartments. The only things that really make them appear as apartments are the close proximity of the lots and the decoration shrouding each one. That wasn't what I was asking for. I actually haven't seen any suggestions for decorative houses that are only available in limited quantities in a select world. In my opinion, that warrants criticism. Doesn't matter if I'm comparing Sims 4 to Sims 2/3 - if I feel a particular component of the game was done better in another version of the game, I will share that. We are on version 4, no reason to be throwing out vastly inferior things under the excuse of "being different". Different doesn't always mean better, and in the case of The Sims 4 it has been used repeatedly as a fallback excuse to brush off criticism.
The real mystery is how much of the lackluster features are the devs not understanding and how much of it is engine/budget limitations. Allow me to take a crack at why you liked Sims 2's apartments:
Sims 2? You had that lobby area where there was a couple things, like maybe a lounge or a gym. You might be hanging out in your apartment and feel like working out, and then you'd see some of your neighbors already at the gym, giving you a chance to both workout and chat with them. Or maybe you just want to socialize or mooch off the neighbors, and viola, with a knock on the door you were on your way into their apartment to do those things.
In many ways, Sims 2 apartments were the humble beginnings of an "open world," just very condensed and on a small scale. You didn't have a complete open world like Sims 3, but you had a lot with ~10 sims that were all being simulated, and the building itself had a sense of community as you'd pass by your neighbors regularly or pay them visits on the fly.
Sims 3 lacked this because the lobbies were very sparse and neighbor apartments didn't actually exist, so while you had the whole open world to explore, your direct building felt very dead. Sims 4 likewise lacks this because there AREN'T any lobbies, and beyond 2-3 repetitive and very scripted actions your neighbors can perform, they're practically non-existent outside of those. Even visiting their apartment is practically the same feel as visiting a new lot since it can't be done on the fly. In both cases, the direct building itself lacks a sense of community and a sense that your neighbors have lives as involved as yours....because they don't. They disappear from existence the moment they go behind their apartment door.
If I'm wrong and you don't feel I summarized what you wanted...? Great testament to how easy miscommunication is. People naturally like things for different reasons, and without communication of why we liked things, it's easy to mess up and focus on the wrong features. Especially since let's face it, some people aren't great at communicating or perhaps lack the analytical skills needed to really pinpoint what they loved properly. That's something both the community and the gurus need to be concious of when they read feedback.
If I'm right...? Doesn't really change the warnings posted above, but I would likewise question if the team doesn't know what people want, but often can't deliver on it. I for one am very suspicious of the fact that lobbies don't exist in Sims 4 apartments, and I personally believe that's likely an engine limitation; evidence would suggest the apartments are merely lots suspended high in the air, and that multiple story lots on the scale seen in Sims 3 simply isn't doable.
What really plum would be if it's indeed the latter, but the Sims team refrains from communicating this to us because omg gotta uphold that image that Sims 4 is nothing but an improvement!!! Imagine if you give the SimGurus feedback and collectively they know they cannot provide you with the feature you've requested, but because the request is popular, they feel obligated to deliver. We may have seen that in City Living: very few seem happy with it's rendition of apartments, and I think had people known to expect that, they would've said don't bother with an apartment themed expansion at all. Let's say for example that dynamic Seasons is impossible for this engine, but they don't communicate that because it creates a bad image of the game, and instead we get half-baked season worlds with stagnant seasons that never change. This absolutely plum, because had we gotten a chance to provide feedback, we may have been able to tell them we'd prefer they do it right or don't bother at all. When there's no chance to say this however, then they spend time on a half-baked feature we don't want, we only get disappointment, the image of the game looks poor anyways and everybody loses.
For everyone's sake, I hope it's just basic miscommunication. If it's engine limitations...? Then we need to be ready to compromise on some ideas and let them explore some new ones that suit the engine better; a weaker engine doesn't automatically mean the game has to be worse, it just demands a bit more creativity in steering around those limitations, which might be limited if we insist on demanding copy-paste jobs of older features from past games.....and if it's engine limitations AND miscommunication because they refuse to confess to said limitations...? Then whoo boy, we're in for one heck of a train wreck...
You pretty much nailed it. Apartments were huge in Sims 2 because an apartment operated so much differently than a regular lot. As you said it was the baby steps toward that open world. For the first time you could interact with your neighbors, you could go to a community space without traveling through a loading screen. The ability to add them to any residential world was a huge plus.
Sims 4 apartments were shoehorned into the expansion pack and shouldn't have happened, at least not if they knew they couldn't do them in a somewhat decent manner. Whether it be engine limitations, or clueless management; the apartments in Sims 4 are easily the worst yet.
I can't add them to any other world, I can barely edit the ugly selection that came with the world. There is no lobby, or amenities of any kind. There's neighbors, but not in the same sense as Sims 2. Just like every other 'neighbor' you have in The Sims 4, those living in the apartment right next to you or across the hall cannot be visited without sitting through a loading screen. Something even Sims 2 managed to get rid of in apartments. There's no such thing as apartment gameplay, something that Maxis wanted players to think was coming with them. There's minimal difference between living in an apartment than living in a house, the biggest difference is how small your lot is and how little you can change.
Well, going back to the original topic, I will agree that there are some things in TS4 that are missing from the previous games that might be cause for disappointment.
On the other hand, there are so many things that TS4 brought to the table that to me, it's a "wash" in terms of deciding whether it's bad or better than the previous games. And that's been true for every iteration. TS3 brought us open world, but lacked the charm of TS1 and was too heavily skewed towards family play. But...it brought us open world and casT and tons of build mode tools, interactions, and new gameplay features and careers that TS1 didn't, so what TS3 added made up for what was lost.
It's the same with TS4. It's missing things from previous iterations but by the same token, it has stuff that weren't in them, like the clubs systems, emotions, certain buy and build mode features, new abilities, new types of objects and interactions. So I don't think it's fair when people do this thing of slating one iteration of The Sims because it's lacking something from the previous games, when it also brought things that weren't available before.
