Forum Announcement, Click Here to Read More From EA_Cade.
Should some things never be a part of The Sims?
Triplis
Posts: 3,048 Member
To be clear upfront, I'm *not* talking about things like R-rated content. That's not the topic of discussion and I'm not sure it'd even be allowed for discussion anyway.
What I am talking about is a concept that sprouted in mind from a discussion about a particular feature (in this case, life stages). I was putting forth the position that setting aside limited time and resources, there's little limit in terms of a particular phase or gradual part of a life stage that shouldn't be included. In other words, the main factor at play here is limitations in the time and resources it takes to develop content.
But I thought, "Is that really a valid position to take?"
And so I put the question to you... is there a limit on where the inclusion of a particular feature, assuming infinite development resources, surpasses the point of making sense to be included? For example, could an argument be made that after a certain point, some level of detail or some type of feature is inherently likely to be unfun to play with, due to its nature? Or could an argument be made that some level of detail or type of feature is likely to weigh the game down to the point of absurdity?
I mean, this is a kind of simulation of life and so it can theoretically include most anything from life. But can it go too far in terms of the size and scope of what it includes? Is there a point where the word "game" could become buried in a desire to include as much detail as possible?
Let me know what you think.
(As an aside to the mods: I put this in feedback, as I expect the discussion to primarily center around the state of Sims 4 as it relates to the future of the series. If you feel that it would be better suited elsewhere, that's obviously up to you. But that's the reason I have for where I put it.)
What I am talking about is a concept that sprouted in mind from a discussion about a particular feature (in this case, life stages). I was putting forth the position that setting aside limited time and resources, there's little limit in terms of a particular phase or gradual part of a life stage that shouldn't be included. In other words, the main factor at play here is limitations in the time and resources it takes to develop content.
But I thought, "Is that really a valid position to take?"
And so I put the question to you... is there a limit on where the inclusion of a particular feature, assuming infinite development resources, surpasses the point of making sense to be included? For example, could an argument be made that after a certain point, some level of detail or some type of feature is inherently likely to be unfun to play with, due to its nature? Or could an argument be made that some level of detail or type of feature is likely to weigh the game down to the point of absurdity?
I mean, this is a kind of simulation of life and so it can theoretically include most anything from life. But can it go too far in terms of the size and scope of what it includes? Is there a point where the word "game" could become buried in a desire to include as much detail as possible?
Let me know what you think.
(As an aside to the mods: I put this in feedback, as I expect the discussion to primarily center around the state of Sims 4 as it relates to the future of the series. If you feel that it would be better suited elsewhere, that's obviously up to you. But that's the reason I have for where I put it.)
Mods moved from MTS, now hosted at: https://triplis.github.io
1
Comments
(◡‿◡✿)
For story tellers or family players things like a bassinet baby adds nothing to the game they want to be able to bathe it have it in the rooms with the family play with it and carry it teach it. Now we have a child who completely skips over puberty a big change in someone life who becomes an adult-sized man or woman completely skipping over an important time and change in a persons life also leaving out many story opportunities so yeah preteens are needed.
If the toddlers have shown us anything its that they can add in life stages and do them right I'd take them over any update or expansion they have given us nothing has made me play this game more.
While I understand the desire not to completely overlook important life-stages, pre-teen is not really one of them since it is a relatively new concept in how we measure life progression.
So since the real important changes that many Simmers desire are all part of Adolescence, that really is what being a teenager is, regardless of weather a person has actually reached 13 or not. Technically "pre-teen" is just any and all life stages that occur before Adolescence.
I think if is better if we don't look at the "teen years" as being strictly starting at 13.
Therefore, what exactly, game-wise, do you feel the Adolescent years at missing? Certain topics wouldn't be suitable in a game like The Sims, nor would most people want to play with some of these aspects.
Happy Simming!
I'd also like more definition between YAs and Adults -- there's really nothing to tell the two apart other than just a few extra wrinkles on the adults. I had the same problem in Sims 3 but at least there I could add grey streaks to hair with CASt when my Sims turned Adult. But there should be something that sets apart Adults from YAs -- maybe harder time conceiving so your Sims either have to adopt or they have to take that into consideration when deciding when to start their families.
And Elders, well, I'd just like more for them to do than sit around waiting for Grimmy to show up. With Spa Day, I've gotten some of my elders into wellness (yoga/meditation) or some of them take up painting when they retire from their jobs. I'd like to see part-time jobs open up for elders, if they want to supplement their pension, more hobbies, etc. I've been using cheats as well for elders to change one of their traits since some old folks do go through personality changes -- an Active Sim to Lazy, for example, or change one trait to Insane just to represent the Sim getting a little "dotty". I'd love to see more traits like Absent-Minded make a comeback, maybe Grumpy (a milder version of Mean-spirited).
What shouldn't be in the game? Can't really think of anything -- I don't really want to see zombies make a comeback but I know that some players would love them -- that would be a GP I'd probably have to skip unless the devs gave us an on/off switch for the non-human Sims.
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
Wasn't it much more fun in times past to make your wish list, submit it and hope some of it got done, rather than debate and talk about budgets, process, how things are voted in or out of a game? Should customers ever have to worry about that? Not in my opinion.
Even Virtual Family Game 2 had progressive aging and it is one of the least animated games. It can't be that hard. Big games require big money, I guess. But if they want to bring this game into the 21st century progressive aging would be a good place to start.
