Yeah, TS3 (and really TS2 has its share of bugs that were fixed by Pescado) is kind of inexcusable how they let the bugs just slide. But Maxis isn't the only EA company to do so. An example -- here's the one bugfix mod I wrote for Dragon Age Origin. http://www.nexusmods.com/dragonage/mods/928/? (feel free to not click -- it's basically a list of over 100 bugs in DAO)
It's a shame that most of these were never addressed. The errors ranged from simple data entry errors that could have been easily and quickly fixed to problems with some scripts that needed a bit more work. I have no clue why most of the errors were left in with the final patch. IMO, EA could have and should have implemented a lot of bug fixes and it would have made their customers much happier. Plus, consoles would have also gotten the fixes.
Bug fixing is not only apparently not a huge priority, but will be outright ignored if they don't prevent the game from loading.
That's the thing there is a difference between mild bugs such as 'invisible Sims' or even the so called 'useful bugs' such as Sims who are never tired and then you have unplayable bugs which are game breaking. From what I heard, the December patch' was not fixed for a while and many said they couldn't even play their games and such bugs need to be addressed ASAP
Not only that, when they try or do fix one bug they seem to make 4 more to take it's place.
My TS4 game ran great with no issues that I couldn't live with. Sure some minor bugs, fork stuck to hand etc.., that I could fix easily or ignore. But the forced patching made more and more bugs in my great game. I can't go back and play it like it was because everyone's game has o be the same with forced patching. If I could just get the patches I need I would be playing TS4 now. As it is I just gave up trying.
That's the thing, patches shouldn't be forced. In the TS3 days and I think even in TS2 I held back from patches for a while. In the end it was because I was waiting for the mod updates but I have heard some horror stories about patches breaking the game so I held back from them.
Also in the early days of CAW, some patches meant that CAW couldn't open as it needed to be uploaded so when Ambitions came out there was an uproar when people waited for weeks for a fix. I think since then new patches have been softer on CAW but I have heard from time to time some complaints with them
As for forced patches, that's a big no in my book, almost as big as a no to being forced to play online
Oh, forced patching is a mess. I cannot stand it. What forced patching means is I cannot play the game at all for a few days until the mods that I use catch up. I like it when I can choose when to patch -- in Sims 3, I patched once all the mods I used were updated. I can't think of any positives to forced patching.
If we are considering playing with CC Mods, we are talking a completely different experience than the EA produced game itself. If a producer fixes their content, and it breaks CC content, that is a totally different matter.
As for bugs, I have encountered bugs in every version of The Sims and SimCity at one point or another. With Sims 4, I have only encounted 3, and two of those were fixed in less than two months. Nothing like waiting 1.5 years for a patch to fix an issue in "Druid" back in the day. Or issues with a couple of Westwood Games titles that it wasn't until the company all but abandoned the game and a private programmer came up with a patch they released through their own BB system and then a website.
It's not a matter of wanting fixes "now" so much as it is wanting fixes period. When a game requires mods to run properly, that's an issue. Mods are good, but they should not be bug fixes -- at least not permanent bug fixes.
And don't kid yourself. With Dragon Age Origins, again, there were a lot of people who could not access their DLC for quite a long period of time. It was intermittent with me, but some people had it permanent. Why shouldn't those people who bought a product have their fix ASAP?
I've been gaming since the 70s, btw. Ultima IX was a travesty, and again, it was due to EA pushing Origin to release a game that was not ready to be released. But most games did not have issues anywhere near that severe.
Oh I agree! I never used mods before TS3. I don't like using mods at all. I know allot of people do for games like Skyrim but I love that game just like it is. It didn't need mods for me to fully enjoy playing it. If you have to have mods the game is sorely lacking IMHO. Now CC is another story. I loved CC in TS2!! TS3 CC did nothing but give me issues so I quit using it for TS3 and with the issues that the patches make for TS4 I don't even try using it. They made the game supposedly CC/Mod friendly, then break them with every patch. Just not worth the headache!
Oh, forced patching is a mess. I cannot stand it. What forced patching means is I cannot play the game at all for a few days until the mods that I use catch up. I like it when I can choose when to patch -- in Sims 3, I patched once all the mods I used were updated. I can't think of any positives to forced patching.
If we are considering playing with CC Mods, we are talking a completely different experience than the EA produced game itself. If a producer fixes their content, and it breaks CC content, that is a totally different matter.
As for bugs, I have encountered bugs in every version of The Sims and SimCity at one point or another. With Sims 4, I have only encounted 3, and two of those were fixed in less than two months. Nothing like waiting 1.5 years for a patch to fix an issue in "Druid" back in the day. Or issues with a couple of Westwood Games titles that it wasn't until the company all but abandoned the game and a private programmer came up with a patch they released through their own BB system and then a website.
EA knows a lot of people use mods, so they should accommodate them. If they didn't then they wouldn't have included a mods folder by default in the game. So you are wrong there.
Oh, forced patching is a mess. I cannot stand it. What forced patching means is I cannot play the game at all for a few days until the mods that I use catch up. I like it when I can choose when to patch -- in Sims 3, I patched once all the mods I used were updated. I can't think of any positives to forced patching.
If we are considering playing with CC Mods, we are talking a completely different experience than the EA produced game itself. If a producer fixes their content, and it breaks CC content, that is a totally different matter.
As for bugs, I have encountered bugs in every version of The Sims and SimCity at one point or another. With Sims 4, I have only encounted 3, and two of those were fixed in less than two months. Nothing like waiting 1.5 years for a patch to fix an issue in "Druid" back in the day. Or issues with a couple of Westwood Games titles that it wasn't until the company all but abandoned the game and a private programmer came up with a patch they released through their own BB system and then a website.
