In the first video I was agreeing with every word they said, yes, yes, that is what The Sims was, but it doesn't seem to be true anymore. If anyone watches it besides me they will heare how they engaged the community to build what the community wanted rather than just ship a big game. How they gave them the tools in situations of things like what if I did this? what would happen? I think this version has forgotten that and they kept talking about if you are looking for 'win' in the game you will never find it, then why is this game riddled with so many to do list to win? I think this game is much farther away than the heart of the Sims to those original developers and Will Wright.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
I never use mods and play Sims 3 all the time. But I did have to fix all the ep worlds routing as there were a ton of routing issues in the EP world - like Bridgeport and IP's world were horrid. So yes- once I fixed the routing, removed a few troublesome sim families - like the Scotts and remove the gym/school combo buildings - lag troubles ceased to exist.
But to be perfectly honest I do prefer playing user created worlds and the Store worlds over the ep worlds. They do not have the same issues the ep worlds had. The game plays mint to be honest without a mod in sight or CC.
I can't fix Sims 4's boredom or lacking or load screens or culling or missing content.
This is pretty much how I play TS3 too. Recently-ish I did add mods but that was just for more features etc. I always found that by removing the laggy families and fixing a few terrain/door/etc issues most worlds ran really well. I still run all the expansion packs (except that Kate Perry thing) and loads of store content and enjoy a game that plays extremely well. I think I'm lucky though, I know most people have bad lag. Mind you I've never bothered adding CC to TS3, maybe that's the difference.
I dont use mods on TS3 However I do use tons of CC and it runs awesome on my computer! To me TS4 is a bit laggy in a way only Mod I use is MC Command and only CC I have is Hairstyles and I have those CC packages combined into one package using S4pe. and yet it still is a bit laggy. The time gets all crazy and out of wack.... only issue I have wit Ts3 is the CAS and how you have to wait for the clothing to load (-____-) most irritating thing EVER! if you could add Ts4's CAs to TS3 I'd be a happy camper lol
"Bada su the gorn bada su the brawn bada bady oda aba donk donk donk gerbits gerbits vo gerbits".
I'll say this one , we should not need CC to make the game playable . Funner yes, but playable acourcse not . When your paying good money for a game . Everything should be complete, and stand on its on . Expansions are supprised expand game play, not fix game play .
In the first video I was agreeing with every word they said, yes, yes, that is what The Sims was, but it doesn't seem to be true anymore. If anyone watches it besides me they will heare how they engaged the community to build what the community wanted rather than just ship a big game. How they gave them the tools in situations of things like what if I did this? what would happen? I think this version has forgotten that and they kept talking about if you are looking for 'win' in the game you will never find it, then why is this game riddled with so many to do list to win? I think this game is much farther away than the heart of the Sims to those original developers and Will Wright.
I absolutely agree with you!!!!!
"Bada su the gorn bada su the brawn bada bady oda aba donk donk donk gerbits gerbits vo gerbits".
I started to kind of like ts4. Not as a game. Oh, God... definitely not as a game. It's become a spectator sport. It's like watching a slow motion shipwreck where nobody gets fatally wounded... except the fans' enthusiasm.
It's more like the Titanic to me, it hit that toddler iceberg a long time ago and there's the same shortage of lifeboats!
In the first video I was agreeing with every word they said, yes, yes, that is what The Sims was, but it doesn't seem to be true anymore. If anyone watches it besides me they will heare how they engaged the community to build what the community wanted rather than just ship a big game. How they gave them the tools in situations of things like what if I did this? what would happen? I think this version has forgotten that and they kept talking about if you are looking for 'win' in the game you will never find it, then why is this game riddled with so many to do list to win? I think this game is much farther away than the heart of the Sims to those original developers and Will Wright.
Yeah, watching the view of the people involved in previous The Sims games really makes the birth of The Sims 4 concept a lot confusing, really.
In the first video, at 5:24, Tim LeTorneau says that one of the main points of the game is giving the players the tools to be their own creative director. We can see how that vision was expanded on consistently with each iteration - The Sims had great build tools and was very moddable back in its day; The Sims 2 greatly improved sims characterization and world building tools; The Sims 3 expanded even more theses tools with CASt and CAW. And then we reach the last iteration and I can really understand why it sticks out like a sore thumb. It goes backwards and does not improve, really. CAS is slightly improved, but still is meh.
