We could have limited control of our pets, that when we click on our pet we get a menu of things the pet can do. like go bark at door, play with a toy, eat food. go outside to poopy. go get their collar to go for a walk. same with any of the pets.
If your pet learns things the object could be clicked on, to allow the pet to interact with that object. It should not be a need to have it take up a slot that's for family members.
I like that idea.
"[...] and everything will be okay in the end. If it's not okay, then it's not the end."
For cats and dogs I think they should be playable but I hope they will have a decent AI so they will actually do their own stuff when they need. But sometimes I just like to have my cats sleep in a particular place (like in a rug in front of a fire) so I want to be able to command them. Maybe they can gives us an option on the menu if we want them to be controllable or not. But then again, if you don't want to control them, just don't. I guess in the end what matters is the AI. If it's good enough that you don't have to babysit the pets, then it's all good. Those who want to control them, can do so, and those who don't, won't need to.
I think at this point in time its really silly to add pets and not make them playable.
The key word, being silly.
We expect a decent ai for them and then simply if we want to we can take control when we want, its a really simple addition and its just makes things better, there's literally no reason to say no logically.
I completely disagree. There is no Logical reason to make them controllable. Why, I said in my post above.
I really hate to break it to you but your reasoning isn't reasonable?
The only real justification is possibly performance.
Your reasoning is well.. Unreasonable from what I can tell? Just give control of pets, we expect them to be independent and the pets are sims. Its just a fun extra, there's no justification in not having it as an extra. Its literally just an extra feature.
There is no reason why you can't have the same experience without playable pets to when you do have playable pets.
Its completely optional and in this scenario I expect them to make them playable or it would just be silly. If they wont then just cancel the pets EP. I don't really care for playing pets or having them in general its my least liked EP overall but its silly to not add playable pets because of the "autonomous" thing or even the pack name.
Pets implies exactly what it is, pets added to the game, you can't derive less or more from it. So really I don't get your reasoning at all, unless I misunderstood you?
Otherwise there's still no justification, pets even if not playable would still have obvious interactions that could be made into a playable type, there's not exactly a problem other than adding fun, playable pets also allows easier time taking photoshoots which I think is enough to say you're really it should be in the game, lots of players have fun just making pictures and why shouldn't you play them?
That's just such a hollow pack, if they aren't even going to take pets all the way then they might as well not even add pets, they're always a boring (not bad EP) so at least give it the most potential it can.
That and there could a large selection of obvious pet actions while playing as them.
That and pets adds Werewolves and so some other interactions could come into play, also that means werewolves shouldn't be playable because they aren't full sims and the supernatural sims also shouldn't because it deters from simulating humans.
Once again not sure if I misunderstood you, but I don't get how you justified no playable pets.
If they're going to do pets take it all the way, there is nothing that will ruin the experience over them being playable unless you ruin it for yourself.
Sorry If I didn't quite understand you properly?
But the way I see I see people like to be creative and that shouldn't be limited if it can be helped. I expect lots of functions in the game and if they're not going to do it then don't do the pack.
Okay. There seems to be a big divide between those that want NPC pet and those that want sim pets. So, I have a question for the SIM PETS group. What do you want to do as a pet that is so important that you can't play without it?
Okay. There seems to be a big divide between those that want NPC pet and those that want sim pets. So, I have a question for the SIM PETS group. What do you want to do as a pet that is so important that you can't play without it?
The key thing for me is I want to add individuality to my pets and not have them just be doing some script given to them because of some training and traits. I want to be able to play a cat say that is normally perfectly calm and never wreaks anything but when her owner gives her say dry food the fourth night in a row maybe she decides to purposely wait till he is in the room them shred his favorite chair (had a cat that did this) where at the same time I also want to play a cat that never ever wants to hurt anything and doesn't need that to be trained in because they just are naturally a big baby (my current cat). I want animals with personality and the ability to react to things differently not just be trained to be non destructive and then they aren't destructive end of story (or given a certain trait and again end of story).
Also I like the idea of playing as a very independent dog that goes from lot to lot town to town and scrounges for food and otherwise tries to get by in life on its own. I could see that as a fun challenge to play with basically only being the animals and trying to manipulate the environment the right way to live as one with out a sims assistance.
I have done lady and the tramp-esque play through where I act out an animal romance
which brings me to that I don't really like the idea of sims just saying go breed to an animal and it listening but I do want control of my pets breeding.
I want to sometimes add a bit of fantasy and pretend I have super genius animals that can act and think like normal sims and have wishes for themselves which again pulls a bit on the learning to manipulate the world from the animals perspective to accomplish it's wants/needs (which is obviously not everyone's cup of tea but I would like the opportunity to do so)
I personally feel more involved with the animal when I am playing it because it allows me to be it's brain so to say which allows me to feel like I can write out it's story better and maybe explain why an animal is the way it is. When I'm not being the animals though I feel more detached and like I'm not really playing it's story and making it more of watching it and therefor don't feel like I'm as able so say this animal acts mean to kids because of a bad experience when it was younger.
Not playing them makes them feel like objects only really valuable if you have a sim that bothers to interact with them. Animals are unique individuals and do their own crazy things independent of human interference including learning skills and odd habits, they are smart individuals and I don't think they should be forced to develop only through a sims interference I would rather they were not treated as such in the sim game and instead given the opportunity to learn good and bad behaviors on their own. This isn't necessarily impossible with NPC pets but I think it will be much much easier to do this with playable pets.
Animals are a part of life I want to play with. I have a Cat do horseback riding and have close family that have dogs I see frequently, I have plenty of opportunity in real life to play with a pet as a pet, but no opportunity to try and be a pet.
Which leads to I buy the sims so I can play with life not watch life happen, I dislike it when they give me things to just look at. I want to play with my characters and control, them if I wanted to watch things happen out of my control I would buy a movie or watch tv. I however don't want that, I want a sandbox game that provides me with the tools to do as I please and play with different scenarios as I wish. I want as much as possible to set my own limitations in this game not have predetermined one given to me off the start because then I feel like I have more options, the ability to play with an animal is one of the options that I feel would open up game play for me if I wanted to.