I've encountered plenty of bugs both with and without mods. But yeah, most people know that a patch will break at least some of the mods/cc they use. That's to be expected. And that's why forced patching is a mess. Many people don't want to patch immediately for that reason -- they like their mods, and they want to continue to use them. Pulling your mods can break your save, which is why you wait to patch until the mods you use are updated. But with forced patching, you no longer can do this.
Also, bringing up, "Well, this game had issues that took YEARS to fix" is not an excuse for game breaking bugs in any game. Not the ones you cite, and not others either. It would be like saying, "This hamburger tastes awful!" "Well, you know, that restaurant there serves far worse burgers, and in fact, a few years ago, they made a bunch of people sick." That doesn't make the burgers at the first restaurant any better.
Oh, forced patching is a mess. I cannot stand it. What forced patching means is I cannot play the game at all for a few days until the mods that I use catch up. I like it when I can choose when to patch -- in Sims 3, I patched once all the mods I used were updated. I can't think of any positives to forced patching.
Actually you can by shutting off auto update. Then you update when you want to. But if you want to get a EP or GP you have to update first so again you will have to get the forced patch at some point. Once you have gotten it there is no going back. I have tried!
Ah, I've just encountered the game refusing to load if it's not patched. I currently am not playing Sims 4 enough to worry too much about it, though. Probably just having Origin offline would also avoid it.
Edit: It's not only Sims 4 which has the autopatching, actually. Dragon Age Inquisition released a mod-breaking-completely patch and the advice is to roll it back (people who mod the game by default should have a backup of the previous patch) and take Origin off line. Somehow, it doesn't seem like it should be this complicated. Just give people the option to patch when they want to patch.
I've been gaming since the 70s, btw. Ultima IX was a travesty, and again, it was due to EA pushing Origin to release a game that was not ready to be released. But most games did not have issues anywhere near that severe.
I have to call the "since the 70s". We are not talking console or arcade games. Good grief, arcade systems had their issues, and many games at arcades failed or had glitches that we all used to our advantage. PC games like the ones were are considering now were not evident until the mid to late 80s. You can't compare a game like Pong, missile command or "Artillery" to a game like "The Sims".
Even Wizardy and Bards Tale (originals) had issues that most people just restarted from a save to fix (pull out that floppy, restart the computer, restart the game).
To quote Billy Joel "the good old days weren't always good". I still have all my old floppy disk games, now all loaded on to virtual machines running DOS and Windows 3, or using Amiga and early IBM emulators. Sometimes I get nostalgic and pull them up and run through them for the storylines, and then chuckle when I hit one of those classic faults and bugs.
Ah well. I just originally started this thread mainly to point out that it was people perceptions, personal preferences and modern developers - not the parent company - that tinge reactions to the newest Sims title.
Oh, forced patching is a mess. I cannot stand it. What forced patching means is I cannot play the game at all for a few days until the mods that I use catch up. I like it when I can choose when to patch -- in Sims 3, I patched once all the mods I used were updated. I can't think of any positives to forced patching.
Actually you can by shutting off auto update. Then you update when you want to. But if you want to get a EP or GP you have to update first so again you will have to get the forced patch at some point. Once you have gotten it there is no going back. I have tried!
Ah, I've just encountered the game refusing to load if it's not patched. I currently am not playing Sims 4 enough to worry too much about it, though. Probably just having Origin offline would also avoid it.
I stopped that when I got it with the first patch. I don't let Origin start with my computer. I shut off auto update and I have Origin offline. If you open Origin while online it will go and check and then you are stuck. I have the disc version, I don't know how the digital version is. I also don't start my game while my computer is connected online to prevent it from not allowing me to play.
I read an article and interview that says that EA was the one that backed sims, that somebody at maxis said of sims idea: "who wants to play with a dollhouse"
Gallery ID: Gaia Puma (Click pic above if you would to download that exact building)
Oh, forced patching is a mess. I cannot stand it. What forced patching means is I cannot play the game at all for a few days until the mods that I use catch up. I like it when I can choose when to patch -- in Sims 3, I patched once all the mods I used were updated. I can't think of any positives to forced patching.
You can chose to play offline in origin and not patch the game.
Gallery ID: Gaia Puma (Click pic above if you would to download that exact building)
I've been gaming since the 70s, btw. Ultima IX was a travesty, and again, it was due to EA pushing Origin to release a game that was not ready to be released. But most games did not have issues anywhere near that severe.
I have to call the "since the 70s". We are not talking console or arcade games. Good grief, arcade systems had their issues, and many games at arcades failed or had glitches that we all used to our advantage. PC games like the ones were are considering now were not evident until the mid to late 80s. You can't compare a game like Pong, missile command or "Artillery" to a game like "The Sims".
Even Wizardy and Bards Tale (originals) had issues that most people just restarted from a save to fix (pull out that floppy, restart the computer, restart the game).
To quote Billy Joel "the good old days weren't always good". I still have all my old floppy disk games, now all loaded on to virtual machines running DOS and Windows 3, or using Amiga and early IBM emulators. Sometimes I get nostalgic and pull them up and run through them for the storylines, and then chuckle when I hit one of those classic faults and bugs.
Ah well. I just originally started this thread mainly to point out that it was people perceptions, personal preferences and modern developers - not the parent company - that tinge reactions to the newest Sims title.
EA has always owned "The Sims" family of games.
Okay, if you're not counting things like the old Ataris, we'll say since the early 80s. I remember spending entirely too much of my life on various systems.