@Erpe I think that saying that The Sims was primarily aimed at young girls is a flawed assumption, no matter how many times you say it. You can make a case for later games, but The Sims apparently had no intention to be a young girl game to play with dolls. First, because in the interview they clearly say they went away from the Dollhouse name, because they were afraid it would drive away males. If they were really set in selling it to young girls, why even bother? They were clearly aiming for as wide and audience as possible. Probably because they had no idea who the game would appeal to. As it shows from the sensation this game is till today, being one of the only games to actually attract lots of girls, women, boys and men, AND to attract older audiences (elders, which most developers don't even give a cwap to), this game has a pretty wide approach to it's public.
Second, the game design really doesn't seem like aimed at young girls. The UI was pretty dull and the items in the game were very classical and timeless - again, it appeals to not only a broad audience, but an international audience as well. Even the box art doesn't look like something that would appeal to young audiences it featured a burglar, old people ,only one kid (a boy) playing with an airplane, a woman in a suit carrying coffee and a couple kissing, all of that with a mix of desaturated colors behind. Yeah, not really my idea of "tween".
Third, the game was pretty unforgiving in terms of management, something I can't believe would be aimed at young girls at the time. Not saying that young girls are dumb (I was one myself, and loved the game), but if even to this day women are considered "too stupid" and "limited" to enjoy some games by some developers, why would 16 years ago be any better? Granted, the team that made The Sims was different from most, and I don't think they would exclude young girls from their expected buyers, but I still think they went towards the neutral route with the game.
So yeah, you keep saying that The Sims was always intended for young girls over and over and over, and that is not bad, but I really can't see it at all. Even The Sims 2 was pretty neutral in many regards.
I respect your opinion, but I believe that if people have some patience the game could be great. For all you know the upcoming content could be fantastic and completely change your stance.
And for all we know the content could remain as shallow as its consistently been.
I've seen others be patient and that's great for them, but it's rude to imply that people are being impatient when we're 2 years in and BASIC ncps and features are missing.
That only shows me that there's absolutely no rush either on behalf of EA, The Sims' devs or both.
In the first video I was agreeing with every word they said, yes, yes, that is what The Sims was, but it doesn't seem to be true anymore. If anyone watches it besides me they will heare how they engaged the community to build what the community wanted rather than just ship a big game. How they gave them the tools in situations of things like what if I did this? what would happen? I think this version has forgotten that and they kept talking about if you are looking for 'win' in the game you will never find it, then why is this game riddled with so many to do list to win? I think this game is much farther away than the heart of the Sims to those original developers and Will Wright.
Yeah, watching the view of the people involved in previous The Sims games really makes the birth of The Sims 4 concept a lot confusing, really.
In the first video, at 5:24, Tim LeTorneau says that one of the main points of the game is giving the players the tools to be their own creative director. We can see how that vision was expanded on consistently with each iteration - The Sims had great build tools and was very moddable back in its day; The Sims 2 greatly improved sims characterization and world building tools; The Sims 3 expanded even more theses tools with CASt and CAW. And then we reach the last iteration and I can really understand why it sticks out like a sore thumb. It goes backwards and does not improve, really. CAS is slightly improved, but still is meh.
@Erpe I think that saying that The Sims was primarily aimed at young girls is a flawed assumption, no matter how many times you say it. You can make a case for later games, but The Sims apparently had no intention to be a young girl game to play with dolls. First, because in the interview they clearly say they went away from the Dollhouse name, because they were afraid it would drive away males. If they were really set in selling it to young girls, why even bother? They were clearly aiming for as wide and audience as possible. Probably because they had no idea who the game would appeal to. As it shows from the sensation this game is till today, being one of the only games to actually attract lots of girls, women, boys and men, AND to attract older audiences (elders, which most developers don't even give a cwap to), this game has a pretty wide approach to it's public.
Second, the game design really doesn't seem like aimed at young girls. The UI was pretty dull and the items in the game were very classical and timeless - again, it appeals to not only a broad audience, but an international audience as well. Even the box art doesn't look like something that would appeal to young audiences it featured a burglar, old people ,only one kid (a boy) playing with an airplane, a woman in a suit carrying coffee and a couple kissing, all of that with a mix of desaturated colors behind. Yeah, not really my idea of "tween".
Third, the game was pretty unforgiving in terms of management, something I can't believe would be aimed at young girls at the time. Not saying that young girls are dumb (I was one myself, and loved the game), but if even to this day women are considered "too plum" and "limited" to enjoy some games by some developers, why would 16 years ago be any better? Granted, the team that made The Sims was different from most, and I don't think they would exclude young girls from their expected buyers, but I still think they went towards the neutral route with the game.