I'm also just in general a bit of a control freak and I have saves where I quite simply do not want to have an animal mess up what I am doing so I would like the ability to rein it in if I have too.
I do want a good autonomy so I can also just play a sim training a pet if I want to and have that challenge because it doesn't ruin it for me having the knowledge I can always just control them I'm constantly making rules in this game to challenge myself so that really doesn't bug me (obviously some it does though). I want good strong AI for pets so that they can be left alone I just want the ability to supplement where I want as well and the opportunity to try out a new perspective if I choose.
I also want extra slots added for pets another concern that was mentioned by the NPC side. I don't mind if say they give as three slots and you go over three pets they take up normal sim spots but I want the ability to have a full household of eight sims with a pet or two as well.
I just also want the opportunity to do more with my pets/animals when it pleases me.
Whew that was longer than intended . I suppose I should ask as well what exactly do the NPC pet groups feel they will lose if the pets are play able? Also any suggestions on compromises that could be made or things that could be added to make things better? Because if we can get a kinda sorta consensus middle ground it may be helpful to devs... maybe, or maybe not. If it's going to be released so I'm thinking it might be a little to late anyways but hey I'm having fun discussing this
Okay. There seems to be a big divide between those that want NPC pet and those that want sim pets. So, I have a question for the SIM PETS group. What do you want to do as a pet that is so important that you can't play without it?
I think I've already mentioned this a couple of times here, but I'll say it again anyways in case you didn't see it.
First of all, it's a simulation game. So, I don't see the point of adding restrictions to pets as well. If the pets are controllable, you can tell a story with it much more easily. For example, if I want to create some 'drama' between the dog and the owner. Like maybe the dog just loathes the owner, even tho the owner is trying his best to like the dog and care for it. This wouldn't be possible if pets are uncontrollable cuz most likely the game will automatically make the dog like the owner if the owner treats the dog well.
I wouldn't say, "Wow, I need pets to be controllable cuz I have something sooooo important to do with them." I'm just saying it just adds more dynamic (if it is done correctly with good AI) to your game, if they're controllable.
It's pretty much like how toddlers can create mess and you can manually control them to do it just to annoy your parent sims and make your parent sims discipline the toddlers. Like, I would want to be able to manually make the pets create a mess, just for fun cuz that's who I am and I got nothing better to do with my life.
Also, I think BeJaWa raised this point before about why it would make sense to have pets to be controllable. If you are saying we can't control pets just like we can't control them in real life, that's also like saying, I can't control other humans in real life, but how come in The Sims, we can control more than one sim in the household? The game might as well make it so the player can only play as your own main character, like some RPG game.
Okay. There seems to be a big divide between those that want NPC pet and those that want sim pets. So, I have a question for the SIM PETS group. What do you want to do as a pet that is so important that you can't play without it?
I think I've already mentioned this a couple of times here, but I'll say it again anyways in case you didn't see it.
First of all, it's a simulation game. So, I don't see the point of adding restrictions to pets as well. If the pets are controllable, you can tell a story with it much more easily. For example, if I want to create some 'drama' between the dog and the owner. Like maybe the dog just loathes the owner, even tho the owner is trying his best to like the dog and care for it. This wouldn't be possible if pets are uncontrollable cuz most likely the game will automatically make the dog like the owner if the owner treats the dog well.
I wouldn't say, "Wow, I need pets to be controllable cuz I have something sooooo important to do with them." I'm just saying it just adds more dynamic (if it is done correctly with good AI) to your game, if they're controllable.
It's pretty much like how toddlers can create mess and you can manually control them to do it just to annoy your parent sims and make your parent sims discipline the toddlers. Like, I would want to be able to manually make the pets create a mess, just for fun cuz that's who I am and I got nothing better to do with my life.
Also, I think BeJaWa raised this point before about why it would make sense to have pets to be controllable. If you are saying we can't control pets just like we can't control them in real life, that's also like saying, I can't control other humans in real life, but how come in The Sims, we can control more than one sim in the household? The game might as well make it so the player can only play as your own main character, like some RPG game.
Very well said is all I can say, the idea of uncontrollable pets is rather silly and there's no justification to not making them controllable, there's only benefits and at the end of the day you don't need to play them.
The most important thing is that pets get a good autonomy and AI, then its all okay.
I vote playable. It's called playing with life for a reason.
Short but sweet, its true, I mean at the end of the day its a game we kind of expect more features not less. I'm surprised some people actually want pets to be uncontrollable considering the amount of people that complained about TS4 lacking features.
I think at this point in time its really silly to add pets and not make them playable.
The key word, being silly.
We expect a decent ai for them and then simply if we want to we can take control when we want, its a really simple addition and its just makes things better, there's literally no reason to say no logically.
I completely disagree. There is no Logical reason to make them controllable. Why, I said in my post above.
I really hate to break it to you but your reasoning isn't reasonable?
The only real justification is possibly performance.
Your reasoning is well.. Unreasonable from what I can tell? Just give control of pets, we expect them to be independent and the pets are sims. Its just a fun extra, there's no justification in not having it as an extra. Its literally just an extra feature.
There is no reason why you can't have the same experience without playable pets to when you do have playable pets.
Its completely optional and in this scenario I expect them to make them playable or it would just be silly. If they wont then just cancel the pets EP. I don't really care for playing pets or having them in general its my least liked EP overall but its silly to not add playable pets because of the "autonomous" thing or even the pack name.
Pets implies exactly what it is, pets added to the game, you can't derive less or more from it. So really I don't get your reasoning at all, unless I misunderstood you?
Otherwise there's still no justification, pets even if not playable would still have obvious interactions that could be made into a playable type, there's not exactly a problem other than adding fun, playable pets also allows easier time taking photoshoots which I think is enough to say you're really it should be in the game, lots of players have fun just making pictures and why shouldn't you play them?