And I'm certainly not waxing nostalgic when I say I've been gaming all of my life, and I'm middle aged. I'm just saying that while bugs have always been in games (and they certainly have been), you're the one who keeps saying that since old games had bugs, some of them taking far too long to resolve, as if that's an excuse for bugs not being fixed in today's games. I say that's not a good reason at all.
And yes, I agreed with you already that EA has always owned the Sims. They have. If the Sims fails, it won't be like what happened to many other game makers that EA took over and bled dry. EA has been good to Maxis, and Maxis has been good to EA.
Oh, forced patching is a mess. I cannot stand it. What forced patching means is I cannot play the game at all for a few days until the mods that I use catch up. I like it when I can choose when to patch -- in Sims 3, I patched once all the mods I used were updated. I can't think of any positives to forced patching.
If we are considering playing with CC Mods, we are talking a completely different experience than the EA produced game itself. If a producer fixes their content, and it breaks CC content, that is a totally different matter.
As for bugs, I have encountered bugs in every version of The Sims and SimCity at one point or another. With Sims 4, I have only encounted 3, and two of those were fixed in less than two months. Nothing like waiting 1.5 years for a patch to fix an issue in "Druid" back in the day. Or issues with a couple of Westwood Games titles that it wasn't until the company all but abandoned the game and a private programmer came up with a patch they released through their own BB system and then a website.
EA knows a lot of people use mods, so they should accommodate them. If they didn't then they wouldn't have included a mods folder by default in the game. So you are wrong there.
EA knows people are using mods. But lets consider a similar scenario. Car manufacturers can't be responsible if you mod on your Chevy has problems when they have a factory recall on a part, or if your mod you want to use has issues working with that Chevy. Chevy is concerned that their equipment gives you options, but also meets company and highway standards.
EA and other companies make room for mods, but they also tell you "mods are at your own risk". If you are using mods in ANY environment, you are always increasing risk factors, so you can't blame the company that makes it possible but warns you that you are increasing your risk. If they supported mods in the way you are inferring, they would have a support division that just handles resolving your mod issues, instead of giving you some general answers (remove your mods and try again) or sending you back to the mod producer.
I makes me wonder how many of you posting in this thread actually have an appreciation of the programming and development process in a realistic way.
I've been gaming since the 70s, btw. Ultima IX was a travesty, and again, it was due to EA pushing Origin to release a game that was not ready to be released. But most games did not have issues anywhere near that severe.
I have to call the "since the 70s". We are not talking console or arcade games. Good grief, arcade systems had their issues, and many games at arcades failed or had glitches that we all used to our advantage. PC games like the ones were are considering now were not evident until the mid to late 80s. You can't compare a game like Pong, missile command or "Artillery" to a game like "The Sims".
Even Wizardy and Bards Tale (originals) had issues that most people just restarted from a save to fix (pull out that floppy, restart the computer, restart the game).
To quote Billy Joel "the good old days weren't always good". I still have all my old floppy disk games, now all loaded on to virtual machines running DOS and Windows 3, or using Amiga and early IBM emulators. Sometimes I get nostalgic and pull them up and run through them for the storylines, and then chuckle when I hit one of those classic faults and bugs.
Ah well. I just originally started this thread mainly to point out that it was people perceptions, personal preferences and modern developers - not the parent company - that tinge reactions to the newest Sims title.
EA has always owned "The Sims" family of games.
I think people nowadays are more spoiled maybe because technology is more widespread people think is easy to do things and everything will be perfect in gaming. I remember, when I played PS2 or 1 dunno and my memory card got corrupt... I lost like 120 hours of games XD and had to restart everything again. And nobody gave a plum about it. I mean it malfunctioned and got corrupt. Those things happen. One thing is we not getting pools because of bad intentions of EA wanting to capitalize on it. Other is lack of time/malfunction/plum happens.
I think the pools and ghosts and so on (I think, I am not sure) was lack of time to do it properly. Like we have those weird suggestive conversations happening in game between kid and adult, prob worse was happening with toddlers, can you imagine?).
But the unclear communication between EA/Sims people and us/gamers/market is what makes people think the worse ("EA kept pools and ghosts out on purpose to sell a Gamepack based on killing sims on pools lol") in Sims 4 case. I really really think the aborting of Sims Online made them unable to give pools, toddlers, etc. I feel bad for the team because looking at Get to Work they are really trying to make up for it and they look really into the game, and now have to make up for time lost. I hope they are able or that EA give them some more resource when Get to Work is successful for them to breath ligther and focus on improving the corners rather than having to run against the clock to make something good for us.
Gallery ID: Gaia Puma (Click pic above if you would to download that exact building)
It's not a matter of wanting fixes "now" so much as it is wanting fixes period. When a game requires mods to run properly, that's an issue. Mods are good, but they should not be bug fixes -- at least not permanent bug fixes.
And don't kid yourself. With Dragon Age Origins, again, there were a lot of people who could not access their DLC for quite a long period of time. It was intermittent with me, but some people had it permanent. Why shouldn't those people who bought a product have their fix ASAP?
I've been gaming since the 70s, btw. Ultima IX was a travesty, and again, it was due to EA pushing Origin to release a game that was not ready to be released. But most games did not have issues anywhere near that severe.
Oh I agree! I never used mods before TS3. I don't like using mods at all. I know allot of people do for games like Skyrim but I love that game just like it is. It didn't need mods for me to fully enjoy playing it. If you have to have mods the game is sorely lacking IMHO. Now CC is another story. I loved CC in TS2!! TS3 CC did nothing but give me issues so I quit using it for TS3 and with the issues that the patches make for TS4 I don't even try using it. They made the game supposedly CC/Mod friendly, then break them with every patch. Just not worth the headache!
EXACTLY! Thankfully somebody understands when I say CC in TS3 gave me a lot of problems and headache!