Another thing is that TS4 is not a complete game. It's literally a work in progress. I never get it when people do this thing (they did it with TS2 vs TS3, too) where they'll trash one iteration that's not even close to being complete by comparing it to one that has over a dozen EPs and SPs, as well as more than a dozen new objects and venues at the store. It's like people keep misremembering that every sims game started out with the barest essentials and didn't really start to pick up several EPs later. And if you don't believe me, do this experiment--try to run any of the previous games with the base game and the base game only. (You can do this in TS3 by unchecking the packs in the launcher.) You will be so surprised at how little there was to do in each game at the very beginning.
So not only is pitting an incomplete vs a complete game unfair, it's counterproductive. The reason why TS1, TS2 and TS3 completed with so much content is that players spent the entire duration of each iteration pitching ideas. I can't find the post, but I'm pretty sure that Into the Future started out as a pitch on the old forums by a player. He posted something like, "I want a Jetsons world, and I want it laid out like this and I want it laid out like that, and I want this, this and that in the game." Same thing with Generations--it was a response to players unhappy with lack of family play. Imagine if the entire duration of TS3 no one had given suggestions and just complained about how TS3 was lacking. There would've been no Into the Future, no Generations or any of the other content that came out in TS3.
So if you're one of those people who find TS4 lacking, why not just post suggestions and feedback in the forums about what you would like to see added to make it less lacking? Instead of just making general complaints about how it's not as good as X, Y or Z because it's lacking?
You must not read that much into threads. There's a lot of feedback, and a lot of it is very constructive.
I know I have shared what I would like to see on these boards, and guess what they made it. I'm speaking about apartments (I'm still burnt on them); they were probably my #1 requested paid feature because they were incredibly versatile in The Sims 2, and extremely underwhelming in The Sims 3. Naturally my feedback was "I liked The Sims 2 style over The Sims 3 and would gladly pay for apartments of equal or greater functionality to Sims 2". The apartments in CL are barely apartments. The only things that really make them appear as apartments are the close proximity of the lots and the decoration shrouding each one. That wasn't what I was asking for. I actually haven't seen any suggestions for decorative houses that are only available in limited quantities in a select world. In my opinion, that warrants criticism. Doesn't matter if I'm comparing Sims 4 to Sims 2/3 - if I feel a particular component of the game was done better in another version of the game, I will share that. We are on version 4, no reason to be throwing out vastly inferior things under the excuse of "being different". Different doesn't always mean better, and in the case of The Sims 4 it has been used repeatedly as a fallback excuse to brush off criticism.
The real mystery is how much of the lackluster features are the devs not understanding and how much of it is engine/budget limitations. Allow me to take a crack at why you liked Sims 2's apartments:
Sims 2? You had that lobby area where there was a couple things, like maybe a lounge or a gym. You might be hanging out in your apartment and feel like working out, and then you'd see some of your neighbors already at the gym, giving you a chance to both workout and chat with them. Or maybe you just want to socialize or mooch off the neighbors, and viola, with a knock on the door you were on your way into their apartment to do those things.
In many ways, Sims 2 apartments were the humble beginnings of an "open world," just very condensed and on a small scale. You didn't have a complete open world like Sims 3, but you had a lot with ~10 sims that were all being simulated, and the building itself had a sense of community as you'd pass by your neighbors regularly or pay them visits on the fly.
This!
I actually thought that TS2's Apartment Life was a pretty good foresight of what you would see in TS3 on a small scale. It was not just about your Sims, but the world around hem and how they interact with that world
You must not read that much into threads. There's a lot of feedback, and a lot of it is very constructive.
@drake_mccarty Actually, you are the one who must not read that much into threads because if you had, you would know that I am one of those posters who not only actively posts constructive feedback threads but participates in ones posted by other players:
Which is neither here nor there, because in the end, my comments weren't an accusation that nobody in this forum posts constructive feedback. It was an invitation for the players like you who don't post any constructive feedback at all to stop focusing on what could have been and instead care more about what this game could become. You didn't take it--and that's okay--so I'll just quietly step out of the way so I don't get in the way of the complaining.
Well, going back to the original topic, I will agree that there are some things in TS4 that are missing from the previous games that might be cause for disappointment.
On the other hand, there are so many things that TS4 brought to the table that to me, it's a "wash" in terms of deciding whether it's bad or better than the previous games. And that's been true for every iteration. TS3 brought us open world, but lacked the charm of TS1 and was too heavily skewed towards family play. But...it brought us open world and casT and tons of build mode tools, interactions, and new gameplay features and careers that TS1 didn't, so what TS3 added made up for what was lost.
It's the same with TS4. It's missing things from previous iterations but by the same token, it has stuff that weren't in them, like the clubs systems, emotions, certain buy and build mode features, new abilities, new types of objects and interactions. So I don't think it's fair when people do this thing of slating one iteration of The Sims because it's lacking something from the previous games, when it also brought things that weren't available before.
Another thing is that TS4 is not a complete game. It's literally a work in progress. I never get it when people do this thing (they did it with TS2 vs TS3, too) where they'll trash one iteration that's not even close to being complete by comparing it to one that has over a dozen EPs and SPs, as well as more than a dozen new objects and venues at the store. It's like people keep misremembering that every sims game started out with the barest essentials and didn't really start to pick up several EPs later. And if you don't believe me, do this experiment--try to run any of the previous games with the base game and the base game only. (You can do this in TS3 by unchecking the packs in the launcher.) You will be so surprised at how little there was to do in each game at the very beginning.
So not only is pitting an incomplete vs a complete game unfair, it's counterproductive. The reason why TS1, TS2 and TS3 completed with so much content is that players spent the entire duration of each iteration pitching ideas. I can't find the post, but I'm pretty sure that Into the Future started out as a pitch on the old forums by a player. He posted something like, "I want a Jetsons world, and I want it laid out like this and I want it laid out like that, and I want this, this and that in the game." Same thing with Generations--it was a response to players unhappy with lack of family play. Imagine if the entire duration of TS3 no one had given suggestions and just complained about how TS3 was lacking. There would've been no Into the Future, no Generations or any of the other content that came out in TS3.