That's just such a hollow pack, if they aren't even going to take pets all the way then they might as well not even add pets, they're always a boring (not bad EP) so at least give it the most potential it can.
That and there could a large selection of obvious pet actions while playing as them.
That and pets adds Werewolves and so some other interactions could come into play, also that means werewolves shouldn't be playable because they aren't full sims and the supernatural sims also shouldn't because it deters from simulating humans.
Once again not sure if I misunderstood you, but I don't get how you justified no playable pets.
If they're going to do pets take it all the way, there is nothing that will ruin the experience over them being playable unless you ruin it for yourself.
Sorry If I didn't quite understand you properly?
But the way I see I see people like to be creative and that shouldn't be limited if it can be helped. I expect lots of functions in the game and if they're not going to do it then don't do the pack.
You wrote a wall of text and didn't even prove any of my Points wrong (nor did you really mention them). To make it short: It ruins the experience of having a pet, it's not realistic. It defeats the possibility of bringing a fresh gameplay component into the game... instead of just another household member with "free will on".
In the 90's children who were still too Young to own their own pet (or didn't have any responsibilities whatsoever) got a tamagotchi they could take care of instead. It was a fun Little game that eventually sold 5 Million (!) copies on the game Boy alone and even adults enjoyed to Play it. And why was it fun and a huge success after all? Because YOU COULD NOT CONTROL the dang Thing, it was about you, your responsibility, your actions and consequences, a gameplay mix that is FUN. Something like that could have been introduced with pets (see TS2).
I am just wondering, People here actually don't seem to be interested in an accurate life Simulation (with an accurate pet Simulation). Most of you just want to have another household member that can be used in your very own dollhouse experience. If that's what you want more power to you, I guess. But don't tell me it is "Logical", it isn't. Look at me, it's Logical I am clicking on my dog and make it go outside to pee whenever I want (because, you know, in real life, I can also use my psychic powers, it's logica, duh!)
Edit: It's not necessarily about the interactions themselves, it is about the potential for gameplay via Code --> scripts for example. If your Sim performs interation A it could result in a scripted Event that involves your pet, this particular event could happen without the Player even "noticing" it. Scripted Events could have more Things to offer than just ordinary interactions. It would blend into gameplay just fine when they are NOT controllable and enhance it.
Conclusion: While playable pets mostly cripple the gameplay and the experience itself they don't have any real benefits (besides role-playing).
Post edited by HalloMolli on
"[...] and everything will be okay in the end. If it's not okay, then it's not the end."
Short but sweet, its true, I mean at the end of the day its a game we kind of expect more features not less. I'm surprised some people actually want pets to be uncontrollable considering the amount of people that complained about TS4 lacking features.
And I am wondering after all the People praising TS2 and its eps, after the huge backlash EA got for making controllable pets in TS3 (although it was Kind of reasonable - but not really - with an open world set-up) and the fact that TS4 tends to get tedious after a while because everything is so, well, predictable (because Players have Control over everything) that People even consider (!) to have playable pets. It just does not make any sense. New, fresh and enhanced gameplay? No, thanks. And We never wanted npc roommates anyway beause it's about playing with life, don't you know (it's funny that everybody seems to think that "playing with" also means having Control, instead of just, I mean, manipulating it, makes too much sense, does it, plum)? And it's only Logical that you can Control pets, that's how real life works, duh?!
Edit: At this Point we don't even have to argue anymore because I am sure EA will make them controllable in the end. It's just the easy route for them. They would NEVER create an accurate pet experience since It's too risky (--> Bugs) and obviously some of you guys wouldn't want it to become one anyway. Which is sad because in TS2 it was all about having a Family and their experience of owning a dog or a kitten, in TS3, on the other Hand, the Focus was on playing (!) one. And nobody did it in any of my 100's of Let's Plays I have been watching for years now. Of Course not, it's boring af and gets old fast. They were just there, like in idle-mode, and didn't have a real purpose eventually.
Post edited by HalloMolli on
"[...] and everything will be okay in the end. If it's not okay, then it's not the end."
> I am just wondering, People here actually don't seem to be interested in an accurate life Simulation (with an accurate pet Simulation). Most of you just want to have another household member that can be used in your very own dollhouse experience. If that's what you want more power to you, I guess. But don't tell me it is "Logical", it isn't. Look at me, it's Logical I am clicking on my dog and make it go outside to pee whenever I want (because, you know, in real life, I can also use my psychic powers, it's logica, duh!)
SimlishPopstar adressed that point though. He said that it's not realistic that you can control humans either (and toddlers especially). It comes down not to a realistic experience, but to how much fun people have.
And there is absolutely no reason why you should not be able not to control a pet ever. I play with my toddlers in pretty hands-off way. There is nothing to stop me from doing the same with dogs, maybe only directing them to eat when they are about to starve. That gives me the "true" pet experience, while also allowing me to play stray dogs.
> Edit: It's not necessarily about the interactions themselves, it is about the potential for gameplay via Code --> scripts for example. If your Sim performs interation A it could result in a scripted Event that involves your pet, this particular event could happen without the Player even "noticing" it. Scripted Events could have more Things to offer than just ordinary interactions. It would blend into gameplay just fine when they are NOT controllable and enhance it.
Could you give me an example of scripted interaction that would not be possible with a controllable pet?
In the 90's children who were still too Young to own their own pet (or didn't have any responsibilities whatsoever) got a tamagotchi they could take care of instead. It was a fun Little game that eventually sold 5 Million (!) copies on the game Boy alone and even adults enjoyed to Play it. And why was it fun and a huge success after all? Because YOU COULD NOT CONTROL the dang Thing, it was about you, your responsibility, your actions and consequences, a gameplay mix that is FUN. Something like that could have been introduced with pets (see TS2).
I am just wondering, People here actually don't seem to be interested in an accurate life Simulation (with an accurate pet Simulation). Most of you just want to have another household member that can be used in your very own dollhouse experience. If that's what you want more power to you, I guess. But don't tell me it is "Logical", it isn't. Look at me, it's Logical I am clicking on my dog and make it go outside to pee whenever I want (because, you know, in real life, I can also use my psychic powers, it's logica, duh!)
