I know many follow LGR, enjoyed his Sims 3 reviews, and look forward to his future Sims 4 review. He gave his opinion very recently on "missing features" of Sims 4. Do you agree with his view?
I completely agree with him. People are making such a big deal out of them not including things that never promised us to begin with. We also have no evidence that many of things he included on the list EA even considered including in a the Sims 4 base game.
I'm definitely giving the game a good, hard try, but I'm also very displeased about the lack of features AND the fact that EA/Maxis has done absolutely nothing to turn the fire down while the pot's boiling over. They won't even allow trusted review companies retail copies to review, which is always a red flag.
That being said, nobody should ever summarily dismiss a list of complaints MERELY because "EA never promised" the items. To be frank, EA never promised us -anything- outside of the two or three basic features. They didn't promise us elders, skills, careers, music, or anything at all other than "The Sims 4." EA and 'The Sims' has such great name recognition that they can bank on the fact that people are going to buy this game, even if they haven't read a single review on it, and many of them are going to like it, irregardless of what it contains. That doesn't mean that the complaints of older players, or even big money spenders who are typically long-term players, shouldn't count for anything.
Edit: In a round-about way, I guess you could say that I'm suggesting that EA should use these complaints constructively, not simply ignore them. Some complaints are baseless, but this MANY complaints with this many supporters is a resounding message to EA that should be heard.
A lot of simmers might not be aware of this, but if you watch his non sims reviews, you can see that he is pretty biases towards what he likes. Nothing against the man for this - everyone is biased, including myself.
I'm not sure how game reviews CAN'T be biased, personally. A person's taste in video games is as personal and unique as a person's taste in music, food, fashion etc.
This is why I don't even hold much weight to reviews anyway, all I want to know is if the game works then I can decide if I like it myself.
I agree with you. I've seen a lot of people on these forums say that LGR isn't biased and tells it like it is. If you watch his Duke Nukem Forever review, you can see that is anything but the case.
XD Bad Duke Nukem no cookie for you.
I wanted to like the game so much. But no. I don't know what they were thinking when they made Duke into Master Chief - Duke isn't Halo.
As I see it, disagreeing with @bflury's incredibly negative and biased list does not mean he is selling out. It just means the man has a brain in his head and intends to use it. There is a difference between these features are missing and that sucks to OMG these features are missing so its going to be the worst game in the entire world! I very much doubt that LGR is viewing the game with rose colored glasses, his review will likely include a great many scathing jokes. But he will likely look at the game for what it is and not what it should have been, whether that is good or bad in his opinion we will have to wait and see.
A lot of simmers might not be aware of this, but if you watch his non sims reviews, you can see that he is pretty biases towards what he likes. Nothing against the man for this - everyone is biased, including myself.
I'm not sure how game reviews CAN'T be biased, personally. A person's taste in video games is as personal and unique as a person's taste in music, food, fashion etc.
This is why I don't even hold much weight to reviews anyway, all I want to know is if the game works then I can decide if I like it myself.
I agree with you. I've seen a lot of people on these forums say that LGR isn't biased and tells it like it is. If you watch his Duke Nukem Forever review, you can see that is anything but the case.
XD Bad Duke Nukem no cookie for you.
I wanted to like the game so much. But no. I don't know what they were thinking when they made Duke into Master Chief - Duke isn't Halo.
I used to like the Duke Nukem games but that one made me run for the hills. Yes I am a woman and I liked those games. :P
It's quite drop from the top, so how ya feeling down there?
Nope it doesn't surprise me and im still going to watch his review. He is an honest reviewer, he is not paid off. LGR i would like to think is the type of reviewer where he doesn't let other information cloud his judgement on the game. I've always seen him give a review from his personal opinion on how he plays the game. So his opinion on the list is that it's misleading, is his opinion. He knows with new editions to the series no promises are made. The list to him could be viewed as misleading because it makes it seem like the game is a bad game when it many not be. That's all going to be his personal opinion and it doesn't mean he's bought.
Yeesh. I don't like sims 4 because it doesn't fit my play style when i use it to play. However I'm not going to go on this witch hunt after simmers who are willing to give the game a chance and label them as people who are paid off by EA. The one thing like LGR has always i feel promoted is that not to buy games based on his judgement or reviews, but to do research and then buy. I like that he's humble and even though i don't agree with his opinion about the list, i don't find him any less an honest person.