So yeah, you keep saying that The Sims was always intended for young girls over and over and over, and that is not bad, but I really can't see it at all. Even The Sims 2 was pretty neutral in many regards.
Actually I see it as more important that the game was and still seems to be primarily aimed at young teens much more than it is aimed at adults.
But it was also mainly aimed at female gamers. Just the name Dollhouse shows that and the fact that Will Wright's young teen daughter Cassidy was a main inspiration for him shows it too.
The person in the video wasn't the person who changed the name away from Dollhouse. He was just a person who was a member of the team and I don't think that he was present when the name was discussed because I believe that the name was only discussed between Will Wright and EA. So when another member of the team "interprets" the reasons for the change of name I am quite sure that he is just guessing.
The reason I believe this is that marketing isn't a main interest for game developers. But it is for EA and the name of a product is extremely important in marketing. Therefore I am sure that EA's marketing experts discussed the name more than the developers did. But EA probably didn't like the name Dollhouse for two reasons:
1. "Dollhouse" would be more suitable for a child's game than for a teen's game. Some teens could therefore avoid the game for that reason.
2. Even though it was Will Wright's original idea to make a dollhouse for young girls the game had changed and become more of a new kind of life simulation than just a dollhouse game. The name Domestic Home Simulator therefore described better what the game was about. It was just too long and too technical sounding to be good. So the final name (probably mainly chosen by EA but in discussions with Will Wright) became instead just "The Sims".
Since then a lot of other things have changed too. Things which were still true just a couple of decades ago aren't true anymore and especially if we consider the behavior of young males and females:
1. "Girls are quiet and not interested in sports or action movies"
2. "Girls aren't interested in video games and regards boys who play video games as nerds"
3. "Girls aren't interested in business"
and so on... We don't have to go more then about a couple of decades back before those statements would have been accepted by everybody. But we all don't expect anybody to accept them today because the difference in behavior between young females and males has just become smaller and smaller in all areas. Especially girls have changed their behavior towards the traditional behavior of boys. But many boys have changed their behavior in the opposite direction too...
The only problem is that if they stop TS4 now, what will fun TS5?
I mean if we all want a 'mind blowing' game that is worth our money, there needs t be some sort of budget to fund it!
No, buying unsatisfactory product in the hope that EA will use the profits on actually producing satisfactory product is incorrect thinking.
To spend money on product is to reward the company making said product. Rewarding EA for making unsatisfactory product (by spending money on it) will only encourage them to continue to make unsatisfactory product.
If EA want's to make better product, then funding it is their problem - not the consumer's.
Agreed. After all, the profits from TS3 conveniently made their way over to Titanfall apparently.
I'm sure EA makes enough money to fund development on TS5. It isn't as if all their games are budget priced, or even reasonably priced.
That said, some folks like TS4 and they should "have their day" so to speak. I don't trust EA to make a decent sims game ever again anyway. You only need to look at the hash up they started halfway through the last one, and into this 4th one.
I'm trying to accept that the quality Sims days are over
There's no evidence of anything like that. The only thing we've heard of about TS4/Titanfall is that they exchanged their place in the release schedule, and that since the profitability of both games was the same, it didn't change EA bottom lines for these quarters.
There's no evidence of anything like that. The only thing we've heard of about TS4/Titanfall is that they exchanged their place in the release schedule, and that since the profitability of both games was the same, it didn't change EA bottom lines for these quarters.
Depending on how the rest of this year goes and next year, it may end for me.
Honestly I am beginning to get tired of it all. I have been playing TS3 lately and really enjoying it.
My TS4 sims are cute and all, but I have no compelling reason to buy further into this game.
I've read most of this thread and phew .. I understand we all have different opinions, but why can't we just attack or praise the game instead of, you know, each other?
Although I too am not a huge TS4 fan, OP, I think if you use a question as a title to your thread "Should the Sims 4 end here?" you can at the very least allow people to answer that question honestly, even if their answer is no. Just like it'd be cool if people could nicely state why it shouldn't end instead of immediately going on the defensive about it, too ...
Perhaps next time you could use a title like "A thread for all those who think TS4 should definitely end" instead?
In the first video I was agreeing with every word they said, yes, yes, that is what The Sims was, but it doesn't seem to be true anymore. If anyone watches it besides me they will heare how they engaged the community to build what the community wanted rather than just ship a big game. How they gave them the tools in situations of things like what if I did this? what would happen? I think this version has forgotten that and they kept talking about if you are looking for 'win' in the game you will never find it, then why is this game riddled with so many to do list to win? I think this game is much farther away than the heart of the Sims to those original developers and Will Wright.