So if you're one of those people who find TS4 lacking, why not just post suggestions and feedback in the forums about what you would like to see added to make it less lacking? Instead of just making general complaints about how it's not as good as X, Y or Z because it's lacking?
The excuse "it's an incomplete game" is pretty poor, IMHO. At least, when I compare TS4 to its predecessors, I compare their base games as I've played them in their respective primes, and the features they have added to constitute making an entirely new Sims game. When I look at Sims 4, I ultimately find emotions, multitasking, redesigned assets, and other minor features do not hold a candle next to a game which adds an entire open world, tool to completely customize said open world, tool to re-texture anything right from the game, vastly updated CAS/Build-Buy, gameplay features, and more. Or a game (The Sims 2) which completely converts the game into 3D, adds generational gameplay, genetics, hugely redesigned world and Sims, redesigned CAS, redesigned B/B, etc.
I do think your experiment is a fair way of comparing the base games, as long as the player approaches the experiment with the mindset that they're comparing a game that claims to be the fourth iteration released in the year 2014 next to the third, in 2009, and the second, and 2005.
I agree with you on your last claim -- constructive feedback is always better than simple criticisms. But it's still a good thing to point out the flaws/shortcomings in what you have purchased. Not everyone has to play the role of developer, and suggest they know the solution to a problem. That's EA's job. It was not Apple's customers that have built the idea of an iPhone -- nobody could have predicted that. It was thanks to Apple/Steve Jobs themselves. If EA were as innovative, maybe we'd see our own "iPhone" breakthrough within The Sims.
Work on the sims 4 started in 2008, and they scrapped everything 4 years later. Imagine how great the game couldve been if they didnt have to start over and release the game in just 2 years
Work on the sims 4 started in 2008, and they scrapped everything 4 years later. Imagine how great the game couldve been if they didnt have to start over and release the game in just 2 years
Yeah, well you can thank those people who keep wanting The Sims series to be made multiplayer/co-op for that.
@luthienrising WOW! I can't even believe what I'm reading. The condescension and ignorance coming from you is so strong right now. Your posts are HIGHLY inappropriate.
@luthienrising WOW! I can't even believe what I'm reading. The condescension and ignorance coming from you is so strong right now. Your posts are HIGHLY inappropriate.
And yet she has not come back into this thread for some reason to try and explain what she meant as she left me confused...
Sims 4 has it's flaws. Sims 1 and 2 had it's flaws. Please don't bring race/gender/sexuality into a discussion about the quality of a game. Sure it is extremely important to have diversity and the like. But lots of us can agree that that is something Sims 4 does right. Going deeper than this on a discussion that never brought it up would be pointless
My point in the other discussion still stands as relevant:[/b] it is unwise to make an update guided by politics or virtue signaling, it's smarter to make an update guided by a researched attempt to provide as many simmers with gameplay they want as possible.
I must be missing some vital piece of context if this point is meant to be legitimate. Not everything is about profit, for one, and supporting a cause is not automatically virtue signaling, for another. The world does not operate in black and white. Companies often try to do things that will make them look good for the sales boost from having a better reputation, but that doesn't mean they are never sincerely trying to help in their intentions. The motivation from "better reputation" vs. "better world" is a sliding scale and all companies and all actions are not all the same.
It can be anything from people who see money as a means to an end and are after some other goal (I think Elon Musk is probably a sterling example of this) to people who see money as the end, but are happy to try to make the world a better place in the process, to people who just want money and will use virtue signaling to make more money.
Since we can't go interrogate EA's employees and get an unquestionable answer out of the decision-makers about why the particular decision in question was made, it's utterly pointless to speculate beyond the motivations and words that they have put out there for us to see. We can't read their minds. And in the event that they were trying to make the world a better place, it seems selfish to argue that they should have prioritized keeping a few more simmers happy, rather than trying to make a positive impact in society. So the legitimacy of such a point really hinges on information we don't have and never will have.
What blows me away is that I can play The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim on my laptop with a maximum of 5 seconds long loading screens (skyrim has STUNNING graphics, I will point out), no lag at all, the game runs perfectly. The sims 4 on the other hand is apparently a much more complicated game, even though the sims look like cartoons and there is no open world. Loading screens for me are about a minute long, there are tons of bugs, and after playing through two sim generations the game is laggy and barely playable at all.
I will not argue with how complicated the coding is in the sims 4, cause I haven't looked into that, but I have to say I feel like they are doing a lot wrong, and much more complicated than it has to be. I can play any rpg perfectly on my laptop, but not the sims 4. If I can get a game like Skyrim to play, which has stunning graphics, a gigantic open world, countless of interactions, and a slight butterfly effect, then I don't quite understand why the sims 4 is more lag than it is gameplay.
I don't know how it compares to Skyrim's code, but it is pretty complicated from what I've seen. Most of the complexity is probably in the autonomy, the running of / timing of animations, and just interactions in general. Note that this is a game where things are supposed to look more or less realistic in terms of space and touching. A tiny bit off on an animation, or a single step in a complicated interaction, and it can look very odd. There's a lot that needs to be precise for the simulation to be immersive. Skyrim, in my experience playing it, doesn't have a lot of precision in that way. The physics engine is fairly imprecise, animations don't really need to be timed together except in select cutscene-like scenarios, which are few and far-between. In this game, there's a ton of little systems working together to make it look like something real and organic is just evolving out of nowhere, like real life. Skyrim has spawn points and pre-built areas. I could never quite lose myself in Skyrim in part because it got to the point where I'd seen most everything and there was nothing much new for me left to see. In TS4, it's designed to try to evolve organically such that you'll always be able to see things in a way you didn't see them before; it's by no means perfect, but my point is that it requires a lot of precise interplay.
Is it actually more complex? I don't know. I just know it has a lot of complexity. Could it be simpler? Probably, in a few ways. Most code can.
What blows me away is that I can play The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim on my laptop with a maximum of 5 seconds long loading screens (skyrim has STUNNING graphics, I will point out), no lag at all, the game runs perfectly. The sims 4 on the other hand is apparently a much more complicated game, even though the sims look like cartoons and there is no open world. Loading screens for me are about a minute long, there are tons of bugs, and after playing through two sim generations the game is laggy and barely playable at all.