All of this.
I'm disappointed by some of the changes that they decided to make to the series. As of now, the 4th title doesn't sound as though it fits my personal playstyle as well as the 3rd did. But, that said, that's just my opinion. I enjoy LGR's reviews because he comes across as very honest and he always encourages gamers to make their own decisions. His reaction doesn't surprise me, and I'm still looking forward to his review of TS4.
I trust LGR's opinions, I feel that they are not 100% bias... But I trust his opinion, and ironically, his opinion about the list is the same as mine, to +1 for LGR!
A lot of simmers might not be aware of this, but if you watch his non sims reviews, you can see that he is pretty biases towards what he likes. Nothing against the man for this - everyone is biased, including myself.
I'm not sure how game reviews CAN'T be biased, personally. A person's taste in video games is as personal and unique as a person's taste in music, food, fashion etc.
This is why I don't even hold much weight to reviews anyway, all I want to know is if the game works then I can decide if I like it myself.
I agree with you. I've seen a lot of people on these forums say that LGR isn't biased and tells it like it is. If you watch his Duke Nukem Forever review, you can see that is anything but the case.
XD Bad Duke Nukem no cookie for you.
I wanted to like the game so much. But no. I don't know what they were thinking when they made Duke into Master Chief - Duke isn't Halo.
I used to like the Duke Nukem games but that one made me run for the hills. Yes I am a woman and I liked those games. :P
It's not as uncommon as you would think Still awesome though, Duke 3D is one of my favorite PC games.
I'm definitely giving the game a good, hard try, but I'm also very displeased about the lack of features AND the fact that EA/Maxis has done absolutely nothing to turn the fire down while the pot's boiling over. They won't even allow trusted review companies retail copies to review, which is always a red flag.
That being said, nobody should ever summarily dismiss a list of complaints MERELY because "EA never promised" the items. To be frank, EA never promised us -anything- outside of the two or three basic features. They didn't promise us elders, skills, careers, music, or anything at all other than "The Sims 4." EA and 'The Sims' has such great name recognition that they can bank on the fact that people are going to buy this game, even if they haven't read a single review on it, and many of them are going to like it, irregardless of what it contains. That doesn't mean that the complaints of older players, or even big money spenders who are typically long-term players, shouldn't count for anything.
I don't like the insinuation that older players are the ones who are complaining and only newer ones are the ones who are giving it a chance, but I'm interested in what you said about EA not giving "trusted review companies" retail copies to review. You mean IGN, Gamespot, Edge, etc? How do you know that? I don't follow reviews at all but don't they usually come out a little closer to release?
PURPOSE: This list is intended to allow ANYONE familiar with the series, whether the last game they played was original Sims or the latest patched up version of base Sims 3 to take that experience and get a minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers. There is plenty of information available elsewhere explaining what is new in the game.
I'm wondering why so many ep features were on the list if it's supposed to be on base games only.
I know many follow LGR, enjoyed his Sims 3 reviews, and look forward to his future Sims 4 review. He gave his opinion very recently on "missing features" of Sims 4. Do you agree with his view?
I completely agree with him. People are making such a big deal out of them not including things that never promised us to begin with. We also have no evidence that many of things he included on the list EA even considered including in a the Sims 4 base game.
That was never the purpose of the list...
In fact it is very clearly mentioned at the very top:
PURPOSE: This list is intended to allow ANYONE familiar with the series, whether the last game they played was original Sims or the latest patched up version of base Sims 3 to take that experience and get a minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers. There is plenty of information available elsewhere explaining what is new in the game.
"minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers" and yet it only includes things that are missing, no matter how minute a thing it may be. The entire thread has an extremely negative slant so I'm just not seeing it.
I know many follow LGR, enjoyed his Sims 3 reviews, and look forward to his future Sims 4 review. He gave his opinion very recently on "missing features" of Sims 4. Do you agree with his view?
HA! Now you must all come to the dark side that is TS4
Interesting....especially the part of 'never promised to begin with'.
A sequel in a series tends to build on it's predecessors, and it's implied that features are kept and built on, rather than removed all together.
But anyway, I hope his review will be impartial.