Yeah, watching the view of the people involved in previous The Sims games really makes the birth of The Sims 4 concept a lot confusing, really.
In the first video, at 5:24, Tim LeTorneau says that one of the main points of the game is giving the players the tools to be their own creative director. We can see how that vision was expanded on consistently with each iteration - The Sims had great build tools and was very moddable back in its day; The Sims 2 greatly improved sims characterization and world building tools; The Sims 3 expanded even more theses tools with CASt and CAW. And then we reach the last iteration and I can really understand why it sticks out like a sore thumb. It goes backwards and does not improve, really. CAS is slightly improved, but still is meh.
@Erpe I think that saying that The Sims was primarily aimed at young girls is a flawed assumption, no matter how many times you say it. You can make a case for later games, but The Sims apparently had no intention to be a young girl game to play with dolls. First, because in the interview they clearly say they went away from the Dollhouse name, because they were afraid it would drive away males. If they were really set in selling it to young girls, why even bother? They were clearly aiming for as wide and audience as possible. Probably because they had no idea who the game would appeal to. As it shows from the sensation this game is till today, being one of the only games to actually attract lots of girls, women, boys and men, AND to attract older audiences (elders, which most developers don't even give a cwap to), this game has a pretty wide approach to it's public.
Second, the game design really doesn't seem like aimed at young girls. The UI was pretty dull and the items in the game were very classical and timeless - again, it appeals to not only a broad audience, but an international audience as well. Even the box art doesn't look like something that would appeal to young audiences it featured a burglar, old people ,only one kid (a boy) playing with an airplane, a woman in a suit carrying coffee and a couple kissing, all of that with a mix of desaturated colors behind. Yeah, not really my idea of "tween".
Third, the game was pretty unforgiving in terms of management, something I can't believe would be aimed at young girls at the time. Not saying that young girls are dumb (I was one myself, and loved the game), but if even to this day women are considered "too plum" and "limited" to enjoy some games by some developers, why would 16 years ago be any better? Granted, the team that made The Sims was different from most, and I don't think they would exclude young girls from their expected buyers, but I still think they went towards the neutral route with the game.
So yeah, you keep saying that The Sims was always intended for young girls over and over and over, and that is not bad, but I really can't see it at all. Even The Sims 2 was pretty neutral in many regards.
Actually I see it as more important that the game was and still seems to be primarily aimed at young teens much more than it is aimed at adults.
But it was also mainly aimed at female gamers. Just the name Dollhouse shows that and the fact that Will Wright's young teen daughter Cassidy was a main inspiration for him shows it too.
The person in the video wasn't the person who changed the name away from Dollhouse. He was just a person who was a member of the team and I don't think that he was present when the name was discussed because I believe that the name was only discussed between Will Wright and EA. So when another member of the team "interprets" the reasons for the change of name I am quite sure that he is just guessing.
The reason I believe this is that marketing isn't a main interest for game developers. But it is for EA and the name of a product is extremely important in marketing. Therefore I am sure that EA's marketing experts discussed the name more than the developers did. But EA probably didn't like the name Dollhouse for two reasons:
1. "Dollhouse" would be more suitable for a child's game than for a teen's game. Some teens could therefore avoid the game for that reason.
2. Even though it was Will Wright's original idea to make a dollhouse for young girls the game had changed and become more of a new kind of life simulation than just a dollhouse game. The name Domestic Home Simulator therefore described better what the game was about. It was just too long and too technical sounding to be good. So the final name (probably mainly chosen by EA but in discussions with Will Wright) became instead just "The Sims".
Since then a lot of other things have changed too. Things which were still true just a couple of decades ago aren't true anymore and especially if we consider the behavior of young males and females:
1. "Girls are quiet and not interested in sports or action movies"
2. "Girls aren't interested in video games and regards boys who play video games as nerds"
3. "Girls aren't interested in business"
and so on... We don't have to go more then about a couple of decades back before those statements would have been accepted by everybody. But we all don't expect anybody to accept them today because the difference in behavior between young females and males has just become smaller and smaller in all areas. Especially girls have changed their behavior towards the traditional behavior of boys. But many boys have changed their behavior in the opposite direction too...