I will not argue with how complicated the coding is in the sims 4, cause I haven't looked into that, but I have to say I feel like they are doing a lot wrong, and much more complicated than it has to be. I can play any rpg perfectly on my laptop, but not the sims 4. If I can get a game like Skyrim to play, which has stunning graphics, a gigantic open world, countless of interactions, and a slight butterfly effect, then I don't quite understand why the sims 4 is more lag than it is gameplay.
I don't know how it compares to Skyrim's code, but it is pretty complicated from what I've seen. Most of the complexity is probably in the autonomy, the running of / timing of animations, and just interactions in general. Note that this is a game where things are supposed to look more or less realistic in terms of space and touching. A tiny bit off on an animation, or a single step in a complicated interaction, and it can look very odd. There's a lot that needs to be precise for the simulation to be immersive. Skyrim, in my experience playing it, doesn't have a lot of precision in that way. The physics engine is fairly imprecise, animations don't really need to be timed together except in select cutscene-like scenarios, which are few and far-between. In this game, there's a ton of little systems working together to make it look like something real and organic is just evolving out of nowhere, like real life. Skyrim has spawn points and pre-built areas. I could never quite lose myself in Skyrim in part because it got to the point where I'd seen most everything and there was nothing much new for me left to see. In TS4, it's designed to try to evolve organically such that you'll always be able to see things in a way you didn't see them before; it's by no means perfect, but my point is that it requires a lot of precise interplay.
Is it actually more complex? I don't know. I just know it has a lot of complexity. Could it be simpler? Probably, in a few ways. Most code can.
Exactly that. It's not even a comparison. You can't change the buildings in Skyrim on the fly. You can't change the NPC looks or behaviours on the fly. You can't rearrange where NPCs live on the fly. The only thing Skyrim's got going for it is the graphics, which btw, it should have, considering it's little more than a glorified FPS with a fantasy set dressing on it. It better look pretty, lol.
It can be anything from people who see money as a means to an end and are after some other goal (I think Elon Musk is probably a sterling example of this) to people who see money as the end, but are happy to try to make the world a better place in the process, to people who just want money and will use virtue signaling to make more money.
Since we can't go interrogate EA's employees and get an unquestionable answer out of the decision-makers about why the particular decision in question was made, it's utterly pointless to speculate beyond the motivations and words that they have put out there for us to see.
Guys remember that time I said some of you have got a bad habit of killing a discussion by arguing "we have no proof and we can never know so let's just leave it at that" instead of trying to refute any arguments I've made....? Yeah.
We're talking about the company voted most hated company in America twice in a row (and then the contest ceased to exist). We're talking about the very same company that refused to include things like Toddlers and swimming pools at base game, but saw fit to include giant cupcake factories and rocket ships. The entire release stunk of EA pushing the game out the door too soon and not caring, but you mean to tell me the moment it's about transgender rights, suddenly those same uncaring suits don't care about profit margins? Let's be clear about something: the moment that transgender patch dropped, multiple publications had articles ready. It was if EA informed them of it in advance, as if they wanted people to know how progressive and how pro-LGBT they were.
It's for profit, it's naive to think otherwise. And what's more, I don't think you're doing yourself any favors by giving logical, unfeeling and uncaring companies that strive for profit the benefit of the doubt. By all means give individuals the benefit of the doubt; I'm sure the individual programmers and workers like the message, for example, but let's not give a faceless company the benefit of the doubt like we'll hurt it's fee-fees if we don't.
This all ties right back into the fact that I think faaaaar too many people view companies as friends rather than entities they did a trade with. I mean honestly, why do you care? Why are you going out of your way to defend the....integrity of EA? Why does it seem like an uncomfortable idea for you to view EA as calculating and money-orientated...? I brought it up to make a point about prioritizing marketing over the actual product, not to insist they're the devil or something; I believe I stated multiple times I don't fault them for being calculating and logical because that's exactly what all companies become.
And as such, even if tomorrow we somehow irrefutably proved EA's entire staff is passionate about political messages all out of the goodness of their hearts rather than the goodness of their pockets, it hasn't changed anything: they still use the game as a political statement rather than a game, which is part of my problem with it. I do not play this game to hear political statements shouted at me, even if I agree with said statements. I don't care; I don't need political validation from a game. I want to play my game and have fun, thus I still view such politically-orientated updates as misguided and often counter-intuitive to the focus of a game.
At the end of the day, it all comes down to this: if EA is so progressive and passionate about these issues, why weren't they included at launch? And as I said, it doesn't really matter much in the grand scheme of things: whether EA are a bunch of compassionate LGBT allies or some guys in suits smelling a chance for profit off such a patch, the patch and the events surrounding it still seemed to prioritize advertisements over gameplay, and THAT'S the problem. That's what needs to be avoided in the future and that's why I get nervous when I hear them asking for more skin tones or talking about cultural representation or the like, because all of those issues tend to be aesthetic-only and completely devoid of gameplay.
@luthienrising WOW! I can't even believe what I'm reading. The condescension and ignorance coming from you is so strong right now. Your posts are HIGHLY inappropriate.
And yet she has not come back into this thread for some reason to try and explain what she meant as she left me confused...
Hi. I came back. I explained. I got dumped on again by people who read some words and not others. I decided there was no point in further derailing the thread. I stated that I wasn't going to be in this thread anymore. Not sure why you thought I'd come back and keep defending myself against false accusations.
So. Not returning again. Please don't bother paging me here. I don't even usually read this whole forum category anymore.
EA CREATOR NETWORK MEMBER — Want to be notified of patches, new Broken Mods threads, and urgent Sims 4 news? Follow me at https://www.patreon.com/luthienrising.
Work on the sims 4 started in 2008, and they scrapped everything 4 years later. Imagine how great the game couldve been if they didnt have to start over and release the game in just 2 years
Yeah, well you can thank those people who keep wanting The Sims series to be made multiplayer/co-op for that.
And to those people I say: some game formulas just won't work well in multiplayer form... accept it goshdarnit!