I can give you so many examples of sequels of games coming out and people going crazy up to the release of them finding out certain things had changed/been omitted... Fallout 1 and 2 were isometric and had a turn based combat system, when BethesdaObsidian showcased Fallout 3 it had changed into a FPS/FPRPG. People got over that, though, and New Vegas is one of my favourite games of all time.
Diablo 1 and 2 were also isometric, and very dark with a gothic looking art style. They also allowed us to put our own stat points in and D2 had other things like runewords and charms. Diablo 3 is still isometric but it now has a more stylistic art style, it's gone down the more "cartoony" road than realistic. It doesn't allow players to put their own stat points in upon levelling up, nor does it have runewords or charms. Yet it still sold over 14 million copies last I checked, not sure how many copies have sold on the console versions or how well RoS has been selling. I admit it was a bit bland when it first released, but Blizzard have patched things up to make it a lot more fun.
My point is, these things happen in the games industry CONSTANTLY. When people finally get to play the game they tend to realise it's not actually so bad.
Agreed, 'things change'. But you'd have to agree that Sims is notorious for monetizing things, example, the Greenhouse was released as store content whilst in S2, it was part of an expansion. And it was $17 for the greenhouse!
When I see the changes to the base game, I'm dreading the monetization. Yes, I know it's optional, but I don't think it's ethical. Just my 2c.
Missing some of the context with this tweet, which is the nature of the medium I suppose. It had nothing to do with excusing the list, and everything to do with not taking it at face value and instead forming an educated opinion. Read the very next tweet and ones from the past to get where I was coming from.
That said, I just feel SOME of the hype surrounding this list is absurd. I find it odd that people are telling me "we were promised things things!" when they simply were assuming instead of going on fact. Basically, "don't get your hopes up until you know for sure what you're getting into" is what I was trying to say. It's like going to a party expecting a pizza when you were never told there would be pizza to begin with, and then complaining that you got a calzone. Maybe you expected pizza because you had pizza a few times before, but it's also on you to determine what they're serving so you're not surprised.
Also, I've never claimed to be unbiased, and personally I think it's unwise to treat my views as law or base a purchase solely on them. Frick I'd never trust my word alone, I'm about as opinionated as they come. I'm simply a dude with a voice and likes to share his hobby. By and large, I review for the sake of entertainment, not to be a source of purely objective content. It even says so right on my YouTube channel page. No matter how much I try to be fair to a game, it's still only one viewpoint, and for a complex $60+ game you should be doing tons of your own research on top of listening to reviewers.
PURPOSE: This list is intended to allow ANYONE familiar with the series, whether the last game they played was original Sims or the latest patched up version of base Sims 3 to take that experience and get a minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers. There is plenty of information available elsewhere explaining what is new in the game.
I'm wondering why so many ep features were on the list if it's supposed to be on base games only.
Because it adds to that impressive number of "78+" and it relies on people not knowing and seeking others to do all their thinking for them.
Makes a good headline, like a lot of sensationalist news these days.
I know many follow LGR, enjoyed his Sims 3 reviews, and look forward to his future Sims 4 review. He gave his opinion very recently on "missing features" of Sims 4. Do you agree with his view?
HA! Now you must all come to the dark side that is TS4
Nah, I'll watch the review but still not buying.
It's quite drop from the top, so how ya feeling down there?
PURPOSE: This list is intended to allow ANYONE familiar with the series, whether the last game they played was original Sims or the latest patched up version of base Sims 3 to take that experience and get a minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers. There is plenty of information available elsewhere explaining what is new in the game.
I'm wondering why so many ep features were on the list if it's supposed to be on base games only.
Because the list features base game play from sims 1, 2, and 3. Not just sims 3 and at some point and time all those features missing have been in base game at one point in time. So the conclusion is you didn't read the fine print to well that says that.
Oh almost forgot the list also includes that patched content that was patched on to the base game.
In fact it is very clearly mentioned at the very top:
PURPOSE: This list is intended to allow ANYONE familiar with the series, whether the last game they played was original Sims or the latest patched up version of base Sims 3 to take that experience and get a minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers. There is plenty of information available elsewhere explaining what is new in the game.
It doesn't matter what you state the purpose of the list is; people are going to interpret the motive and reasoning differently.
Saying in big bold letters in the title "OFFICIALLY CONFIRMED MISSING/CRIPPLED BASE features..." makes one think these are features that were supposed to be in Sims 4 but somewhere along the way they were removed.