Edit: It's not necessarily about the interactions themselves, it is about the potential for gameplay via Code --> scripts for example. If your Sim performs interation A it could result in a scripted Event that involves your pet, this particular event could happen without the Player even "noticing" it. Scripted Events could have more Things to offer than just ordinary interactions. It would blend into gameplay just fine when they are NOT controllable and enhance it.
Conclusion: While playable pets mostly cripple the gameplay and the experience itself they don't have any real benefits (besides role-playing).
Sorry to intervene. I find it interesting that you used Tamagotchi as an analogy/example. I get what you're trying to say but personally to me, The Sims is more than just a tamagotchi. If I want to take care of a virtual pet, I would play other games. There are loads of app games like that out right now. But the Sims is a simulation game and a lot of players even play the game as a form of story telling. Tamagotchi isn't really a type of game where you can create your own story. You just take care of it, train it, hope it doesn't die and that's it.
Also, for your conclusion, no one knows for sure that playable pets will cripple gameplay. We haven't seen it happen in the game yet, obviously. It's up to the devs to make pets the best iteration in the whole game. Maybe pets in TS3 weren't the best, but let's hope they do a better job if they do make TS4 pets playable. I mean, at least they made TS4 toddlers much more tolerable, in my opinion. A lot of family players seem to like the toddlers a lot too, so it's possible they could make pets enjoyable.
Well if we do get playable pets. I want pet doors. I can imagine Fido or Frisky nosing out of the house and gallivanting around the hood and deciding to relieve their needs.. well pretty much where ever they want unless that's not in their nature. Maybe asking for food.. you know how your pets eagerly wait for around the time it's due. Usually pacing, begging or whining if it's late they let you know. That could be part of the beg for or request food on their own and the owner could comply much like when toddlers ask. I'd also like them to be able to umm breed on their own (with the proper pixellation of course bushes and cover). They could come home preggers. (I do believe in spaying/neutering and keeping pets safe or on a leash in urban areas..in real life but not sure I want it to be a mandate in a game) If the owner dies though I do think it should be game over for that household.. like it would be if the parents of a toddler died.
Then I'd like the owner in turn to be able to take care of them also. The pets could run automously whenever you aren't training them or feeding them ect. You wouldn't have to play them unless you wanted too.
Sometimes I play one sim in the house and the rest are basically autonomous with just checks and nudges to keep them going. I can see doing this but playing as the pet as the main sim. That would just be fun at times.
I had written earlier in this thread I thought Sims 2 pets were playable. I guess not. I remember seeing their needs though so.. it's hard getting old.
I agree with reasons above for playable pets. Also, I'd like to control pets to give them direction. I can create Sim-pet relationship with NPCs (although, it'd be hard to have ungrateful pet even though his owner tries his best), but I couldn't influence relationship between pets. In my opinion, it adds to the game if I can have pets that hate each other no matter what and make drama when they're in the same room (or, just the opposite, a dog and a cat who live like siblings). I feel that aspect would be rather bland with NPCs.
My vote was already counted on here earlier, but just wanted to say that I also hated that it added to my house count when I had animals. Therefore, if you had two dogs with puppies, then you as a sim couldn't have a large family. I hated that and is one of the biggest reasons that I wish they were nonplayable along with the reason that I would like to collect as many as possible.
SimlishPopstar adressed that point though. He said that it's not realistic that you can control humans either (and toddlers especially). It comes down not to a realistic experience, but to how much fun people have.
The game is called Sims, though, it is build around Controlling a single sim or a Group of sims (mainly families), not animals. And yet People still want the npc-roommate experience back because it's something completely different than just having a household of not-related controllable sims since those simply do not work as a Substitute for us. So your Point is exactly what? This arguement was not addressed by anybody.
Also: TS3 proves my Point that gameplay focusing on making pets controllable gets boring fast. I mean, It's just another household member with certain limitations, the Overall experience of having a pet becomes different and, IMO, obsolete anyway etc. .
And there is absolutely no reason why you should not be able not to control a pet ever.
Yes, there is, there are many reasons. The most important reason is that the experience itself becomes watered-down (look at my example with roommates).
Could you give me an example of scripted interaction that would not be possible with a controllable pet?
Usually if npcs behave or react in a certain complex way, a way the Player don't expect them to (re-)act due to his/her Knowledge of all the interactions in the game, then it's caused by scripts (the potential here is endless), hence having them not controllable allows a much better Integration of a System that aims to achieve the most accurate behavior of a dog for example. If you actively "Play" with your pet and suddenly it starts to behave according to a script (during a scenario or whatever the reason might be) then it would affect your gameplay experience negatively since it does not blend into it too well. However, If you don't have any Control over them said mechanic works better with the "flow" --> there are no "breaks" in gameplay.
(Again: Having an AI that is not coded with the compromise and limitation in mind to be accessible for Player Input all the time is something completely different than "free will on".)
Here is the Thing: Have you ever seen a sim autonomously Queue 5 or 6 interaction in a row without going into idle-phases? No, of Course not.
Example: You have a cat, the cat gets scared by a dog so the behavior would have to go through the following steps: cat reacts to dog --> a social Encounter is triggered --> if bad result --> possibility 1 --> fight --> cat runs away --> jumps on kitchen Counter --> runs out of the home --> knocks over the trashcan --> dog follows --> [...] .
This is a very primitive Scenario but it relies on "chain-interactions". In other words: It would require to Queue many interactions in quick succession to accomplish the end-result. The "free will on"-Ai is not programmed to be this flexible. Even if it was it would break with the "controllable" Party anyway and produce many Bugs eventually.
---
However, my main Point still stands: It would defeat the purpose of pets (as an experience).
"[...] and everything will be okay in the end. If it's not okay, then it's not the end."