Gallery ID: Gaia Puma (Click pic above if you would to download that exact building)
Actually, I do agree that no dev is responsible for making sure they don't break mods. That is impossible and everyone knows that's impossible. When files are changed, if a mod had changed them previously, it needs to be updated. THIS is why patching should be optional.
And by optional I mean when a patch happens, when doing the check, let the gamer know it's there, but leave it up to them whether to install it. I suppose it's probably a bit more of an issue with the online component of the game (the gallery especially), but just a warning saying that you may not be able to access on line features without patching should suffice.
I makes me wonder how many of you posting in this thread actually have an appreciation of the programming and development process in a realistic way.
This is succinct and poignant - even though I've dabbled/have a base understanding of code and count many developers/game artists in my circle of friends, it's always easy to look on the outside and decry the problems like they're simple to fix.
On the flip side, I do get tired of wondering HOW some of the critical problems or major things can linger for YEARS in a game's code when the fanbase is jumping up and down yelling about it for that entire time.
Nothing wrong with TS3, I can already see a few digs towards TS3 being made already. TS3 was a success, the business of the old forums compared to this one are an example of that and that is my final word on the matter
While I didn't have as much fun with TS3 as TS2 I did buy everything that was offered for it. My reference was the bugs that were never fixed. TS2 bugs were fixed before the next EP/SP was released, it also didn't have as many bugs. At that time they extensively play tested their games. A number of play tester post on the old BBs boards. In all actuality it is EA's fault that tS is sliding because of the amount of bugs that are allowed to continue to plague the game and not be fixed before another EP/SP/GP adds to it more bugs.
If it wasn't for Twallan fixing TS3 I would have quit playing it after Pets.
Just my honest opinion.
Have to disagree on bugs being fixed in Sims 2 before the next release, they did not fix them all even after Sims 2 life has ended. If the Sims BBS was still up you would see the complaints. EA/Maxis has a bad track record in not providing timely bug fixing.
Omen by HP Intel®️ Core™️ i9- 12900K W/ RGB Liquid Cooler 32GB Nvidia RTX 3080 10Gb ASUS Ultra-Wide 34" Curved Monitor. Omen By HP Intel® Core™ i7-12800HX 32 GB Nvidia 3070 Ti 8 GB 17.3 Screen
Oh, and I'll add I never expect anything to be perfect -- we don't live in that kind of world. I actually have a fairly good understanding of what is doable and what is not, and perfect is on the latter list. That doesn't mean, though, that things shouldn't be fixed. That also doesn't mean that things should be deliberately cut (thank goodness Day 1 DLC seems to be at the end of its life).
The one time I took it upon myself to make a bugfix mod, it took me more tries than I want to admit to get it right, and there probably still may be a stray issue or two in it (I'll be the first to admit my programming skills are limited). It's not perfection that people are asking for. But when paying for a product, and for many people, more than their full day's wage, you have a right to have expectations.
Companies trying to shovel out inferior products and expect consumers to buy happened before -- what happened in the 1980s is the industry nearly died. People were unwilling to buy what was being produced. Nintendo saved the industry back then. Anyway, if developers decide to push out inferior products and just expect people to buy because it's a videogame or of a certain franchise, the same thing will happen again. People were no more or less entitled back in the 1980s; there was just not the type of world wide forum to complain about it. Ultimately, people will vote with their wallets.
Okay, if you're not counting things like the old Ataris, we'll say since the early 80s. I remember spending entirely too much of my life on various systems.
And I'm certainly not waxing nostalgic when I say I've been gaming all of my life, and I'm middle aged. I'm just saying that while bugs have always been in games (and they certainly have been), you're the one who keeps saying that since old games had bugs, some of them taking far too long to resolve, as if that's an excuse for bugs not being fixed in today's games. I say that's not a good reason at all.
I was born in 1969. I remember the release of the first in-home game systems, and passing those little hand held football or soccer game back and forth for each inning until they came out with the true "Head2Head" models. ::: chuckle ::: Good times when you always had to be face to face with your opponent.
I think I am being a bit misunderstood here. I am not saying bugs and patches are nothing. I am saying that, the more complex the systems and games get, the more likely we are to have bugs. This is more likely to happened as more variance in the systems we use to play them happens.
The complexity of programming and design today makes it highly probable that there will be conflicts every time they try to fix an issue. Sometimes, totally unexpected results will happened ONLY after a game or program gets on over 3000 machines. I have participated in a number of closed Betas that only one or two people of a couple hundred or a couple thousand encountered issues, so the program or game was released. As soon as it ended up in regular production, or during the process to the publishing media, the issues turned out to be a 10-20% level. Sometimes this was due to the users ISP, security program or other factors that could not be fully accounted for in a reasonable testing process. Mainly because there are far too many variables. For instance, I did not encounter the issues with the toddlers during the beta testing. Others did, so they did a pull on them.
Yes, I believe that companies should address issues ASAP. I think they also need to find the best balance between demands for new products and fixes that become apparent on old products.
I just feel that a number of the "issues" in Sims 4 are over dramatized in a lot of ways. I have been playing since the open Beta, and have to computers - one with mod content and one without. I have not seen the majority of issues that were reported on the forums, and helped a few people find out that their issues were with an odd mod content (ear cuff earing mod that would not let Sims4 load after the last update for instance). The issues was in one single piece of CC content that could have been designed to not have this issue (another earcuff created by another modder had no issues at all).
This is all I look from. I agree that things like the toddlers issues, basement border vs ground surface placed items, and issues with interacting with stoves and refrigerators need to be addressed. However, I also appreciate that it becomes a hard thing to track certain specifics when it doesn't affect ALL users. I have yet to encounter the issues with cooking interactions, but my wife has had it multiple times. I found a work around that works for her every time, but when I presented the same to two other people only one had consistent success with it.