The term dollhouse was a WIP title and a logical one at that. The fact it was no more than a work title and changed when the real thing was released implies they were absolutely not aiming for female teens. But even more it is implied by the fact that in any case Sims 1 breaths everything BUT female teen. If I may polarize:
The game is far too dark and sharp for that. I don't know if you were old enough back then to 'be around', but it simply was not a girl's game.
@JoAnne65 We won't agree on that because I remember those days very differently.
Yes, I was old enough to play the games. But in those days I visited the game stores to study other games and the games I bought were Might&Magic VI, Starcraft, Civilization III and similar games. I wondered why this uninteresting "The Sims" game with its primitive ugly graphics got so much attention and several expansions because it clearly seemed targeted at young girls and in those days girls were rare customers in the game stores. But all the boxes with "The Sims" at the cover were more and more often studied eagerly by young girls who often also discussed the boxes with an adult women - which probably was their mum who had followed them to the store
TS1 was to my judgement almost only played by females. But both the times and the games have changed. Already in 2004 I saw a video about TS2 and this game had much better graphics and clearly also much more interesting gameplay. So I bought it and played it every day for about two years. I therefore also bought the complete collection of TS1 to learn a little about its predecessor. But after playing it for just about 3 weeks I knew what I was interested in and stopped playing it. It was only slightly better than I originally expected and it was mainly only interesting for me because it was the predecessor to the Sims 2.
Today I won't call the Sims games "games for girls" because the times have changed. Most of the simmers are still females. But there are many more males playing the Sims games too and I am one of them myself
This is an entertaining article about a Dad being introduced to TS1. It's interspersed with interviews from Will Wright and the original team about the beginnings of the Sims. They talk about doll houses and what gender was playing when.
@JoAnne65 We won't agree on that because I remember those days very differently.
Yes, I was old enough to play the games. But in those days I visited the game stores to study other games and the games I bought were Might&Magic VI, Starcraft, Civilization III and similar games. I wondered why this uninteresting "The Sims" game with its primitive ugly graphics got so much attention and several expansions because it clearly seemed targeted at young girls and in those days girls were rare customers in the game stores. But all the boxes with "The Sims" at the cover were more and more often studied eagerly by young girls who often also discussed the boxes with an adult women - which probably was their mum who had followed them to the store
TS1 was to my judgement almost only played by females. But both the times and the games have changed. Already in 2004 I saw a video about TS2 and this game had much better graphics and clearly also much more interesting gameplay. So I bought it and played it every day for about two years. I therefore also bought the complete collection of TS1 to learn a little about its predecessor. But after playing it for just about 3 weeks I knew what I was interested in and stopped playing it. It was only slightly better than I originally expected and it was mainly only interesting for me because it was the predecessor to the Sims 2.
Today I won't call the Sims games "games for girls" because the times have changed. Most of the simmers are still females. But there are many more males playing the Sims games too and I am one of them myself
You were wondering why this uninteresting The Sims game with its primitive ugly graphics got so much attention and several expansions because it 'clearly' seemed targeted at young girls. Who said it was? You did, apparently. It was your private conclusion and the facts contradicted with that assumption (at least, that's how I interprete your words). I do think, like you write, the game did appeal to girls and women more than other games. The fact girls liked The Sims however doesn't mean it was aimed at them. Also I don't quite get the link between you discovering the graphics improved and therefore suddenly concluded it was suitable for guys after all ? I truely wonder if the percentage of male simmers increased over the years. I doubt that to be honest, are there any statistics on that?
And for all we know the content could remain as shallow as its consistently been.
I've seen others be patient and that's great for them, but it's rude to imply that people are being impatient when we're 2 years in and BASIC ncps and features are missing.
I honestly don't understand why threads like this pop up. Sure the game isn't like previous iterations, but that's because they're finished. Once the Sims 4 is finished, then you can judge. If you don't like it, just don't play it. No one will hate you for it. It's your decision.
~I just like lifestates. Is that too much to ask for?~
And for all we know the content could remain as shallow as its consistently been.
I've seen others be patient and that's great for them, but it's rude to imply that people are being impatient when we're 2 years in and BASIC ncps and features are missing.
Well at least they've given us phone covers now.
You're right, I'm so ungrateful.
Thank you, EA! Who needs toddlers, cars and NCPs when you give us phone covers
@Marnetti What's it matter though? You don't have to read them. I don't go into the Sims 4 Happy Play thread only to tell people not to be happy about the game. With these kinds of titles, you do kinda know what to expect. And if we're all civil about it, we can like/dislike whatever we want, as long as we give each other enough room to breathe and have our own opinions. I guess that, in the end, just like it's more fun for people to be able to share their enjoyment of a game, it's also more fun to know you're not the only one getting frustrated with a game you love(d).