Missing some of the context with this tweet, which is the nature of the medium I suppose. It had nothing to do with excusing the list, and everything to do with not taking it at face value and instead forming an educated opinion. Read the very next tweet and ones from the past to get where I was coming from.<br />
<br />
That said, I just feel SOME of the hype surrounding this list is absurd. I find it odd that people are telling me "we were promised things things!" when they simply were assuming instead of going on fact. Basically, "don't get your hopes up until you know for sure what you're getting into" is what I was trying to say. It's like going to a party expecting a pizza when you were never told there would be pizza to begin with, and then complaining that you got a calzone. Maybe you expected pizza because you had pizza a few times before, but it's also on you to determine what they're serving so you're not surprised.<br />
<br />
Also, I've never claimed to be unbiased, and personally I think it's unwise to treat my views as law or base a purchase solely on them. Frick I'd never trust my word alone, I'm about as opinionated as they come. I'm simply a dude with a voice and likes to share his hobby. By and large, I review for the sake of entertainment, not to be a source of purely objective content. It even says so right on my YouTube channel page. No matter how much I try to be fair to a game, it's still only one viewpoint, and for a complex $60+ game you should be doing tons of your own research on top of listening to reviewers.
I watch because your reviews are funny. :P
That and you tend to point out the pros and cons.
It's quite drop from the top, so how ya feeling down there?
PURPOSE: This list is intended to allow ANYONE familiar with the series, whether the last game they played was original Sims or the latest patched up version of base Sims 3 to take that experience and get a minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers. There is plenty of information available elsewhere explaining what is new in the game.
I'm wondering why so many ep features were on the list if it's supposed to be on base games only.
There aren't EP features on the list. I suppose we need to go through and not only link to the sources confirming that the features aren't in TS4, but also links proving that they were features in the base games - some of them we did that for. Then I figured that it's easy enough to find out where/when certain features debuted, so why should we do that?
All I'm saying is if you (or anyone else) think there is something on the list that never appeared in a base game, please point it out and it will be fixed.
I know many follow LGR, enjoyed his Sims 3 reviews, and look forward to his future Sims 4 review. He gave his opinion very recently on "missing features" of Sims 4. Do you agree with his view?
I completely agree with him. People are making such a big deal out of them not including things that never promised us to begin with. We also have no evidence that many of things he included on the list EA even considered including in a the Sims 4 base game.
That was never the purpose of the list...
In fact it is very clearly mentioned at the very top:
PURPOSE: This list is intended to allow ANYONE familiar with the series, whether the last game they played was original Sims or the latest patched up version of base Sims 3 to take that experience and get a minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers. There is plenty of information available elsewhere explaining what is new in the game.
The issue with "The List" @bflury is that it is completely bias, every part of it. I know you want to "inform" people, but it is just there to turn people away from the game, not help them come to a decision of the game. It is very bias.
PURPOSE: This list is intended to allow ANYONE familiar with the series, whether the last game they played was original Sims or the latest patched up version of base Sims 3 to take that experience and get a minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers. There is plenty of information available elsewhere explaining what is new in the game.
I'm wondering why so many ep features were on the list if it's supposed to be on base games only.
Because the list features base game play from sims 1, 2, and 3. Not just sims 3 and at some point and time all those features missing have been in base game at one point in time. So the conclusion is you didn't read the fine print to well that says that.
Oh almost forgot the list also includes that patched content that was patched on to the base game.
Hmmm. I saw some that were strictly ep added. But maybe I imagined that?
Comments
I completely agree with him. People are making such a big deal out of them not including things that never promised us to begin with. We also have no evidence that many of things he included on the list EA even considered including in a the Sims 4 base game.
I'm definitely giving the game a good, hard try, but I'm also very displeased about the lack of features AND the fact that EA/Maxis has done absolutely nothing to turn the fire down while the pot's boiling over. They won't even allow trusted review companies retail copies to review, which is always a red flag.
That being said, nobody should ever summarily dismiss a list of complaints MERELY because "EA never promised" the items. To be frank, EA never promised us -anything- outside of the two or three basic features. They didn't promise us elders, skills, careers, music, or anything at all other than "The Sims 4." EA and 'The Sims' has such great name recognition that they can bank on the fact that people are going to buy this game, even if they haven't read a single review on it, and many of them are going to like it, irregardless of what it contains. That doesn't mean that the complaints of older players, or even big money spenders who are typically long-term players, shouldn't count for anything.