As a IT/IS support tech, and having a brother-in-law who is a service tech for a major automotive company, we often see these "gremlin" issues that become harder to track and properly fix due to the complexity of the original design. These games are NOTHING like the programming of the ones we played pre-2004, as modular programming approaches and serious variations of machines (system, drivers, third party software, chipsets, and OSes) all play an unseen factor on so many things.
Maybe I am just a "too reasonable" sort, and like to give the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes it is because I watch people complaining in the forums that have no appreciation for the complexity of the programs and systems, or that don't know simple settings or adjustments that support playing their way. Heck, I just participated in another Sims forums that had a person complaining that their game was broken after a patch when they got the patch from a "pay to play" site that was unrelated to EA and Origin. I.E, he was complaining about a hacked version that was broken in the first place. ::: chuckle :::
Oh, forced patching is a mess. I cannot stand it. What forced patching means is I cannot play the game at all for a few days until the mods that I use catch up. I like it when I can choose when to patch -- in Sims 3, I patched once all the mods I used were updated. I can't think of any positives to forced patching.
If we are considering playing with CC Mods, we are talking a completely different experience than the EA produced game itself. If a producer fixes their content, and it breaks CC content, that is a totally different matter.
As for bugs, I have encountered bugs in every version of The Sims and SimCity at one point or another. With Sims 4, I have only encounted 3, and two of those were fixed in less than two months. Nothing like waiting 1.5 years for a patch to fix an issue in "Druid" back in the day. Or issues with a couple of Westwood Games titles that it wasn't until the company all but abandoned the game and a private programmer came up with a patch they released through their own BB system and then a website.
EA knows a lot of people use mods, so they should accommodate them. If they didn't then they wouldn't have included a mods folder by default in the game. So you are wrong there.
EA knows people are using mods. But lets consider a similar scenario. Car manufacturers can't be responsible if you mod on your Chevy has problems when they have a factory recall on a part, or if your mod you want to use has issues working with that Chevy. Chevy is concerned that their equipment gives you options, but also meets company and highway standards.
EA and other companies make room for mods, but they also tell you "mods are at your own risk". If you are using mods in ANY environment, you are always increasing risk factors, so you can't blame the company that makes it possible but warns you that you are increasing your risk. If they supported mods in the way you are inferring, they would have a support division that just handles resolving your mod issues, instead of giving you some general answers (remove your mods and try again) or sending you back to the mod producer.
I makes me wonder how many of you posting in this thread actually have an appreciation of the programming and development process in a realistic way.
Hum,,, Well my stand point is with out mods or CC. 10 yrs ago TS2 had so much more natural emotions, interactions with more objects and the world around them in the base game than TS4 has. Including service NPC's that also interacted with our sims. That was 10 yrs ago. With the advanced technology one would think they could do that much easier than they did 10 yrs ago. So I expected TS4 to be so much more than TS2 or even 3 and we got so much less. Programming has advanced but our sims didn't. Except they now rely on tablets and cell phones that is!
Nothing wrong with TS3, I can already see a few digs towards TS3 being made already. TS3 was a success, the business of the old forums compared to this one are an example of that and that is my final word on the matter
While I didn't have as much fun with TS3 as TS2 I did buy everything that was offered for it. My reference was the bugs that were never fixed. TS2 bugs were fixed before the next EP/SP was released, it also didn't have as many bugs. At that time they extensively play tested their games. A number of play tester post on the old BBs boards. In all actuality it is EA's fault that tS is sliding because of the amount of bugs that are allowed to continue to plague the game and not be fixed before another EP/SP/GP adds to it more bugs.
If it wasn't for Twallan fixing TS3 I would have quit playing it after Pets.
Just my honest opinion.
Have to disagree on bugs being fixed in Sims 2 before the next release, they did not fix them all even after Sims 2 life has ended. If the Sims BBS was still up you would see the complaints. EA/Maxis has a bad track record in not providing timely bug fixing.
I am very glad that I didn't get or have many bugs with TS2. But there are some that didn't have many with TS3 too. So I guess it is just how your game is. The only bug I really had an issue with in TS2 was the jump bug and that was fixed very quickly.
I will say that I tend to ignore some issues that are bugs. If it doesn't hamper my enjoyment of the game and I can work around it I just ignore it usually.
Oh, these forums are very political, I guess is the best way to put it. I love Sims 3, I like Sims 4, I see issues in both games that I think need to be addressed, though I know it's too late for Sims 3. I do think you're right, that a lot of people do not understand how complex it really is to fix some things, and in fact, finding the trigger can be a crazy mess of difficult. And also, with the law of unintended consequence, it's so easy to break one thing when fixing another.
What makes me nervous about the Sims 4 and its bugs, to be honest, is the Sims 3. Things that should have been fixed, and that were fixed by mods, were left broken. And it's the same developer. Then I look at the parent company and other franchises within, and my own personal experiences with this and knowing the decision to not fix bugs coming from people above the front line. I don't know. I hope Sims 4 ends up with a better track record.
I makes me wonder how many of you posting in this thread actually have an appreciation of the programming and development process in a realistic way.
This is succinct and poignant - even though I've dabbled/have a base understanding of code and count many developers/game artists in my circle of friends, it's always easy to look on the outside and decry the problems like they're simple to fix.
On the flip side, I do get tired of wondering HOW some of the critical problems or major things can linger for YEARS in a game's code when the fanbase is jumping up and down yelling about it for that entire time.