I brought fruit loops. I think the fruit loops might be fruit. I better roll film to find out lol. Yeah this thread has gone wild. Some of the stuff said is very silly and not logical. Normal I am the not the logical one. Some people arguments make me want to look at the floor tiles.
Work on the sims 4 started in 2008, and they scrapped everything 4 years later. Imagine how great the game couldve been if they didnt have to start over and release the game in just 2 years
Yeah, well you can thank those people who keep wanting The Sims series to be made multiplayer/co-op for that.
And to those people I say: some game formulas just won't work well in multiplayer form... accept it goshdarnit!
Agreed. It's like trying to force a round peg into a square hole.
Ironically though there is a ton of potential upside for server-side hosting of the worlds.
Something I'm sure they're very much aware of and would love to be able to implement, but simply can't becasue the fan base would never tolerate it.
The only way they could get away with it is to actually take the financial risk, build the prototype and prove to the community that they could offer a vastly superior experience if they hosted the worlds themselve's.
If they were to ever succeded in doing that (which has about as much chance as a snownball in Hades)
Multiplayer would be a logical and natural next step for them to explore..
It can be anything from people who see money as a means to an end and are after some other goal (I think Elon Musk is probably a sterling example of this) to people who see money as the end, but are happy to try to make the world a better place in the process, to people who just want money and will use virtue signaling to make more money.
Since we can't go interrogate EA's employees and get an unquestionable answer out of the decision-makers about why the particular decision in question was made, it's utterly pointless to speculate beyond the motivations and words that they have put out there for us to see.
Guys remember that time I said some of you have got a bad habit of killing a discussion by arguing "we have no proof and we can never know so let's just leave it at that" instead of trying to refute any arguments I've made....? Yeah.
We're talking about the company voted most hated company in America twice in a row (and then the contest ceased to exist). We're talking about the very same company that refused to include things like Toddlers and swimming pools at base game, but saw fit to include giant cupcake factories and rocket ships. The entire release stunk of EA pushing the game out the door too soon and not caring, but you mean to tell me the moment it's about transgender rights, suddenly those same uncaring suits don't care about profit margins? Let's be clear about something: the moment that transgender patch dropped, multiple publications had articles ready. It was if EA informed them of it in advance, as if they wanted people to know how progressive and how pro-LGBT they were.
It's for profit, it's naive to think otherwise. And what's more, I don't think you're doing yourself any favors by giving logical, unfeeling and uncaring companies that strive for profit the benefit of the doubt. By all means give individuals the benefit of the doubt; I'm sure the individual programmers and workers like the message, for example, but let's not give a faceless company the benefit of the doubt like we'll hurt it's fee-fees if we don't.
This all ties right back into the fact that I think faaaaar too many people view companies as friends rather than entities they did a trade with. I mean honestly, why do you care? Why are you going out of your way to defend the....integrity of EA? Why does it seem like an uncomfortable idea for you to view EA as calculating and money-orientated...? I brought it up to make a point about prioritizing marketing over the actual product, not to insist they're the devil or something; I believe I stated multiple times I don't fault them for being calculating and logical because that's exactly what all companies become.
And as such, even if tomorrow we somehow irrefutably proved EA's entire staff is passionate about political messages all out of the goodness of their hearts rather than the goodness of their pockets, it hasn't changed anything: they still use the game as a political statement rather than a game, which is part of my problem with it. I do not play this game to hear political statements shouted at me, even if I agree with said statements. I don't care; I don't need political validation from a game. I want to play my game and have fun, thus I still view such politically-orientated updates as misguided and often counter-intuitive to the focus of a game.
At the end of the day, it all comes down to this: if EA is so progressive and passionate about these issues, why weren't they included at launch? And as I said, it doesn't really matter much in the grand scheme of things: whether EA are a bunch of compassionate LGBT allies or some guys in suits smelling a chance for profit off such a patch, the patch and the events surrounding it still seemed to prioritize advertisements over gameplay, and THAT'S the problem. That's what needs to be avoided in the future and that's why I get nervous when I hear them asking for more skin tones or talking about cultural representation or the like, because all of those issues tend to be aesthetic-only and completely devoid of gameplay.
What is there to refute if the argument you're making hinges on data none of us can have access to? There are a million and one topics we could discuss. I don't see what's productive about discussing one that will very likely never have a conclusive answer. Especially if you're going to try to act like you can magically make a probable answer out of wild speculation.
Comments
1) the search tool .
2) making an object bigger or smaller without having a mod for.
3) improved MOO no need omsp anymore.
4) Easy built tool. No round walls still but we're almost close to.
5) A hospital to play
6) A Prison etc.
I don't tell I am a fan of the sims 4 but these amazing stuffs must be included in the previous easily ! Except of always badmouthing on ts4 and complain about a game you play or you brought or download I don't know where, tell yourself why this game was made like this? That's a dev choice and no matter the numbers of tantrums you can do, they don't care of you.
I am a sims 3 fan and sometimes I am deceived by the game because we lack interactions between the sims, I wanted to slap a sims that was a troublemaker without fighting with I couldn't. We don't have a lot of animation as well. The toddlers are boring, we can't disable or send the cellphone and using instead of home phone, we can't care of the stray pets and even your own pets without being friends with etc.
When I am in the sims 2 I am deceived by the game too , no open world, no colourwheel , no open carreer playable, fexw or inexistant slot in objects, 90% of the cc you find are not pets and ep improved etc. (compared to the sims 3 all the new cc are improved for pets since the patch was made) Poor bodyshop no more sliders etc.
Does that mean ts2 and ts3 are also worst game ever made ? NO !
on wordpress: thesimsophonique.wp.com / on dreamwidth: simsophonique.dreamwidth.org
Follow me on tumblr (sims only)
simsophonique.tumblr.com (please no triggers I am autistic asperger)
On the other hand, there are so many things that TS4 brought to the table that to me, it's a "wash" in terms of deciding whether it's bad or better than the previous games. And that's been true for every iteration. TS3 brought us open world, but lacked the charm of TS1 and was too heavily skewed towards family play. But...it brought us open world and casT and tons of build mode tools, interactions, and new gameplay features and careers that TS1 didn't, so what TS3 added made up for what was lost.
