November 15 - It's Friday, so what do I have for you? A Friday Highlight - here!
November 12 - Everyone ready for November Maxis Monthly? Details here

Just started playing TS4, and I've had thoughts.

2...Next

Comments

  • SucomSucom Posts: 1,688 Member
    There is no doubt that EA have achieved their goal for the game to be played on lesser spec machines. The problem is, at what cost? If the game is so lacking, it's pretty pointless having a smooth running game if no-one actually wants to play it.

    (Yes, I know some people want to play it but I'm not one of them)
  • Evil_OneEvil_One Posts: 4,407 Member
    Sucom wrote: »
    There is no doubt that EA have achieved their goal for the game to be played on lesser spec machines. The problem is, at what cost? If the game is so lacking, it's pretty pointless having a smooth running game if no-one actually wants to play it.

    (Yes, I know some people want to play it but I'm not one of them)

    That 'goal' is just a cover, a way for Ea­xis to shift the blame for the failings of the game onto the players instead of themselves, this game was rushed out after being poorly assembled from the remains of Olympus and instead of holding their hands up and admitting their failure, they come out with the 'oh it's so it can run on lower spec PCs' line so that people with higher spec PCs will blame those with lower spec PCs for the game lacking so much.

    If it was the case that this game is the way it is because it was made to run on lower spec machines, I'd like them to explain how come that there's far more detailed games that run on even lower spec than TS4?
    raw
  • kremesch73kremesch73 Posts: 10,472 Member
    edited July 2016
    Evil_One wrote: »
    Sucom wrote: »
    There is no doubt that EA have achieved their goal for the game to be played on lesser spec machines. The problem is, at what cost? If the game is so lacking, it's pretty pointless having a smooth running game if no-one actually wants to play it.

    (Yes, I know some people want to play it but I'm not one of them)

    That 'goal' is just a cover, a way for Ea­xis to shift the blame for the failings of the game onto the players instead of themselves, this game was rushed out after being poorly assembled from the remains of Olympus and instead of holding their hands up and admitting their failure, they come out with the 'oh it's so it can run on lower spec PCs' line so that people with higher spec PCs will blame those with lower spec PCs for the game lacking so much.

    If it was the case that this game is the way it is because it was made to run on lower spec machines, I'd like them to explain how come that there's far more detailed games that run on even lower spec than TS4?

    I half suspect, if there was an Olympus, that it is the game we have today. I don't think it was scrapped. I feel it may have simply been revamped.

    I'm not fully buying into 'the game was made to run on lower end PCs.'

    The more I hang around here, the more suspicious I become.
    Dissatisfied with Sims 4 and hoping for a better Sims 5
  • HappySimmer3HappySimmer3 Posts: 6,702 Member
    edited July 2016
    @kremesch73 that's what I think, too. In the beginning I believed that they used parts of it and built on it. But after seeing so much of the gameplay I came to the conclusion that they didn't change it all that much.

    Have you ever read this thread? http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/858721/leaked-early-gameplay-of-the-sims-4-new-information/p1

    It explains a lot, IMO.
    The Sims 30695923002_cffaca4078_t.jpg

    Where are we going, and why am I in this hand basket?!
  • Evil_OneEvil_One Posts: 4,407 Member
    kremesch73 wrote: »
    Evil_One wrote: »
    Sucom wrote: »
    There is no doubt that EA have achieved their goal for the game to be played on lesser spec machines. The problem is, at what cost? If the game is so lacking, it's pretty pointless having a smooth running game if no-one actually wants to play it.

    (Yes, I know some people want to play it but I'm not one of them)

    That 'goal' is just a cover, a way for Ea­xis to shift the blame for the failings of the game onto the players instead of themselves, this game was rushed out after being poorly assembled from the remains of Olympus and instead of holding their hands up and admitting their failure, they come out with the 'oh it's so it can run on lower spec PCs' line so that people with higher spec PCs will blame those with lower spec PCs for the game lacking so much.

    If it was the case that this game is the way it is because it was made to run on lower spec machines, I'd like them to explain how come that there's far more detailed games that run on even lower spec than TS4?

    I half suspect, if there was an Olympus, that it is the game we have today. I don't think it was scrapped. I feel it may have simply been revamped.

    I'm not fully buying into 'the game was made to run on lower end PCs.'

    The more I hang around here, the more suspicious I become.

    You mean the game was always this shallow and devoid of content?