I have to agree with this. I am one of those people that tends to abandon a game if there are issues I don't agree with for more than 6 months that are not addressed. At least with the Sims, we watched them fix a number of items almost as soon as they were noticed, and others they give regular updates through certain channels. I have read a number of blogs by devs that still get perplexed by some of the issues that they are still trying to resolve. I think that is why some of the items have caused them to discuss removing a couple features until a full modular solution can be released.
It amazes me how many keep saying "I won't spend anymore money" in the forums all over the place. If I felt that way, I would have done what I did with Blizzard a few years ago and just washed my hands completely and walked away after a LONG customer relationship. I have yet to find the same issues I found there with EA and its divisions.
I makes me wonder how many of you posting in this thread actually have an appreciation of the programming and development process in a realistic way.
This is succinct and poignant - even though I've dabbled/have a base understanding of code and count many developers/game artists in my circle of friends, it's always easy to look on the outside and decry the problems like they're simple to fix.
On the flip side, I do get tired of wondering HOW some of the critical problems or major things can linger for YEARS in a game's code when the fanbase is jumping up and down yelling about it for that entire time.
I have to agree with this. I am one of those people that tends to abandon a game if there are issues I don't agree with for more than 6 months that are not addressed. At least with the Sims, we watched them fix a number of items almost as soon as they were noticed, and others they give regular updates through certain channels. I have read a number of blogs by devs that still get perplexed by some of the issues that they are still trying to resolve. I think that is why some of the items have caused them to discuss removing a couple features until a full modular solution can be released.
It amazes me how many keep saying "I won't spend anymore money" in the forums all over the place. If I felt that way, I would have done what I did with Blizzard a few years ago and just washed my hands completely and walked away after a LONG customer relationship. I have yet to find the same issues I found there with EA and its divisions.
Interesting - you've actually parted ways with Blizzard? What did it for you? I don't have the depth of experience you do as IT support but as a self-taught IT professional going on 12 years in the field now as well as a rabid consumer of games, Blizzard is generally my "golden goose" in terms of polish and professional pride.
That being said, while I have issues with EA's handling of some of their studios, games and practices they do churn out a large amount of my regular gaming diet. Activision/Ubisoft are the devils for me and who I almost never support these days.
Oh, these forums are very political, I guess is the best way to put it. I love Sims 3, I like Sims 4, I see issues in both games that I think need to be addressed, though I know it's too late for Sims 3. I do think you're right, that a lot of people do not understand how complex it really is to fix some things, and in fact, finding the trigger can be a crazy mess of difficult. And also, with the law of unintended consequence, it's so easy to break one thing when fixing another.
What makes me nervous about the Sims 4 and its bugs, to be honest, is the Sims 3. Things that should have been fixed, and that were fixed by mods, were left broken. And it's the same developer. Then I look at the parent company and other franchises within, and my own personal experiences with this and knowing the decision to not fix bugs coming from people above the front line. I don't know. I hope Sims 4 ends up with a better track record.
Unfortunately as it is now when they fix something it breaks something else.
I figure the issue of unsatisfied Woohoo is because they added Alien abduction in and male pregnancy. It is the only connection to why a patch would break Woohoo. It is a good example of how easily things get broken with patches.
Comments
That's the thing, patches shouldn't be forced. In the TS3 days and I think even in TS2 I held back from patches for a while. In the end it was because I was waiting for the mod updates but I have heard some horror stories about patches breaking the game so I held back from them.
Also in the early days of CAW, some patches meant that CAW couldn't open as it needed to be uploaded so when Ambitions came out there was an uproar when people waited for weeks for a fix. I think since then new patches have been softer on CAW but I have heard from time to time some complaints with them
As for forced patches, that's a big no in my book, almost as big as a no to being forced to play online
If we are considering playing with CC Mods, we are talking a completely different experience than the EA produced game itself. If a producer fixes their content, and it breaks CC content, that is a totally different matter.
As for bugs, I have encountered bugs in every version of The Sims and SimCity at one point or another. With Sims 4, I have only encounted 3, and two of those were fixed in less than two months. Nothing like waiting 1.5 years for a patch to fix an issue in "Druid" back in the day. Or issues with a couple of Westwood Games titles that it wasn't until the company all but abandoned the game and a private programmer came up with a patch they released through their own BB system and then a website.
Oh I agree! I never used mods before TS3. I don't like using mods at all. I know allot of people do for games like Skyrim but I love that game just like it is. It didn't need mods for me to fully enjoy playing it. If you have to have mods the game is sorely lacking IMHO. Now CC is another story.
EA knows a lot of people use mods, so they should accommodate them. If they didn't then they wouldn't have included a mods folder by default in the game. So you are wrong there.
I've encountered plenty of bugs both with and without mods. But yeah, most people know that a patch will break at least some of the mods/cc they use. That's to be expected. And that's why forced patching is a mess. Many people don't want to patch immediately for that reason -- they like their mods, and they want to continue to use them. Pulling your mods can break your save, which is why you wait to patch until the mods you use are updated. But with forced patching, you no longer can do this.
Also, bringing up, "Well, this game had issues that took YEARS to fix" is not an excuse for game breaking bugs in any game. Not the ones you cite, and not others either. It would be like saying, "This hamburger tastes awful!" "Well, you know, that restaurant there serves far worse burgers, and in fact, a few years ago, they made a bunch of people sick." That doesn't make the burgers at the first restaurant any better.
Ah, I've just encountered the game refusing to load if it's not patched. I currently am not playing Sims 4 enough to worry too much about it, though. Probably just having Origin offline would also avoid it.