Sorry to intervene. I find it interesting that you used Tamagotchi as an analogy/example. I get what you're trying to say but personally to me, The Sims is more than just a tamagotchi. If I want to take care of a virtual pet, I would play other games. There are loads of app games like that out right now. But the Sims is a simulation game and a lot of players even play the game as a form of story telling. Tamagotchi isn't really a type of game where you can create your own story. You just take care of it, train it, hope it doesn't die and that's it.
No, I want a Life-Simulation game that is capable of simulating pet ownership accurately. I brought the tamagotchi example up to Show that something similar adapted into TS4 would enhance our gameplay significantly (--> by adding a meta-game to it, a nice component that would feel fresh and new, I think TS4 Needs something like that asap).
By the way: For everybody who really wants to Play as an animal in a Simulation context, there are a ton of games.
You can play as a dog/cat/horse etc. - no Problem, there are games build from the ground (!) just for you:
How will pets explore the neighborhood, they have no phones! LOL!
If you zoom out you can "travel" with no phone. I wasn't thinking about them leaving the hood but would like that option too... a roving dog/cat on it's own. Different take on the homeless challenge.
I think it's rather hard to come to some agreement, especially when we consider the boredom aspect. I've played both TS2 and TS3 Pets, and while I feel very nostalgic about TS2, I have more fun with TS3 in that matter.
SimlishPopstar adressed that point though. He said that it's not realistic that you can control humans either (and toddlers especially). It comes down not to a realistic experience, but to how much fun people have.
The game is called Sims, though, it is build around Controlling a single sim or a Group of sims (mainly families), not animals. And yet People still want the npc-roommate experience back because it's something completely different than just having a household of not-related controllable sims since those simply do not work as a Substitute for us. So your Point is exactly what? This arguement was not addressed by anybody.
Also: TS3 proves my Point that gameplay focusing on making pets controllable gets boring fast. I mean, It's just another household member with certain limitations, the Overall experience of having a pet becomes different and, IMO, obsolete anyway etc. .
And there is absolutely no reason why you should not be able not to control a pet ever.
Yes, there is, there are many reasons. The most important reason is that the experience itself becomes watered-down (look at my example with roommates).
Could you give me an example of scripted interaction that would not be possible with a controllable pet?
Usually if npcs behave or react in a certain complex way, a way the Player don't expect them to (re-)act due to his/her Knowledge of all the interactions in the game, then it's caused by scripts (the potential here is endless), hence having them not controllable allows a much better Integration of a System that aims to achieve the most accurate behavior of a dog for example. If you actively "Play" with your pet and suddenly it starts to behave according to a script (during a scenario or whatever the reason might be) then it would affect your gameplay experience negatively since it does not blend into it too well. However, If you don't have any Control over them said mechanic works better with the "flow" --> there are no "breaks" in gameplay.
(Again: Having an AI that is not coded with the compromise and limitation in mind to be accessible for Player Input all the time is something completely different than "free will on".)
Here is the Thing: Have you ever seen a sim autonomously Queue 5 or 6 interaction in a row without going into idle-phases? No, of Course not.
Example: You have a cat, the cat gets scared by a dog so the behavior would have to go through the following steps: cat reacts to dog --> a social Encounter is triggered --> if bad result --> possibility 1 --> fight --> cat runs away --> jumps on kitchen Counter --> runs out of the home --> knocks over the trashcan --> dog follows --> [...] .
This is a very primitive Scenario but it relies on "chain-interactions". In other words: It would require to Queue many interactions in quick succession to accomplish the end-result. The "free will on"-Ai is not programmed to be this flexible. Even if it was it would break with the "controllable" Party anyway and produce many Bugs eventually.
---
However, my main Point still stands: It would defeat the purpose of pets (as an experience).
What everyone thinks sims means is different I have always interpreted it as a simulation game, a simulation game that gives me the tools to play in different styles as I please. So it allows me to simulate life as I see fit which includes animals and humans and fantasy creatures. It isn't about specifically the sim character for me.
Also personally I don't care about roommates others may want them but that really doesn't mean anything to what I enjoy doing.
I'm still not board with ts3 pets, I don't always use them but I don't always build resorts or play with vampires either I found they served just the same amount of usage time as those other features, and at least the opportunity is there for when I want it.
In ts2 particularly I remember how sims with autonomy would react to things in their own way independent of player interference, sims still do a little bit. If the sim devs do a good ai for autonomy then it could cover basically the same interactions if they can or will I don't know. It just comes down to them producing quality content there which I restate if they aren't going to do it right not having control is going to make the pets feel even more like carbon copies of each other.
Scripts aren't endless because it is impossible to script all of the interactions and situations that happen with an independent thinking creature and they are also on a time limit to put out the pack, scripts will be inevitably limited which means there is a finite amount of personalities unexpected situations a pet can get into before it just becomes the same thing. Also with scripts it isn't unexpected you learn how to play the system though training or some other way, because they have to be triggered by something so really it becomes the same thing just indirect control instead.
Your cat scenario could be done also with autonomy kind of like how our sims will react a certain way at a fire in the house.
They don't need to compromise for player control they just need to make it so if the animal was queing and the player comes in and gives a command then the queuing is canceled that is basically the only thing that would need to be done differently to the AI.
Also how would the player have nay way at all to manipulate pets if interrupting the actions lead to bugs? that would mean we can only watch our pets do things in the game because if our sims try to intervene they may also interrupt the actions qued up and bug the game. So why bother getting them if you can't interact with them with out potentially ruining their scripting? If that happens we should file serious bug reports and get EA to fix the game because that would be non functional.
In regards to meta gaming adding difficulty the people want, do you remember the out rage over the checklist jobs and parties? I don't think meta games will really make people happier based on that.
Also did you see the thread where people are complaining that their sims are canceling the player given actions to go do something else? I would say players do indeed enjoy having control over their households and don't like it everything acts independently all the time. Sure these are sims not pets but I would say it is still a sign of what people don't like when it comes to randomness.