    Well, I suppose I could buy that... It could easily be explained with them having to hastily patch in AI and multitasking into what would've just been a players only game.
    raw
  • HermaiHermai Posts: 366 Member
    I've loved all sims games, because they all have a thing to add.
    sometimes I play TS2, sometimes I play TS3 when I want to play with world a little. They are both good games that experimented on different things.

    One would thing that they would gather that experience and make the best of both worlds. Instead they made The Sims 1.5. Maybe it was heading to The Sims "i" as it seems, it's not even in the same axis.

    What revolutionary concept have they brought this time? "oh, it runs smoothly"

    clap clap clap

    wishing EA had more guts to make a game that didn't seem so cut, so small. so limited.
    People whose limitations lie within the strict boundaries this game makes are going to thing the game is just fine. Those who were used to push the limits in the other games are going to feel like bird without wings.
  • kremesch73kremesch73 Posts: 10,472 Member
    that's what I think, too. In the beginning I believed that they used parts of it and built on it. But after seeing so much of the gameplay I came to the conclusion that they didn't change it all that much.

    Have you ever read this thread? http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/858721/leaked-early-gameplay-of-the-sims-4-new-information/p1

    It explains a lot, IMO.

    Ah yes. Not sure if it was the same thread or not, but I do recall seeing that video. I didn't think anything of it at the time, but now it just makes me feel like they simply polished up what they already had.

    It generally takes an average of 5 years to create a sims game according to what I read somewhere, if I recall correctly. It doesn't make sense that they spent most of their time working on one game, and then turned around and built another in half the time, even if it does feel empty. That's assuming the rumours are correct. My suspicions tell me (if there was an online game) they didn't scrap anything at all. They revamped what they had to make it run differently than originally intended.

    This, to me, would explain why they are having so much trouble with new content, and why many things are missing. Then again, their record isn't exactly devoid of poor customer experience. So it could just be as simple as them being what they are as well.

    My other suspicion is related to EA's recent reputation of stripping their games down to the bare bones to make more money by charging to add that content back.

    Either suspicion works for me. Even both combined would make sense to me.
    Dissatisfied with Sims 4 and hoping for a better Sims 5
  • Writin_RegWritin_Reg Posts: 28,851 Member
    edited July 2016
    Remember during Sims 3 production they put out some lesser Sims games specifically made for playing on the lesser powerful laptops - well I swear Sims 4 had to have been meant to be one of those or if not it should have been - as it has always reminded me of those games even though I was never interested in buying any of them - some of my family owned them. Who'd ever think our "beloved" Sims series would become a side game. For some reason I kept picturing even bigger and better than Sims 2 and Sims 3 - a combo of those two even in 64 bit. Never in my wildest imagination could I even believe the great Sims would be reduced to this. Not ever!

    "Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.

    In dreams - I LIVE!
    In REALITY, I simply exist.....

  • kremesch73kremesch73 Posts: 10,472 Member
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Remember during Sims 3 production they put out some lesser Sims games specifically made for playing on the lesser powerful laptops - well I swear Sims 4 had to have been meant to be one of those or if not it should have been - as it has always reminded me of those games even though I was never interested in buying any of them - some of my family owned them. Who'd ever think our "beloved" Sims series would become a side game. For some reason I kept picturing even bigger and better than Sims 2 and Sims 3 - a combo of those two even in 64 bit. Never in my wildest imagination could I even believe the great Sims would be reduced to this. Not ever!

    Preach!
    Dissatisfied with Sims 4 and hoping for a better Sims 5
  • HermaiHermai Posts: 366 Member
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Remember during Sims 3 production they put out some lesser Sims games specifically made for playing on the lesser powerful laptops - well I swear Sims 4 had to have been meant to be one of those or if not it should have been - as it has always reminded me of those games even though I was never interested in buying any of them - some of my family owned them. Who'd ever think our "beloved" Sims series would become a side game. For some reason I kept picturing even bigger and better than Sims 2 and Sims 3 - a combo of those two even in 64 bit. Never in my wildest imagination could I even believe the great Sims would be reduced to this. Not ever!

    yeah, when I saw the world map right after I bought the game and started it... I was actually not believing it. "Ok, where is the town? where is the world map?" "where do I add lots?" "where are the terrain tools - HECK WHERE ARE THE POOLS??"