Edit: In a round-about way, I guess you could say that I'm suggesting that EA should use these complaints constructively, not simply ignore them. Some complaints are baseless, but this MANY complaints with this many supporters is a resounding message to EA that should be heard.
I used to like the Duke Nukem games but that one made me run for the hills. Yes I am a woman and I liked those games. :P
All of this.
I'm disappointed by some of the changes that they decided to make to the series. As of now, the 4th title doesn't sound as though it fits my personal playstyle as well as the 3rd did. But, that said, that's just my opinion. I enjoy LGR's reviews because he comes across as very honest and he always encourages gamers to make their own decisions. His reaction doesn't surprise me, and I'm still looking forward to his review of TS4.
~Kaleb
I don't like the insinuation that older players are the ones who are complaining and only newer ones are the ones who are giving it a chance, but I'm interested in what you said about EA not giving "trusted review companies" retail copies to review. You mean IGN, Gamespot, Edge, etc? How do you know that? I don't follow reviews at all but don't they usually come out a little closer to release?
Ha ha this. He seems to have a grip so far, so I might give him a watch. That "master list" in question is quite ridiculous.
-my nickname was taken on twitter
"minimum expectation of what The Sims 4 offers" and yet it only includes things that are missing, no matter how minute a thing it may be. The entire thread has an extremely negative slant so I'm just not seeing it.
HA! Now you must all come to the dark side that is TS4
Agreed, 'things change'. But you'd have to agree that Sims is notorious for monetizing things, example, the Greenhouse was released as store content whilst in S2, it was part of an expansion. And it was $17 for the greenhouse!
When I see the changes to the base game, I'm dreading the monetization. Yes, I know it's optional, but I don't think it's ethical. Just my 2c.
That said, I just feel SOME of the hype surrounding this list is absurd. I find it odd that people are telling me "we were promised things things!" when they simply were assuming instead of going on fact. Basically, "don't get your hopes up until you know for sure what you're getting into" is what I was trying to say. It's like going to a party expecting a pizza when you were never told there would be pizza to begin with, and then complaining that you got a calzone. Maybe you expected pizza because you had pizza a few times before, but it's also on you to determine what they're serving so you're not surprised.
Also, I've never claimed to be unbiased, and personally I think it's unwise to treat my views as law or base a purchase solely on them. Frick I'd never trust my word alone, I'm about as opinionated as they come. I'm simply a dude with a voice and likes to share his hobby. By and large, I review for the sake of entertainment, not to be a source of purely objective content. It even says so right on my YouTube channel page. No matter how much I try to be fair to a game, it's still only one viewpoint, and for a complex $60+ game you should be doing tons of your own research on top of listening to reviewers.
Because it adds to that impressive number of "78+" and it relies on people not knowing and seeking others to do all their thinking for them.
Makes a good headline, like a lot of sensationalist news these days.
Nah, I'll watch the review but still not buying.
Because the list features base game play from sims 1, 2, and 3. Not just sims 3 and at some point and time all those features missing have been in base game at one point in time. So the conclusion is you didn't read the fine print to well that says that.
Oh almost forgot the list also includes that patched content that was patched on to the base game.
It doesn't matter what you state the purpose of the list is; people are going to interpret the motive and reasoning differently.
Saying in big bold letters in the title "OFFICIALLY CONFIRMED MISSING/CRIPPLED BASE features..." makes one think these are features that were supposed to be in Sims 4 but somewhere along the way they were removed.
I watch because your reviews are funny. :P
That and you tend to point out the pros and cons.
There aren't EP features on the list. I suppose we need to go through and not only link to the sources confirming that the features aren't in TS4, but also links proving that they were features in the base games - some of them we did that for. Then I figured that it's easy enough to find out where/when certain features debuted, so why should we do that?
All I'm saying is if you (or anyone else) think there is something on the list that never appeared in a base game, please point it out and it will be fixed.
Edit: typos
The issue with "The List" @bflury is that it is completely bias, every part of it. I know you want to "inform" people, but it is just there to turn people away from the game, not help them come to a decision of the game. It is very bias.
~Kaleb
Hmmm. I saw some that were strictly ep added. But maybe I imagined that?
-my nickname was taken on twitter