I think when people are saying they want more unexpected they mean things like burgles or meteors falling from the sky, and the difference between these and pets is they are truly unexpected you don't do anything to initiate them where as pets you as the player are purposely getting an animal which then it isn't really random (even if they managed to get infinity scripts so they all acted in new ways all the time) because you are purposely getting the random thing. That means it isn't the same sense of unexpected and random goofiness. Of course I'm not speaking for everyone here but just what I have interpreted from reading other threads.
Comments
I like that idea.
They do pretty good execept my non vamp sims seem to always try to eat the plasma salad I make.
I really hate to break it to you but your reasoning isn't reasonable?
The only real justification is possibly performance.
Your reasoning is well.. Unreasonable from what I can tell? Just give control of pets, we expect them to be independent and the pets are sims. Its just a fun extra, there's no justification in not having it as an extra. Its literally just an extra feature.
There is no reason why you can't have the same experience without playable pets to when you do have playable pets.
Its completely optional and in this scenario I expect them to make them playable or it would just be silly. If they wont then just cancel the pets EP. I don't really care for playing pets or having them in general its my least liked EP overall but its silly to not add playable pets because of the "autonomous" thing or even the pack name.
Pets implies exactly what it is, pets added to the game, you can't derive less or more from it. So really I don't get your reasoning at all, unless I misunderstood you?
Otherwise there's still no justification, pets even if not playable would still have obvious interactions that could be made into a playable type, there's not exactly a problem other than adding fun, playable pets also allows easier time taking photoshoots which I think is enough to say you're really it should be in the game, lots of players have fun just making pictures and why shouldn't you play them?
That's just such a hollow pack, if they aren't even going to take pets all the way then they might as well not even add pets, they're always a boring (not bad EP) so at least give it the most potential it can.
That and there could a large selection of obvious pet actions while playing as them.
That and pets adds Werewolves and so some other interactions could come into play, also that means werewolves shouldn't be playable because they aren't full sims and the supernatural sims also shouldn't because it deters from simulating humans.
Once again not sure if I misunderstood you, but I don't get how you justified no playable pets.
If they're going to do pets take it all the way, there is nothing that will ruin the experience over them being playable unless you ruin it for yourself.
Sorry If I didn't quite understand you properly?
But the way I see I see people like to be creative and that shouldn't be limited if it can be helped. I expect lots of functions in the game and if they're not going to do it then don't do the pack.
The key thing for me is I want to add individuality to my pets and not have them just be doing some script given to them because of some training and traits. I want to be able to play a cat say that is normally perfectly calm and never wreaks anything but when her owner gives her say dry food the fourth night in a row maybe she decides to purposely wait till he is in the room them shred his favorite chair (had a cat that did this) where at the same time I also want to play a cat that never ever wants to hurt anything and doesn't need that to be trained in because they just are naturally a big baby (my current cat). I want animals with personality and the ability to react to things differently not just be trained to be non destructive and then they aren't destructive end of story (or given a certain trait and again end of story).
Also I like the idea of playing as a very independent dog that goes from lot to lot town to town and scrounges for food and otherwise tries to get by in life on its own. I could see that as a fun challenge to play with basically only being the animals and trying to manipulate the environment the right way to live as one with out a sims assistance.
I have done lady and the tramp-esque play through where I act out an animal romance
which brings me to that I don't really like the idea of sims just saying go breed to an animal and it listening but I do want control of my pets breeding.
I want to sometimes add a bit of fantasy and pretend I have super genius animals that can act and think like normal sims and have wishes for themselves which again pulls a bit on the learning to manipulate the world from the animals perspective to accomplish it's wants/needs (which is obviously not everyone's cup of tea but I would like the opportunity to do so)
I personally feel more involved with the animal when I am playing it because it allows me to be it's brain so to say which allows me to feel like I can write out it's story better and maybe explain why an animal is the way it is. When I'm not being the animals though I feel more detached and like I'm not really playing it's story and making it more of watching it and therefor don't feel like I'm as able so say this animal acts mean to kids because of a bad experience when it was younger.
Not playing them makes them feel like objects only really valuable if you have a sim that bothers to interact with them. Animals are unique individuals and do their own crazy things independent of human interference including learning skills and odd habits, they are smart individuals and I don't think they should be forced to develop only through a sims interference I would rather they were not treated as such in the sim game and instead given the opportunity to learn good and bad behaviors on their own. This isn't necessarily impossible with NPC pets but I think it will be much much easier to do this with playable pets.
Animals are a part of life I want to play with. I have a Cat do horseback riding and have close family that have dogs I see frequently, I have plenty of opportunity in real life to play with a pet as a pet, but no opportunity to try and be a pet.
Which leads to I buy the sims so I can play with life not watch life happen, I dislike it when they give me things to just look at. I want to play with my characters and control, them if I wanted to watch things happen out of my control I would buy a movie or watch tv. I however don't want that, I want a sandbox game that provides me with the tools to do as I please and play with different scenarios as I wish. I want as much as possible to set my own limitations in this game not have predetermined one given to me off the start because then I feel like I have more options, the ability to play with an animal is one of the options that I feel would open up game play for me if I wanted to.
I'm also just in general a bit of a control freak and I have saves where I quite simply do not want to have an animal mess up what I am doing so I would like the ability to rein it in if I have too.
I do want a good autonomy so I can also just play a sim training a pet if I want to and have that challenge because it doesn't ruin it for me having the knowledge I can always just control them I'm constantly making rules in this game to challenge myself so that really doesn't bug me (obviously some it does though). I want good strong AI for pets so that they can be left alone I just want the ability to supplement where I want as well and the opportunity to try out a new perspective if I choose.
I also want extra slots added for pets another concern that was mentioned by the NPC side. I don't mind if say they give as three slots and you go over three pets they take up normal sim spots but I want the ability to have a full household of eight sims with a pet or two as well.
I just also want the opportunity to do more with my pets/animals when it pleases me.
Whew that was longer than intended
I think I've already mentioned this a couple of times here, but I'll say it again anyways in case you didn't see it.