It's the same with TS4. It's missing things from previous iterations but by the same token, it has stuff that weren't in them, like the clubs systems, emotions, certain buy and build mode features, new abilities, new types of objects and interactions. So I don't think it's fair when people do this thing of slating one iteration of The Sims because it's lacking something from the previous games, when it also brought things that weren't available before.
Another thing is that TS4 is not a complete game. It's literally a work in progress. I never get it when people do this thing (they did it with TS2 vs TS3, too) where they'll trash one iteration that's not even close to being complete by comparing it to one that has over a dozen EPs and SPs, as well as more than a dozen new objects and venues at the store. It's like people keep misremembering that every sims game started out with the barest essentials and didn't really start to pick up several EPs later. And if you don't believe me, do this experiment--try to run any of the previous games with the base game and the base game only. (You can do this in TS3 by unchecking the packs in the launcher.) You will be so surprised at how little there was to do in each game at the very beginning.
So not only is pitting an incomplete vs a complete game unfair, it's counterproductive. The reason why TS1, TS2 and TS3 completed with so much content is that players spent the entire duration of each iteration pitching ideas. I can't find the post, but I'm pretty sure that Into the Future started out as a pitch on the old forums by a player. He posted something like, "I want a Jetsons world, and I want it laid out like this and I want it laid out like that, and I want this, this and that in the game." Same thing with Generations--it was a response to players unhappy with lack of family play. Imagine if the entire duration of TS3 no one had given suggestions and just complained about how TS3 was lacking. There would've been no Into the Future, no Generations or any of the other content that came out in TS3.
So if you're one of those people who find TS4 lacking, why not just post suggestions and feedback in the forums about what you would like to see added to make it less lacking? Instead of just making general complaints about how it's not as good as X, Y or Z because it's lacking?
You must not read that much into threads. There's a lot of feedback, and a lot of it is very constructive.
I know I have shared what I would like to see on these boards, and guess what they made it. I'm speaking about apartments (I'm still burnt on them); they were probably my #1 requested paid feature because they were incredibly versatile in The Sims 2, and extremely underwhelming in The Sims 3. Naturally my feedback was "I liked The Sims 2 style over The Sims 3 and would gladly pay for apartments of equal or greater functionality to Sims 2". The apartments in CL are barely apartments. The only things that really make them appear as apartments are the close proximity of the lots and the decoration shrouding each one. That wasn't what I was asking for. I actually haven't seen any suggestions for decorative houses that are only available in limited quantities in a select world. In my opinion, that warrants criticism. Doesn't matter if I'm comparing Sims 4 to Sims 2/3 - if I feel a particular component of the game was done better in another version of the game, I will share that. We are on version 4, no reason to be throwing out vastly inferior things under the excuse of "being different". Different doesn't always mean better, and in the case of The Sims 4 it has been used repeatedly as a fallback excuse to brush off criticism.
I agree with everything you've said - minus the sims in Sims 3 looking ugly, I actually like how they look. They look better to me than the sims in 4. But with that being said, I honestly think even without the open world or CASt, or vehicles, one of the biggest killers for me is that fact that playing Sims 4 is like playing a 1950's sitcom. All the thrill that were in the previous games are just gone. Remember back in Sims 2, when you're sim or sims would cloud gaze, and the ran the risk of being crushed by a satellite? Or that random chance of you sim dying when they repaired the radio.
Or how in The Sims, when you would send your family on vacation one or all of them would come down with Montezuma's revenge, and I know sims could get food poisoning in Sims 2 as well. Even in Sims 3! I one sim, even though she's a level 5 I believe in cooking, all she does in burn food, and 9 times of 10, she ends up getting her hubby and kids sick from her cooking. lol
And other aspects, like no burglary whatsoever. I loved having to have my sims get a car alarm installed in Sims 2, so that a thief wouldn't take it. I was hoping it would make a come back in Sims 3. Or just the random act of burglary period. It is no existent in Sims 4. Even when they get sick it isn't something to really worry about. I thought with GTW sickness would be similar to how it was in Sims 2, but better. I liked how your sim could get just a common cold, but then it could become the flu, or worse, pneumonia. And if you didn't take care of them - and sometimes even when you did - they'd die.
Or the guinea pig disease in Sims 1. Man, I remember my first family who got sick from it. It was a mom, dad, and their daughter. The daughter came home from school and started sneezing. Of course I had no idea what was going on, and I thought maybe she had allergies. So I deleted all the trees, flowers, and bushes off of the lot. Then the dad started sneezing too along with the mom.
So then I thought maybe they had a gas leak. lol So I deleted the stove. That's when the dad died! Then the mom! And I exited the lot without saving. This happened four times. I then moved them to a new home. Yet the mom and dad still died. At this point I have to get online and see what was going on. When I found out what was making them sick I started cracking up. After that, I made sure that the guinea pig's cage was spot less, and that no one got bit by him.
Those little things are sorely missing, and they need to be added back. I hate that my sims live in such a sterile, harm free world. Nothing bad every happens. There are no consequences to their actions. They need to bring that SPICE back to the game.
The real mystery is how much of the lackluster features are the devs not understanding and how much of it is engine/budget limitations. Allow me to take a crack at why you liked Sims 2's apartments:
Sims 2? You had that lobby area where there was a couple things, like maybe a lounge or a gym. You might be hanging out in your apartment and feel like working out, and then you'd see some of your neighbors already at the gym, giving you a chance to both workout and chat with them. Or maybe you just want to socialize or mooch off the neighbors, and viola, with a knock on the door you were on your way into their apartment to do those things.
In many ways, Sims 2 apartments were the humble beginnings of an "open world," just very condensed and on a small scale. You didn't have a complete open world like Sims 3, but you had a lot with ~10 sims that were all being simulated, and the building itself had a sense of community as you'd pass by your neighbors regularly or pay them visits on the fly.