Also.. "sure it isn't like previous iterations, but that's cause they're finished" - idk, I keep reading this argument, but I find that really hard to stomach sometimes. Would you apply that same kind of reasoning to everything else you love? What if a new season or your long-time favorite tv show was released, using the exact same title, same actors, decorum, and description, but with an entirely new, unusual, a bit more limiting (to you anyway) & really unfamiliar style - and when you express your disappointment about how a series you've always loved for being exactly what it was has changed into something you don't even really recognize/like anymore, someone tells you "Yeah but the past season's over, sorry, that's life. You're no longer the audience we're catering to"?
The Sims isn't just "the sims, that computer game a couple of kids play" to most people on here. It's the Sims. And it's normal that people have strong opinions about that (whether positive or negative), and it's okay for them to want the series they've always known to remain kind of the same. Just like it's okay to be fine with it changing, and trying to appreciate it in a different way.
Just let everyone speak their mind, in the most civil way possible of course
I honestly don't understand why threads like this pop up. Sure the game isn't like previous iterations, but that's because they're finished. Once the Sims 4 is finished, then you can judge. If you don't like it, just don't play it. No one will hate you for it. It's your decision.
So would you consider it unfair to compare each iteration at the 714 day mark? I don't know how everyone else is comparing, but that's what I'm doing and TS4 still falls flat.
@JoAnne65 We won't agree on that because I remember those days very differently.
Yes, I was old enough to play the games. But in those days I visited the game stores to study other games and the games I bought were Might&Magic VI, Starcraft, Civilization III and similar games. I wondered why this uninteresting "The Sims" game with its primitive ugly graphics got so much attention and several expansions because it clearly seemed targeted at young girls and in those days girls were rare customers in the game stores. But all the boxes with "The Sims" at the cover were more and more often studied eagerly by young girls who often also discussed the boxes with an adult women - which probably was their mum who had followed them to the store
TS1 was to my judgement almost only played by females. But both the times and the games have changed. Already in 2004 I saw a video about TS2 and this game had much better graphics and clearly also much more interesting gameplay. So I bought it and played it every day for about two years. I therefore also bought the complete collection of TS1 to learn a little about its predecessor. But after playing it for just about 3 weeks I knew what I was interested in and stopped playing it. It was only slightly better than I originally expected and it was mainly only interesting for me because it was the predecessor to the Sims 2.
Today I won't call the Sims games "games for girls" because the times have changed. Most of the simmers are still females. But there are many more males playing the Sims games too and I am one of them myself
You were wondering why this uninteresting The Sims game with its primitive ugly graphics got so much attention and several expansions because it 'clearly' seemed targeted at young girls. Who said it was? You did, apparently. It was your private conclusion and the facts contradicted with that assumption (at least, that's how I interprete your words). I do think, like you write, the game did appeal to girls and women more than other games. The fact girls liked The Sims however doesn't mean it was aimed at them. Also I don't quite get the link between you discovering the graphics improved and therefore suddenly concluded it was suitable for guys after all ? I truely wonder if the percentage of male simmers increased over the years. I doubt that to be honest, are there any statistics on that?
No I wasn't wondering because it was targeted at young girls (who until then very rarely played video games). I wondered because the game looked very primitive and had ugly graphics. So I knew that experienced gamers like myself wouldn't consider to buy it. But why were all those girls so interested when they never visited the game stores before?
I studied the boxes to see if there should be any interesting which I had overlooked. But there sure wasn't neither in the Sims 1 basegame nor in the first expansions. I actually became interested though when Makin' Magic was released though because I liked the magic in other games like Might&Magic VI and Might&Magic VII very much. Still I didn't buy Makin' Magic anyway because it was an expansion to a primitive game which didn't look interesting at all and which I would have to buy too
Comments
In the first video I was agreeing with every word they said, yes, yes, that is what The Sims was, but it doesn't seem to be true anymore. If anyone watches it besides me they will heare how they engaged the community to build what the community wanted rather than just ship a big game. How they gave them the tools in situations of things like what if I did this? what would happen? I think this version has forgotten that and they kept talking about if you are looking for 'win' in the game you will never find it, then why is this game riddled with so many to do list to win? I think this game is much farther away than the heart of the Sims to those original developers and Will Wright.