First of all, it's a simulation game. So, I don't see the point of adding restrictions to pets as well. If the pets are controllable, you can tell a story with it much more easily. For example, if I want to create some 'drama' between the dog and the owner. Like maybe the dog just loathes the owner, even tho the owner is trying his best to like the dog and care for it. This wouldn't be possible if pets are uncontrollable cuz most likely the game will automatically make the dog like the owner if the owner treats the dog well.
I wouldn't say, "Wow, I need pets to be controllable cuz I have something sooooo important to do with them." I'm just saying it just adds more dynamic (if it is done correctly with good AI) to your game, if they're controllable.
It's pretty much like how toddlers can create mess and you can manually control them to do it just to annoy your parent sims and make your parent sims discipline the toddlers. Like, I would want to be able to manually make the pets create a mess, just for fun cuz that's who I am and I got nothing better to do with my life.
Also, I think BeJaWa raised this point before about why it would make sense to have pets to be controllable. If you are saying we can't control pets just like we can't control them in real life, that's also like saying, I can't control other humans in real life, but how come in The Sims, we can control more than one sim in the household? The game might as well make it so the player can only play as your own main character, like some RPG game.
Very well said is all I can say, the idea of uncontrollable pets is rather silly and there's no justification to not making them controllable, there's only benefits and at the end of the day you don't need to play them.
The most important thing is that pets get a good autonomy and AI, then its all okay.
Short but sweet, its true, I mean at the end of the day its a game we kind of expect more features not less. I'm surprised some people actually want pets to be uncontrollable considering the amount of people that complained about TS4 lacking features.
You wrote a wall of text and didn't even prove any of my Points wrong (nor did you really mention them). To make it short: It ruins the experience of having a pet, it's not realistic. It defeats the possibility of bringing a fresh gameplay component into the game... instead of just another household member with "free will on".
In the 90's children who were still too Young to own their own pet (or didn't have any responsibilities whatsoever) got a tamagotchi they could take care of instead. It was a fun Little game that eventually sold 5 Million (!) copies on the game Boy alone and even adults enjoyed to Play it. And why was it fun and a huge success after all? Because YOU COULD NOT CONTROL the dang Thing, it was about you, your responsibility, your actions and consequences, a gameplay mix that is FUN. Something like that could have been introduced with pets (see TS2).
I am just wondering, People here actually don't seem to be interested in an accurate life Simulation (with an accurate pet Simulation). Most of you just want to have another household member that can be used in your very own dollhouse experience. If that's what you want more power to you, I guess. But don't tell me it is "Logical", it isn't. Look at me, it's Logical I am clicking on my dog and make it go outside to pee whenever I want (because, you know, in real life, I can also use my psychic powers, it's logica, duh!)
Edit: It's not necessarily about the interactions themselves, it is about the potential for gameplay via Code --> scripts for example. If your Sim performs interation A it could result in a scripted Event that involves your pet, this particular event could happen without the Player even "noticing" it. Scripted Events could have more Things to offer than just ordinary interactions. It would blend into gameplay just fine when they are NOT controllable and enhance it.
Conclusion: While playable pets mostly cripple the gameplay and the experience itself they don't have any real benefits (besides role-playing).
And I am wondering after all the People praising TS2 and its eps, after the huge backlash EA got for making controllable pets in TS3 (although it was Kind of reasonable - but not really - with an open world set-up) and the fact that TS4 tends to get tedious after a while because everything is so, well, predictable (because Players have Control over everything) that People even consider (!) to have playable pets. It just does not make any sense. New, fresh and enhanced gameplay? No, thanks. And We never wanted npc roommates anyway beause it's about playing with life, don't you know (it's funny that everybody seems to think that "playing with" also means having Control, instead of just, I mean, manipulating it, makes too much sense, does it, plum)? And it's only Logical that you can Control pets, that's how real life works, duh?!
Edit: At this Point we don't even have to argue anymore because I am sure EA will make them controllable in the end. It's just the easy route for them. They would NEVER create an accurate pet experience since It's too risky (--> Bugs) and obviously some of you guys wouldn't want it to become one anyway. Which is sad because in TS2 it was all about having a Family and their experience of owning a dog or a kitten, in TS3, on the other Hand, the Focus was on playing (!) one. And nobody did it in any of my 100's of Let's Plays I have been watching for years now. Of Course not, it's boring af and gets old fast. They were just there, like in idle-mode, and didn't have a real purpose eventually.
SimlishPopstar adressed that point though. He said that it's not realistic that you can control humans either (and toddlers especially). It comes down not to a realistic experience, but to how much fun people have.
And there is absolutely no reason why you should not be able not to control a pet ever. I play with my toddlers in pretty hands-off way. There is nothing to stop me from doing the same with dogs, maybe only directing them to eat when they are about to starve. That gives me the "true" pet experience, while also allowing me to play stray dogs.
> Edit: It's not necessarily about the interactions themselves, it is about the potential for gameplay via Code --> scripts for example. If your Sim performs interation A it could result in a scripted Event that involves your pet, this particular event could happen without the Player even "noticing" it. Scripted Events could have more Things to offer than just ordinary interactions. It would blend into gameplay just fine when they are NOT controllable and enhance it.
Could you give me an example of scripted interaction that would not be possible with a controllable pet?
Sorry to intervene. I find it interesting that you used Tamagotchi as an analogy/example. I get what you're trying to say but personally to me, The Sims is more than just a tamagotchi. If I want to take care of a virtual pet, I would play other games. There are loads of app games like that out right now. But the Sims is a simulation game and a lot of players even play the game as a form of story telling. Tamagotchi isn't really a type of game where you can create your own story. You just take care of it, train it, hope it doesn't die and that's it.
Also, for your conclusion, no one knows for sure that playable pets will cripple gameplay. We haven't seen it happen in the game yet, obviously. It's up to the devs to make pets the best iteration in the whole game. Maybe pets in TS3 weren't the best, but let's hope they do a better job if they do make TS4 pets playable. I mean, at least they made TS4 toddlers much more tolerable, in my opinion. A lot of family players seem to like the toddlers a lot too, so it's possible they could make pets enjoyable.