We all want features. It's up to EA to decide what's best for the game. Just let people voice what they want and let EA decide what they will make. Too many simmers are trying to force their hand and shut other simmers up.
I can also list my own wishes:
1. The game should become a life simulation instead of a dollhouse simulation.
2. The game should focus on better and more challenging gameplay instead of stuff and SPs.
3. The game should become much more free of bugs.
4. Aging should happen much more realistic.
5. The game should be M rated instead of T rated because that would allow much more realism.
6. The world should be big but not necessarily open.
But I haven't written that earlier because I know that EA never will fulfill those wishes - and I can't even blame EA because my dream Sims game would be much more difficult to make and probably sell much worse because it wouldn't be a game for about 13 yrs olds too.
So why am I still here? Not because I plan to ever play TS4 again and I also don't plan to play TS3 again. But EA still sometimes makes Sims games that I want to play anyway. The most recently examples are the Sims Freeplay which is a good free game until we reach the highest level (lvl 55) and can't get any further and the Sims Medieval which I played a lot. So I need to be here to see if EA again will make an interesting sidegame or a new game which I maybe could like too.
Not referring to you at all.
They are not trying to please anybody. EA is mainly just a game publisher that is completely controlled by marketing experts and the game designers have close to no influence at all. Even a game designer with as high reputation as Will Wright had to leave EA because he couldn't make his Spore game as he wished and a game designer with less high reputation almost certainly wouldn't have got the permission to make such a game at all. So if a game designer wanted to make the game I described then he would have to leave EA and most likely have to make his own game company too. But the problem with this would then be that he couldn't really make the game as a Sims game without violating EA's copyrights. So he would have to make the game different and wouldn't likely have the money for such a project at all.
I have played Virtual Family and Virtual Family 2 too. VF2 was released in 2012 for iOS and in 2013 for PC. It is still available in Apple's App Store and it still works fine. But it isn't anything like a Sims game. The graphics is very primitive and there are almost no interactions between its characters. It is just about earning money and repairing a very damaged but prebuilt house. This can take several generations. But the gradual aging doesn't really matter.
So it isn't technical impossible to make gradual aging. But EA needs to be able to make clothes and hair for every age group and to have a huge number of interactions between the sims. It is a dollhouse game which mainly is about building dollhouses and dressing up the sims. The interactions are necessary because the game also focus especially at romance and romantic interactions between the dressed-up sims. So the game is just a fantasy about romance and dress-up dolls and EA's main income comes from selling even more clothes, furniture and hair for the sims to wear mainly on dates and to parties or vacations. So it will never get any challenging gameplay at all. I was in doubt. But you seem to be right about him.
They will only let us vote about SPs because it doesn't really matter which SP they make first when they release 4 SPs each year. But I doubt that they ever will let us vote about GPs too (and it is doubtful if they even will make more EPs).
I found discussions about console gamers having huge problems even to be allowed to play E rated games online even though they have bought the games but only can play them offline. They get a message about being "too young to have an account" if they attempt to go online. I think that this problem exists for TS4 too for simmers who are less than 18 yrs old.
I find on this forum there are a whole wack ton of people who want a life simulator for immersion value. People care about things like characters going poof off to work instead of hoping into a carpool or how when cooking things magically appear in a Sims hand. You also see a lot of love for things like doing laundry, seasons simply because having sun all the time feels wrong, adding new life stages not because they have exclusive traits but because teen height is too big a jump from a child's height and wanting to see the preteens go to junior high (or equivalent school in another country) even though it is the same system of school with no new game play.
I do want seasons but I want it for holidays and winter sport skills to be added in and wouldn't buy the pack if it was just animations where as I get the feeling from other posts I've read that others would want seasons just because they want to see seasons. Every thing else I listed above are things I have no interest in and even if resources were unlimited many of them I wouldn't want because I feel they would slow the game down.
I already feel childhood is covered with it's four stages, I would want things added and fixed in the existing stages but I think a pre teen or schooler stage would add unnecessary time spent on a sim where they have limited capabilities when many of the things done by the new stages can be added to an existing stage.
Laundry is again just an animation to me after it has been done once I've seen it and I lose interest there isn't any progress or skills to be had by doing laundry it is just an activity to take up my Sims time and therefore in my play style slow down their progress in achieving things.
Animations like getting into a car pool or grabbing kitchen tools I don't care about either way unless they slow down my Sims from doing their assigned task.
Some people obviously think that time spent in these features is worth it for the immersion it brings. I however see them as unecassary wastes of time distracting from the over all goals I have for my sims and therefore I would be unhappy about their inclusion even if it came at no cost to any other thing produced.
Obviously I agree with you that having a pre-teen stage is not really necessary, since it is basically just like the teen years, or at least maybe like a combo of elementary children and teens, which would add nothing to gameplay. Besides, most adults I know think junior high is best avoided anyway ! LOL
Now I understand that having laundry and cars makes our Sims lives look more realistic and like ours, and I'm not against those things ... but I would much rather have any of the other things I mentioned as well as others, and probably some I never even thought about!
Personally I always love when my Sims can make things be it art, food, magic potions, herbal remedies, things on the work bench, etc. I was so disappointed when "Food Preservation" didn't make the cut in the upcoming "Eco Pack"!
I'm always for a new Aspiration, or even new traits, as well, since these do add to gameplay!