Sims 3 lacked this because the lobbies were very sparse and neighbor apartments didn't actually exist, so while you had the whole open world to explore, your direct building felt very dead. Sims 4 likewise lacks this because there AREN'T any lobbies, and beyond 2-3 repetitive and very scripted actions your neighbors can perform, they're practically non-existent outside of those. Even visiting their apartment is practically the same feel as visiting a new lot since it can't be done on the fly. In both cases, the direct building itself lacks a sense of community and a sense that your neighbors have lives as involved as yours....because they don't. They disappear from existence the moment they go behind their apartment door.
If I'm wrong and you don't feel I summarized what you wanted...? Great testament to how easy miscommunication is. People naturally like things for different reasons, and without communication of why we liked things, it's easy to mess up and focus on the wrong features. Especially since let's face it, some people aren't great at communicating or perhaps lack the analytical skills needed to really pinpoint what they loved properly. That's something both the community and the gurus need to be concious of when they read feedback.
If I'm right...? Doesn't really change the warnings posted above, but I would likewise question if the team doesn't know what people want, but often can't deliver on it. I for one am very suspicious of the fact that lobbies don't exist in Sims 4 apartments, and I personally believe that's likely an engine limitation; evidence would suggest the apartments are merely lots suspended high in the air, and that multiple story lots on the scale seen in Sims 3 simply isn't doable.
What really sucks would be if it's indeed the latter, but the Sims team refrains from communicating this to us because omg gotta uphold that image that Sims 4 is nothing but an improvement!!! Imagine if you give the SimGurus feedback and collectively they know they cannot provide you with the feature you've requested, but because the request is popular, they feel obligated to deliver. We may have seen that in City Living: very few seem happy with it's rendition of apartments, and I think had people known to expect that, they would've said don't bother with an apartment themed expansion at all. Let's say for example that dynamic Seasons is impossible for this engine, but they don't communicate that because it creates a bad image of the game, and instead we get half-baked season worlds with stagnant seasons that never change. This absolutely sucks, because had we gotten a chance to provide feedback, we may have been able to tell them we'd prefer they do it right or don't bother at all. When there's no chance to say this however, then they spend time on a half-baked feature we don't want, we only get disappointment, the image of the game looks poor anyways and everybody loses.
For everyone's sake, I hope it's just basic miscommunication. If it's engine limitations...? Then we need to be ready to compromise on some ideas and let them explore some new ones that suit the engine better; a weaker engine doesn't automatically mean the game has to be worse, it just demands a bit more creativity in steering around those limitations, which might be limited if we insist on demanding copy-paste jobs of older features from past games.....and if it's engine limitations AND miscommunication because they refuse to confess to said limitations...? Then whoo boy, we're in for one heck of a train wreck...
For me, the joy of apartments in S2 was the genuine feeling of community that existed. I could customize and build every aspect of the complex that I wanted. To add icing to the cake, I was able to rotate throughout the households that existed in them (up to 4 full families). They could visit each other, ask the neighbours to visit, etc. Even epidemics would spread and I'd have a family sim make chicken soup and serve it to everyone.
I haven't played S4 apartments, but to my knowledge this can't be done and what was great has neither been improved nor expanded upon. All it appears to be (to me) is just a lot with limitations.
I also build apartments in 3 and am able to make them quite expansive beyond the single abode I can utilize. I have apartments with gyms, nectaries, pools, bars, and game rooms. But I agree about the emptiness. The feeling of loneliness just can't be shaken off.
Having a building that is even more limited than the first two games doesn't feel like progress. It doesn't feel worthwhile. And it will continue to spur my thoughts on what I feel could have been an improvement instead of a missed opportunity. Festivals don't fill the void. I don't utilize them in 3. Couldn't care if I ever saw them (or didn't see them) again.
I do believe it is engine limitations. It's mostly why I don't bother commenting much anymore. What's done is done. It won't change and it won't improve. Not for me. They can slap all the icing onto that stale cake all they want. but the cake will forever be stale.
You pretty much nailed it. Apartments were huge in Sims 2 because an apartment operated so much differently than a regular lot. As you said it was the baby steps toward that open world. For the first time you could interact with your neighbors, you could go to a community space without traveling through a loading screen. The ability to add them to any residential world was a huge plus.
Sims 4 apartments were shoehorned into the expansion pack and shouldn't have happened, at least not if they knew they couldn't do them in a somewhat decent manner. Whether it be engine limitations, or clueless management; the apartments in Sims 4 are easily the worst yet.
I can't add them to any other world, I can barely edit the ugly selection that came with the world. There is no lobby, or amenities of any kind. There's neighbors, but not in the same sense as Sims 2. Just like every other 'neighbor' you have in The Sims 4, those living in the apartment right next to you or across the hall cannot be visited without sitting through a loading screen. Something even Sims 2 managed to get rid of in apartments. There's no such thing as apartment gameplay, something that Maxis wanted players to think was coming with them. There's minimal difference between living in an apartment than living in a house, the biggest difference is how small your lot is and how little you can change.
This!
I actually thought that TS2's Apartment Life was a pretty good foresight of what you would see in TS3 on a small scale. It was not just about your Sims, but the world around hem and how they interact with that world
@drake_mccarty Actually, you are the one who must not read that much into threads because if you had, you would know that I am one of those posters who not only actively posts constructive feedback threads but participates in ones posted by other players:
http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/912922/love-the-game-but-jobs-in-ts4
http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/889496/sports-themed-ep-or-gp
http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/889494/can-we-please-get-part-time-work-back-for-adults
Which is neither here nor there, because in the end, my comments weren't an accusation that nobody in this forum posts constructive feedback. It was an invitation for the players like you who don't post any constructive feedback at all to stop focusing on what could have been and instead care more about what this game could become. You didn't take it--and that's okay--so I'll just quietly step out of the way so I don't get in the way of the complaining.
The excuse "it's an incomplete game" is pretty poor, IMHO. At least, when I compare TS4 to its predecessors, I compare their base games as I've played them in their respective primes, and the features they have added to constitute making an entirely new Sims game. When I look at Sims 4, I ultimately find emotions, multitasking, redesigned assets, and other minor features do not hold a candle next to a game which adds an entire open world, tool to completely customize said open world, tool to re-texture anything right from the game, vastly updated CAS/Build-Buy, gameplay features, and more. Or a game (The Sims 2) which completely converts the game into 3D, adds generational gameplay, genetics, hugely redesigned world and Sims, redesigned CAS, redesigned B/B, etc.