Then I'd like the owner in turn to be able to take care of them also. The pets could run automously whenever you aren't training them or feeding them ect. You wouldn't have to play them unless you wanted too.
Sometimes I play one sim in the house and the rest are basically autonomous with just checks and nudges to keep them going. I can see doing this but playing as the pet as the main sim. That would just be fun at times.
I had written earlier in this thread I thought Sims 2 pets were playable. I guess not. I remember seeing their needs though so.. it's hard getting old.
However, I'd also be fine with a "Controllable pets?" toggle button in gameplay options, so people can choose for themselves per save.
The game is called Sims, though, it is build around Controlling a single sim or a Group of sims (mainly families), not animals. And yet People still want the npc-roommate experience back because it's something completely different than just having a household of not-related controllable sims since those simply do not work as a Substitute for us. So your Point is exactly what? This arguement was not addressed by anybody.
Also: TS3 proves my Point that gameplay focusing on making pets controllable gets boring fast. I mean, It's just another household member with certain limitations, the Overall experience of having a pet becomes different and, IMO, obsolete anyway etc. .
Yes, there is, there are many reasons. The most important reason is that the experience itself becomes watered-down (look at my example with roommates).
Usually if npcs behave or react in a certain complex way, a way the Player don't expect them to (re-)act due to his/her Knowledge of all the interactions in the game, then it's caused by scripts (the potential here is endless), hence having them not controllable allows a much better Integration of a System that aims to achieve the most accurate behavior of a dog for example. If you actively "Play" with your pet and suddenly it starts to behave according to a script (during a scenario or whatever the reason might be) then it would affect your gameplay experience negatively since it does not blend into it too well. However, If you don't have any Control over them said mechanic works better with the "flow" --> there are no "breaks" in gameplay.
(Again: Having an AI that is not coded with the compromise and limitation in mind to be accessible for Player Input all the time is something completely different than "free will on".)
Here is the Thing: Have you ever seen a sim autonomously Queue 5 or 6 interaction in a row without going into idle-phases? No, of Course not.
Example: You have a cat, the cat gets scared by a dog so the behavior would have to go through the following steps: cat reacts to dog --> a social Encounter is triggered --> if bad result --> possibility 1 --> fight --> cat runs away --> jumps on kitchen Counter --> runs out of the home --> knocks over the trashcan --> dog follows --> [...] .
This is a very primitive Scenario but it relies on "chain-interactions". In other words: It would require to Queue many interactions in quick succession to accomplish the end-result. The "free will on"-Ai is not programmed to be this flexible. Even if it was it would break with the "controllable" Party anyway and produce many Bugs eventually.
---
However, my main Point still stands: It would defeat the purpose of pets (as an experience).
No, I want a Life-Simulation game that is capable of simulating pet ownership accurately. I brought the tamagotchi example up to Show that something similar adapted into TS4 would enhance our gameplay significantly (--> by adding a meta-game to it, a nice component that would feel fresh and new, I think TS4 Needs something like that asap).
By the way: For everybody who really wants to Play as an animal in a Simulation context, there are a ton of games.
You can play as a dog/cat/horse etc. - no Problem, there are games build from the ground (!) just for you:
If you zoom out you can "travel" with no phone. I wasn't thinking about them leaving the hood but would like that option too... a roving dog/cat on it's own. Different take on the homeless challenge.
What everyone thinks sims means is different I have always interpreted it as a simulation game, a simulation game that gives me the tools to play in different styles as I please. So it allows me to simulate life as I see fit which includes animals and humans and fantasy creatures. It isn't about specifically the sim character for me.
Also personally I don't care about roommates others may want them but that really doesn't mean anything to what I enjoy doing.
I'm still not board with ts3 pets, I don't always use them but I don't always build resorts or play with vampires either I found they served just the same amount of usage time as those other features, and at least the opportunity is there for when I want it.
In ts2 particularly I remember how sims with autonomy would react to things in their own way independent of player interference, sims still do a little bit. If the sim devs do a good ai for autonomy then it could cover basically the same interactions if they can or will I don't know. It just comes down to them producing quality content there which I restate if they aren't going to do it right not having control is going to make the pets feel even more like carbon copies of each other.
Scripts aren't endless because it is impossible to script all of the interactions and situations that happen with an independent thinking creature and they are also on a time limit to put out the pack, scripts will be inevitably limited which means there is a finite amount of personalities unexpected situations a pet can get into before it just becomes the same thing. Also with scripts it isn't unexpected you learn how to play the system though training or some other way, because they have to be triggered by something so really it becomes the same thing just indirect control instead.
Your cat scenario could be done also with autonomy kind of like how our sims will react a certain way at a fire in the house.
They don't need to compromise for player control they just need to make it so if the animal was queing and the player comes in and gives a command then the queuing is canceled that is basically the only thing that would need to be done differently to the AI.
Also how would the player have nay way at all to manipulate pets if interrupting the actions lead to bugs? that would mean we can only watch our pets do things in the game because if our sims try to intervene they may also interrupt the actions qued up and bug the game. So why bother getting them if you can't interact with them with out potentially ruining their scripting? If that happens we should file serious bug reports and get EA to fix the game because that would be non functional.
In regards to meta gaming adding difficulty the people want, do you remember the out rage over the checklist jobs and parties? I don't think meta games will really make people happier based on that.
Also did you see the thread where people are complaining that their sims are canceling the player given actions to go do something else? I would say players do indeed enjoy having control over their households and don't like it everything acts independently all the time. Sure these are sims not pets but I would say it is still a sign of what people don't like when it comes to randomness.
I think when people are saying they want more unexpected they mean things like burgles or meteors falling from the sky, and the difference between these and pets is they are truly unexpected you don't do anything to initiate them where as pets you as the player are purposely getting an animal which then it isn't really random (even if they managed to get infinity scripts so they all acted in new ways all the time) because you are purposely getting the random thing. That means it isn't the same sense of unexpected and random goofiness. Of course I'm not speaking for everyone here but just what I have interpreted from reading other threads.