Edit: It's not only Sims 4 which has the autopatching, actually. Dragon Age Inquisition released a mod-breaking-completely patch and the advice is to roll it back (people who mod the game by default should have a backup of the previous patch) and take Origin off line. Somehow, it doesn't seem like it should be this complicated. Just give people the option to patch when they want to patch.
I have to call the "since the 70s". We are not talking console or arcade games. Good grief, arcade systems had their issues, and many games at arcades failed or had glitches that we all used to our advantage. PC games like the ones were are considering now were not evident until the mid to late 80s. You can't compare a game like Pong, missile command or "Artillery" to a game like "The Sims".
Even Wizardy and Bards Tale (originals) had issues that most people just restarted from a save to fix (pull out that floppy, restart the computer, restart the game).
To quote Billy Joel "the good old days weren't always good". I still have all my old floppy disk games, now all loaded on to virtual machines running DOS and Windows 3, or using Amiga and early IBM emulators. Sometimes I get nostalgic and pull them up and run through them for the storylines, and then chuckle when I hit one of those classic faults and bugs.
Ah well. I just originally started this thread mainly to point out that it was people perceptions, personal preferences and modern developers - not the parent company - that tinge reactions to the newest Sims title.
EA has always owned "The Sims" family of games.
I stopped that when I got it with the first patch.
Gallery ID: Gaia Puma (Click pic above if you would to download that exact building)
http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/789742/the-sims-4-create-a-world-petition-212-signatures-200-signature-celebration/p1
Gallery ID: Gaia Puma (Click pic above if you would to download that exact building)
http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/789742/the-sims-4-create-a-world-petition-212-signatures-200-signature-celebration/p1
Okay, if you're not counting things like the old Ataris, we'll say since the early 80s. I remember spending entirely too much of my life on various systems.
And I'm certainly not waxing nostalgic when I say I've been gaming all of my life, and I'm middle aged. I'm just saying that while bugs have always been in games (and they certainly have been), you're the one who keeps saying that since old games had bugs, some of them taking far too long to resolve, as if that's an excuse for bugs not being fixed in today's games. I say that's not a good reason at all.
And yes, I agreed with you already that EA has always owned the Sims. They have. If the Sims fails, it won't be like what happened to many other game makers that EA took over and bled dry. EA has been good to Maxis, and Maxis has been good to EA.
EA knows people are using mods. But lets consider a similar scenario. Car manufacturers can't be responsible if you mod on your Chevy has problems when they have a factory recall on a part, or if your mod you want to use has issues working with that Chevy. Chevy is concerned that their equipment gives you options, but also meets company and highway standards.
EA and other companies make room for mods, but they also tell you "mods are at your own risk". If you are using mods in ANY environment, you are always increasing risk factors, so you can't blame the company that makes it possible but warns you that you are increasing your risk. If they supported mods in the way you are inferring, they would have a support division that just handles resolving your mod issues, instead of giving you some general answers (remove your mods and try again) or sending you back to the mod producer.
I makes me wonder how many of you posting in this thread actually have an appreciation of the programming and development process in a realistic way.
I think people nowadays are more spoiled maybe because technology is more widespread people think is easy to do things and everything will be perfect in gaming. I remember, when I played PS2 or 1 dunno and my memory card got corrupt... I lost like 120 hours of games XD and had to restart everything again. And nobody gave a plum about it. I mean it malfunctioned and got corrupt. Those things happen. One thing is we not getting pools because of bad intentions of EA wanting to capitalize on it. Other is lack of time/malfunction/plum happens.
I think the pools and ghosts and so on (I think, I am not sure) was lack of time to do it properly. Like we have those weird suggestive conversations happening in game between kid and adult, prob worse was happening with toddlers, can you imagine?).
But the unclear communication between EA/Sims people and us/gamers/market is what makes people think the worse ("EA kept pools and ghosts out on purpose to sell a Gamepack based on killing sims on pools lol") in Sims 4 case. I really really think the aborting of Sims Online made them unable to give pools, toddlers, etc. I feel bad for the team because looking at Get to Work they are really trying to make up for it and they look really into the game, and now have to make up for time lost. I hope they are able or that EA give them some more resource when Get to Work is successful for them to breath ligther and focus on improving the corners rather than having to run against the clock to make something good for us.
Gallery ID: Gaia Puma (Click pic above if you would to download that exact building)
http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/789742/the-sims-4-create-a-world-petition-212-signatures-200-signature-celebration/p1
EXACTLY! Thankfully somebody understands when I say CC in TS3 gave me a lot of problems and headache!
Gallery ID: Gaia Puma (Click pic above if you would to download that exact building)
http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/789742/the-sims-4-create-a-world-petition-212-signatures-200-signature-celebration/p1
And by optional I mean when a patch happens, when doing the check, let the gamer know it's there, but leave it up to them whether to install it. I suppose it's probably a bit more of an issue with the online component of the game (the gallery especially), but just a warning saying that you may not be able to access on line features without patching should suffice.
This is succinct and poignant - even though I've dabbled/have a base understanding of code and count many developers/game artists in my circle of friends, it's always easy to look on the outside and decry the problems like they're simple to fix.
On the flip side, I do get tired of wondering HOW some of the critical problems or major things can linger for YEARS in a game's code when the fanbase is jumping up and down yelling about it for that entire time.
The one time I took it upon myself to make a bugfix mod, it took me more tries than I want to admit to get it right, and there probably still may be a stray issue or two in it (I'll be the first to admit my programming skills are limited). It's not perfection that people are asking for. But when paying for a product, and for many people, more than their full day's wage, you have a right to have expectations.