I dont use mods on TS3 However I do use tons of CC and it runs awesome on my computer! To me TS4 is a bit laggy in a way only Mod I use is MC Command and only CC I have is Hairstyles and I have those CC packages combined into one package using S4pe. and yet it still is a bit laggy. The time gets all crazy and out of wack.... only issue I have wit Ts3 is the CAS and how you have to wait for the clothing to load (-____-) most irritating thing EVER! if you could add Ts4's CAs to TS3 I'd be a happy camper lol
I absolutely agree with you!!!!!
It's more like the Titanic to me, it hit that toddler iceberg a long time ago and there's the same shortage of lifeboats!
Yeah, watching the view of the people involved in previous The Sims games really makes the birth of The Sims 4 concept a lot confusing, really.
In the first video, at 5:24, Tim LeTorneau says that one of the main points of the game is giving the players the tools to be their own creative director. We can see how that vision was expanded on consistently with each iteration - The Sims had great build tools and was very moddable back in its day; The Sims 2 greatly improved sims characterization and world building tools; The Sims 3 expanded even more theses tools with CASt and CAW. And then we reach the last iteration and I can really understand why it sticks out like a sore thumb. It goes backwards and does not improve, really. CAS is slightly improved, but still is meh.
@Erpe I think that saying that The Sims was primarily aimed at young girls is a flawed assumption, no matter how many times you say it. You can make a case for later games, but The Sims apparently had no intention to be a young girl game to play with dolls. First, because in the interview they clearly say they went away from the Dollhouse name, because they were afraid it would drive away males. If they were really set in selling it to young girls, why even bother? They were clearly aiming for as wide and audience as possible. Probably because they had no idea who the game would appeal to. As it shows from the sensation this game is till today, being one of the only games to actually attract lots of girls, women, boys and men, AND to attract older audiences (elders, which most developers don't even give a cwap to), this game has a pretty wide approach to it's public.
Second, the game design really doesn't seem like aimed at young girls. The UI was pretty dull and the items in the game were very classical and timeless - again, it appeals to not only a broad audience, but an international audience as well. Even the box art doesn't look like something that would appeal to young audiences it featured a burglar, old people ,only one kid (a boy) playing with an airplane, a woman in a suit carrying coffee and a couple kissing, all of that with a mix of desaturated colors behind. Yeah, not really my idea of "tween".
Third, the game was pretty unforgiving in terms of management, something I can't believe would be aimed at young girls at the time. Not saying that young girls are dumb (I was one myself, and loved the game), but if even to this day women are considered "too stupid" and "limited" to enjoy some games by some developers, why would 16 years ago be any better? Granted, the team that made The Sims was different from most, and I don't think they would exclude young girls from their expected buyers, but I still think they went towards the neutral route with the game.
So yeah, you keep saying that The Sims was always intended for young girls over and over and over, and that is not bad, but I really can't see it at all. Even The Sims 2 was pretty neutral in many regards.
And for all we know the content could remain as shallow as its consistently been.
I've seen others be patient and that's great for them, but it's rude to imply that people are being impatient when we're 2 years in and BASIC ncps and features are missing.
That only shows me that there's absolutely no rush either on behalf of EA, The Sims' devs or both.
OUTER SENSHI PRIDE
But it was also mainly aimed at female gamers. Just the name Dollhouse shows that and the fact that Will Wright's young teen daughter Cassidy was a main inspiration for him shows it too.
The person in the video wasn't the person who changed the name away from Dollhouse. He was just a person who was a member of the team and I don't think that he was present when the name was discussed because I believe that the name was only discussed between Will Wright and EA. So when another member of the team "interprets" the reasons for the change of name I am quite sure that he is just guessing.
The reason I believe this is that marketing isn't a main interest for game developers. But it is for EA and the name of a product is extremely important in marketing. Therefore I am sure that EA's marketing experts discussed the name more than the developers did. But EA probably didn't like the name Dollhouse for two reasons:
1. "Dollhouse" would be more suitable for a child's game than for a teen's game. Some teens could therefore avoid the game for that reason.
2. Even though it was Will Wright's original idea to make a dollhouse for young girls the game had changed and become more of a new kind of life simulation than just a dollhouse game. The name Domestic Home Simulator therefore described better what the game was about. It was just too long and too technical sounding to be good. So the final name (probably mainly chosen by EA but in discussions with Will Wright) became instead just "The Sims".