I do think your experiment is a fair way of comparing the base games, as long as the player approaches the experiment with the mindset that they're comparing a game that claims to be the fourth iteration released in the year 2014 next to the third, in 2009, and the second, and 2005.
I agree with you on your last claim -- constructive feedback is always better than simple criticisms. But it's still a good thing to point out the flaws/shortcomings in what you have purchased. Not everyone has to play the role of developer, and suggest they know the solution to a problem. That's EA's job. It was not Apple's customers that have built the idea of an iPhone -- nobody could have predicted that. It was thanks to Apple/Steve Jobs themselves. If EA were as innovative, maybe we'd see our own "iPhone" breakthrough within The Sims.
Yeah, well you can thank those people who keep wanting The Sims series to be made multiplayer/co-op for that.
And yet she has not come back into this thread for some reason to try and explain what she meant as she left me confused...
It can be anything from people who see money as a means to an end and are after some other goal (I think Elon Musk is probably a sterling example of this) to people who see money as the end, but are happy to try to make the world a better place in the process, to people who just want money and will use virtue signaling to make more money.
Since we can't go interrogate EA's employees and get an unquestionable answer out of the decision-makers about why the particular decision in question was made, it's utterly pointless to speculate beyond the motivations and words that they have put out there for us to see. We can't read their minds. And in the event that they were trying to make the world a better place, it seems selfish to argue that they should have prioritized keeping a few more simmers happy, rather than trying to make a positive impact in society. So the legitimacy of such a point really hinges on information we don't have and never will have.
Is it actually more complex? I don't know. I just know it has a lot of complexity. Could it be simpler? Probably, in a few ways. Most code can.
Exactly that. It's not even a comparison. You can't change the buildings in Skyrim on the fly. You can't change the NPC looks or behaviours on the fly. You can't rearrange where NPCs live on the fly. The only thing Skyrim's got going for it is the graphics, which btw, it should have, considering it's little more than a glorified FPS with a fantasy set dressing on it. It better look pretty, lol.
Guys remember that time I said some of you have got a bad habit of killing a discussion by arguing "we have no proof and we can never know so let's just leave it at that" instead of trying to refute any arguments I've made....? Yeah.
We're talking about the company voted most hated company in America twice in a row (and then the contest ceased to exist). We're talking about the very same company that refused to include things like Toddlers and swimming pools at base game, but saw fit to include giant cupcake factories and rocket ships. The entire release stunk of EA pushing the game out the door too soon and not caring, but you mean to tell me the moment it's about transgender rights, suddenly those same uncaring suits don't care about profit margins? Let's be clear about something: the moment that transgender patch dropped, multiple publications had articles ready. It was if EA informed them of it in advance, as if they wanted people to know how progressive and how pro-LGBT they were.
It's for profit, it's naive to think otherwise. And what's more, I don't think you're doing yourself any favors by giving logical, unfeeling and uncaring companies that strive for profit the benefit of the doubt. By all means give individuals the benefit of the doubt; I'm sure the individual programmers and workers like the message, for example, but let's not give a faceless company the benefit of the doubt like we'll hurt it's fee-fees if we don't.
This all ties right back into the fact that I think faaaaar too many people view companies as friends rather than entities they did a trade with. I mean honestly, why do you care? Why are you going out of your way to defend the....integrity of EA? Why does it seem like an uncomfortable idea for you to view EA as calculating and money-orientated...? I brought it up to make a point about prioritizing marketing over the actual product, not to insist they're the devil or something; I believe I stated multiple times I don't fault them for being calculating and logical because that's exactly what all companies become.
And as such, even if tomorrow we somehow irrefutably proved EA's entire staff is passionate about political messages all out of the goodness of their hearts rather than the goodness of their pockets, it hasn't changed anything: they still use the game as a political statement rather than a game, which is part of my problem with it. I do not play this game to hear political statements shouted at me, even if I agree with said statements. I don't care; I don't need political validation from a game. I want to play my game and have fun, thus I still view such politically-orientated updates as misguided and often counter-intuitive to the focus of a game.
At the end of the day, it all comes down to this: if EA is so progressive and passionate about these issues, why weren't they included at launch? And as I said, it doesn't really matter much in the grand scheme of things: whether EA are a bunch of compassionate LGBT allies or some guys in suits smelling a chance for profit off such a patch, the patch and the events surrounding it still seemed to prioritize advertisements over gameplay, and THAT'S the problem. That's what needs to be avoided in the future and that's why I get nervous when I hear them asking for more skin tones or talking about cultural representation or the like, because all of those issues tend to be aesthetic-only and completely devoid of gameplay.
Hi. I came back. I explained. I got dumped on again by people who read some words and not others. I decided there was no point in further derailing the thread. I stated that I wasn't going to be in this thread anymore. Not sure why you thought I'd come back and keep defending myself against false accusations.
So. Not returning again. Please don't bother paging me here. I don't even usually read this whole forum category anymore.
And to those people I say: some game formulas just won't work well in multiplayer form... accept it goshdarnit!
I brought fruit loops. I think the fruit loops might be fruit. I better roll film to find out lol. Yeah this thread has gone wild. Some of the stuff said is very silly and not logical. Normal I am the not the logical one. Some people arguments make me want to look at the floor tiles.
Agreed. It's like trying to force a round peg into a square hole.
Ironically though there is a ton of potential upside for server-side hosting of the worlds.
Something I'm sure they're very much aware of and would love to be able to implement, but simply can't becasue the fan base would never tolerate it.
The only way they could get away with it is to actually take the financial risk, build the prototype and prove to the community that they could offer a vastly superior experience if they hosted the worlds themselve's.
If they were to ever succeded in doing that (which has about as much chance as a snownball in Hades)
Multiplayer would be a logical and natural next step for them to explore..