    What we had in TS1:
    latest?cb=20140721071053

    What we've got in TS4:
    Untitled.jpg


    WHAAAA-- talk about bad first impressions. It left a very bad impression on me. I had paid 100 bucks (in my currency) for what it seemed a glorified mobile game. Bad first impressions for games are a very bad thing. I am still not over this world map thing. I like the realistic looking maps. :|
  • VibseVibse Posts: 98 Member
    Hermai wrote: »
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Remember during Sims 3 production they put out some lesser Sims games specifically made for playing on the lesser powerful laptops - well I swear Sims 4 had to have been meant to be one of those or if not it should have been - as it has always reminded me of those games even though I was never interested in buying any of them - some of my family owned them. Who'd ever think our "beloved" Sims series would become a side game. For some reason I kept picturing even bigger and better than Sims 2 and Sims 3 - a combo of those two even in 64 bit. Never in my wildest imagination could I even believe the great Sims would be reduced to this. Not ever!

    yeah, when I saw the world map right after I bought the game and started it... I was actually not believing it. "Ok, where is the town? where is the world map?" "where do I add lots?" "where are the terrain tools - HECK WHERE ARE THE POOLS??"

    What we had in TS1:
    latest?cb=20140721071053

    What we've got in TS4:
    Untitled.jpg


    WHAAAA-- talk about bad first impressions. It left a very bad impression on me. I had paid 100 bucks (in my currency) for what it seemed a glorified mobile game. Bad first impressions for games are a very bad thing. I am still not over this world map thing. I like the realistic looking maps. :|

    to be fair the picture you show of sims 1 was after they added expansions. At release the sims 1 map was smaller.

    I am not saying that the maps in Sims 4 basegame are great because I was dissapointed too. I do think they have learned something by making Windenburg though.
    Origin ID: Vibse83
    The Jensen family tree
  • Sk8rblazeSk8rblaze Posts: 7,102 Member
    Sucom wrote: »
    There is no doubt that EA have achieved their goal for the game to be played on lesser spec machines. The problem is, at what cost? If the game is so lacking, it's pretty pointless having a smooth running game if no-one actually wants to play it.

    (Yes, I know some people want to play it but I'm not one of them)

    Graphics should have been the only thing they toned down IMHO. They went a bit overboard.
    Vibse wrote: »
    Hermai wrote: »
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Remember during Sims 3 production they put out some lesser Sims games specifically made for playing on the lesser powerful laptops - well I swear Sims 4 had to have been meant to be one of those or if not it should have been - as it has always reminded me of those games even though I was never interested in buying any of them - some of my family owned them. Who'd ever think our "beloved" Sims series would become a side game. For some reason I kept picturing even bigger and better than Sims 2 and Sims 3 - a combo of those two even in 64 bit. Never in my wildest imagination could I even believe the great Sims would be reduced to this. Not ever!

    yeah, when I saw the world map right after I bought the game and started it... I was actually not believing it. "Ok, where is the town? where is the world map?" "where do I add lots?" "where are the terrain tools - HECK WHERE ARE THE POOLS??"

    What we had in TS1:
    latest?cb=20140721071053

    What we've got in TS4:
    Untitled.jpg


    WHAAAA-- talk about bad first impressions. It left a very bad impression on me. I had paid 100 bucks (in my currency) for what it seemed a glorified mobile game. Bad first impressions for games are a very bad thing. I am still not over this world map thing. I like the realistic looking maps. :|

    to be fair the picture you show of sims 1 was after they added expansions. At release the sims 1 map was smaller.

    I am not saying that the maps in Sims 4 basegame are great because I was dissapointed too. I do think they have learned something by making Windenburg though.

    Then again, that's a game from the year 2000. 16 years later, well... I expected more than TS4 worlds -- way more. I still remember the day I saw them for the first time. I thought they were photoshopped and a massive joke!
  • VibseVibse Posts: 98 Member
    Sk8rblaze wrote: »
    Sucom wrote: »
    There is no doubt that EA have achieved their goal for the game to be played on lesser spec machines. The problem is, at what cost? If the game is so lacking, it's pretty pointless having a smooth running game if no-one actually wants to play it.

    (Yes, I know some people want to play it but I'm not one of them)

    Graphics should have been the only thing they toned down IMHO. They went a bit overboard.
    Vibse wrote: »
    Hermai wrote: »
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Remember during Sims 3 production they put out some lesser Sims games specifically made for playing on the lesser powerful laptops - well I swear Sims 4 had to have been meant to be one of those or if not it should have been - as it has always reminded me of those games even though I was never interested in buying any of them - some of my family owned them. Who'd ever think our "beloved" Sims series would become a side game. For some reason I kept picturing even bigger and better than Sims 2 and Sims 3 - a combo of those two even in 64 bit. Never in my wildest imagination could I even believe the great Sims would be reduced to this. Not ever!

    yeah, when I saw the world map right after I bought the game and started it... I was actually not believing it. "Ok, where is the town? where is the world map?" "where do I add lots?" "where are the terrain tools - HECK WHERE ARE THE POOLS??"