Companies trying to shovel out inferior products and expect consumers to buy happened before -- what happened in the 1980s is the industry nearly died. People were unwilling to buy what was being produced. Nintendo saved the industry back then. Anyway, if developers decide to push out inferior products and just expect people to buy because it's a videogame or of a certain franchise, the same thing will happen again. People were no more or less entitled back in the 1980s; there was just not the type of world wide forum to complain about it. Ultimately, people will vote with their wallets.
I was born in 1969. I remember the release of the first in-home game systems, and passing those little hand held football or soccer game back and forth for each inning until they came out with the true "Head2Head" models. ::: chuckle ::: Good times when you always had to be face to face with your opponent.
I think I am being a bit misunderstood here. I am not saying bugs and patches are nothing. I am saying that, the more complex the systems and games get, the more likely we are to have bugs. This is more likely to happened as more variance in the systems we use to play them happens.
The complexity of programming and design today makes it highly probable that there will be conflicts every time they try to fix an issue. Sometimes, totally unexpected results will happened ONLY after a game or program gets on over 3000 machines. I have participated in a number of closed Betas that only one or two people of a couple hundred or a couple thousand encountered issues, so the program or game was released. As soon as it ended up in regular production, or during the process to the publishing media, the issues turned out to be a 10-20% level. Sometimes this was due to the users ISP, security program or other factors that could not be fully accounted for in a reasonable testing process. Mainly because there are far too many variables. For instance, I did not encounter the issues with the toddlers during the beta testing. Others did, so they did a pull on them.
Yes, I believe that companies should address issues ASAP. I think they also need to find the best balance between demands for new products and fixes that become apparent on old products.
I just feel that a number of the "issues" in Sims 4 are over dramatized in a lot of ways. I have been playing since the open Beta, and have to computers - one with mod content and one without. I have not seen the majority of issues that were reported on the forums, and helped a few people find out that their issues were with an odd mod content (ear cuff earing mod that would not let Sims4 load after the last update for instance). The issues was in one single piece of CC content that could have been designed to not have this issue (another earcuff created by another modder had no issues at all).
This is all I look from. I agree that things like the toddlers issues, basement border vs ground surface placed items, and issues with interacting with stoves and refrigerators need to be addressed. However, I also appreciate that it becomes a hard thing to track certain specifics when it doesn't affect ALL users. I have yet to encounter the issues with cooking interactions, but my wife has had it multiple times. I found a work around that works for her every time, but when I presented the same to two other people only one had consistent success with it.
As a IT/IS support tech, and having a brother-in-law who is a service tech for a major automotive company, we often see these "gremlin" issues that become harder to track and properly fix due to the complexity of the original design. These games are NOTHING like the programming of the ones we played pre-2004, as modular programming approaches and serious variations of machines (system, drivers, third party software, chipsets, and OSes) all play an unseen factor on so many things.
Maybe I am just a "too reasonable" sort, and like to give the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes it is because I watch people complaining in the forums that have no appreciation for the complexity of the programs and systems, or that don't know simple settings or adjustments that support playing their way. Heck, I just participated in another Sims forums that had a person complaining that their game was broken after a patch when they got the patch from a "pay to play" site that was unrelated to EA and Origin. I.E, he was complaining about a hacked version that was broken in the first place. ::: chuckle :::
At least on here I don't see that as often.
Hum,,, Well my stand point is with out mods or CC. 10 yrs ago TS2 had so much more natural emotions, interactions with more objects and the world around them in the base game than TS4 has. Including service NPC's that also interacted with our sims. That was 10 yrs ago. With the advanced technology one would think they could do that much easier than they did 10 yrs ago. So I expected TS4 to be so much more than TS2 or even 3 and we got so much less. Programming has advanced but our sims didn't. Except they now rely on tablets and cell phones that is!
I am very glad that I didn't get or have many bugs with TS2. But there are some that didn't have many with TS3 too. So I guess it is just how your game is. The only bug I really had an issue with in TS2 was the jump bug and that was fixed very quickly.
I will say that I tend to ignore some issues that are bugs. If it doesn't hamper my enjoyment of the game and I can work around it I just ignore it usually.
What makes me nervous about the Sims 4 and its bugs, to be honest, is the Sims 3. Things that should have been fixed, and that were fixed by mods, were left broken. And it's the same developer. Then I look at the parent company and other franchises within, and my own personal experiences with this and knowing the decision to not fix bugs coming from people above the front line. I don't know. I hope Sims 4 ends up with a better track record.
I have to agree with this. I am one of those people that tends to abandon a game if there are issues I don't agree with for more than 6 months that are not addressed. At least with the Sims, we watched them fix a number of items almost as soon as they were noticed, and others they give regular updates through certain channels. I have read a number of blogs by devs that still get perplexed by some of the issues that they are still trying to resolve. I think that is why some of the items have caused them to discuss removing a couple features until a full modular solution can be released.
It amazes me how many keep saying "I won't spend anymore money" in the forums all over the place. If I felt that way, I would have done what I did with Blizzard a few years ago and just washed my hands completely and walked away after a LONG customer relationship. I have yet to find the same issues I found there with EA and its divisions.
Interesting - you've actually parted ways with Blizzard? What did it for you? I don't have the depth of experience you do as IT support but as a self-taught IT professional going on 12 years in the field now as well as a rabid consumer of games, Blizzard is generally my "golden goose" in terms of polish and professional pride.
That being said, while I have issues with EA's handling of some of their studios, games and practices they do churn out a large amount of my regular gaming diet. Activision/Ubisoft are the devils for me and who I almost never support these days.
Unfortunately as it is now when they fix something it breaks something else.
I figure the issue of unsatisfied Woohoo is because they added Alien abduction in and male pregnancy. It is the only connection to why a patch would break Woohoo. It is a good example of how easily things get broken with patches.