Since then a lot of other things have changed too. Things which were still true just a couple of decades ago aren't true anymore and especially if we consider the behavior of young males and females:
1. "Girls are quiet and not interested in sports or action movies"
2. "Girls aren't interested in video games and regards boys who play video games as nerds"
3. "Girls aren't interested in business"
and so on... We don't have to go more then about a couple of decades back before those statements would have been accepted by everybody. But we all don't expect anybody to accept them today because the difference in behavior between young females and males has just become smaller and smaller in all areas. Especially girls have changed their behavior towards the traditional behavior of boys. But many boys have changed their behavior in the opposite direction too...
There's no evidence of anything like that. The only thing we've heard of about TS4/Titanfall is that they exchanged their place in the release schedule, and that since the profitability of both games was the same, it didn't change EA bottom lines for these quarters.
That's why I wrote "apparently".
PoppySims Archive
InnaLisa Pose Archive
Devolution of Sims - a once customisable open world sandbox which has become a DLC Party catalog in a shoebox
I ♡ Pudding
Honestly I am beginning to get tired of it all. I have been playing TS3 lately and really enjoying it.
My TS4 sims are cute and all, but I have no compelling reason to buy further into this game.
Although I too am not a huge TS4 fan, OP, I think if you use a question as a title to your thread "Should the Sims 4 end here?" you can at the very least allow people to answer that question honestly, even if their answer is no. Just like it'd be cool if people could nicely state why it shouldn't end instead of immediately going on the defensive about it, too ...
Perhaps next time you could use a title like "A thread for all those who think TS4 should definitely end" instead?
And it should evolve into a phone app just because you do.
The game is far too dark and sharp for that. I don't know if you were old enough back then to 'be around', but it simply was not a girl's game.
Yes, I was old enough to play the games. But in those days I visited the game stores to study other games and the games I bought were Might&Magic VI, Starcraft, Civilization III and similar games. I wondered why this uninteresting "The Sims" game with its primitive ugly graphics got so much attention and several expansions because it clearly seemed targeted at young girls and in those days girls were rare customers in the game stores. But all the boxes with "The Sims" at the cover were more and more often studied eagerly by young girls who often also discussed the boxes with an adult women - which probably was their mum who had followed them to the store
TS1 was to my judgement almost only played by females. But both the times and the games have changed. Already in 2004 I saw a video about TS2 and this game had much better graphics and clearly also much more interesting gameplay. So I bought it and played it every day for about two years. I therefore also bought the complete collection of TS1 to learn a little about its predecessor. But after playing it for just about 3 weeks I knew what I was interested in and stopped playing it. It was only slightly better than I originally expected and it was mainly only interesting for me because it was the predecessor to the Sims 2.
Today I won't call the Sims games "games for girls" because the times have changed. Most of the simmers are still females. But there are many more males playing the Sims games too and I am one of them myself
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/magazine/2002/04/14/guys-and-digital-dolls/9437243f-b5a4-4827-929d-9208ece7dd70/
You're right, I'm so ungrateful.
Thank you, EA! Who needs toddlers, cars and NCPs when you give us phone covers
OUTER SENSHI PRIDE
Also.. "sure it isn't like previous iterations, but that's cause they're finished" - idk, I keep reading this argument, but I find that really hard to stomach sometimes. Would you apply that same kind of reasoning to everything else you love? What if a new season or your long-time favorite tv show was released, using the exact same title, same actors, decorum, and description, but with an entirely new, unusual, a bit more limiting (to you anyway) & really unfamiliar style - and when you express your disappointment about how a series you've always loved for being exactly what it was has changed into something you don't even really recognize/like anymore, someone tells you "Yeah but the past season's over, sorry, that's life. You're no longer the audience we're catering to"?
The Sims isn't just "the sims, that computer game a couple of kids play" to most people on here. It's the Sims. And it's normal that people have strong opinions about that (whether positive or negative), and it's okay for them to want the series they've always known to remain kind of the same. Just like it's okay to be fine with it changing, and trying to appreciate it in a different way.
Just let everyone speak their mind, in the most civil way possible of course
@PrincessSaturn haha ikr
So would you consider it unfair to compare each iteration at the 714 day mark? I don't know how everyone else is comparing, but that's what I'm doing and TS4 still falls flat.
I studied the boxes to see if there should be any interesting which I had overlooked. But there sure wasn't neither in the Sims 1 basegame nor in the first expansions. I actually became interested though when Makin' Magic was released though because I liked the magic in other games like Might&Magic VI and Might&Magic VII very much. Still I didn't buy Makin' Magic anyway because it was an expansion to a primitive game which didn't look interesting at all and which I would have to buy too