    What we had in TS1:
    latest?cb=20140721071053

    What we've got in TS4:
    Untitled.jpg


    WHAAAA-- talk about bad first impressions. It left a very bad impression on me. I had paid 100 bucks (in my currency) for what it seemed a glorified mobile game. Bad first impressions for games are a very bad thing. I am still not over this world map thing. I like the realistic looking maps. :|

    to be fair the picture you show of sims 1 was after they added expansions. At release the sims 1 map was smaller.

    I am not saying that the maps in Sims 4 basegame are great because I was dissapointed too. I do think they have learned something by making Windenburg though.

    Then again, that's a game from the year 2000. 16 years later, well... I expected more than TS4 worlds -- way more. I still remember the day I saw them for the first time. I thought they were photoshopped and a massive joke!

    you have a point. I really did expect more from the sims 4 and when I first saw the maps I thought they where from an alpha build or something like that. I just hope that in the future they will do better if not in Sims 4 then in Sims 5 if they ever release that.
    Origin ID: Vibse83
    The Jensen family tree
  • GoldmoldarGoldmoldar Posts: 10,486 Member
    edited July 2016
    I agree with the OP. Some aspects are cool but for me, it is not a step forward from the mighty game that The Sims 3 is
    I tend to agree with you however they moved forward in some areas but way back in others and I see no balance being some main features are missing from Sims 4 that could really help Sims 4 progress better such as the editing tools that was present in Sims 3 and even Sims 2. The colors in Sims 4 is not enough and the list can go on. The only thing I can do is monitor the progress with the packs being introduced and pray that some of the cut features are added back in.

    AMD 2700X 16 GB AMD Radeon 590 8 GB Rosewill Rise Full Tower SB Recon PCIE 3D LG Ultrawide 34"
    AMD FX 8350 16 GB AMD Radeon 390 8 GB Storm Trooper Full Tower SB Z Samsung 27"
  • HermaiHermai Posts: 366 Member
    Vibse wrote: »
    Hermai wrote: »
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Remember during Sims 3 production they put out some lesser Sims games specifically made for playing on the lesser powerful laptops - well I swear Sims 4 had to have been meant to be one of those or if not it should have been - as it has always reminded me of those games even though I was never interested in buying any of them - some of my family owned them. Who'd ever think our "beloved" Sims series would become a side game. For some reason I kept picturing even bigger and better than Sims 2 and Sims 3 - a combo of those two even in 64 bit. Never in my wildest imagination could I even believe the great Sims would be reduced to this. Not ever!

    yeah, when I saw the world map right after I bought the game and started it... I was actually not believing it. "Ok, where is the town? where is the world map?" "where do I add lots?" "where are the terrain tools - HECK WHERE ARE THE POOLS??"

    What we had in TS1:
    latest?cb=20140721071053

    What we've got in TS4:
    Untitled.jpg


    WHAAAA-- talk about bad first impressions. It left a very bad impression on me. I had paid 100 bucks (in my currency) for what it seemed a glorified mobile game. Bad first impressions for games are a very bad thing. I am still not over this world map thing. I like the realistic looking maps. :|

    to be fair the picture you show of sims 1 was after they added expansions. At release the sims 1 map was smaller.

    I am not saying that the maps in Sims 4 basegame are great because I was dissapointed too. I do think they have learned something by making Windenburg though.

    That's true!! I probrably got that wrong because when I first bought the sims I bought deluxe edition and unleashed together, so I never played only the base game. I had forgotten that, and when I went to search for the picture, I couldn't find the small version of old town. Here it is:
    latest?cb=20100904113637

    Quite smaller in fact, but I liked the realistic style nonetheless. The game being based on the SimCity games, it's not surprising, and I wonder if they used the same tools to design the town, hence it feels like an actual world. TS4 style looks like it comes out of nowhere... actually, it really resembles a mobile game :/
  • MovottiMovotti Posts: 7,010 Member
    Hermai wrote: »
    The game being based on the SimCity games, it's not surprising, and I wonder if they used the same tools to design the town, hence it feels like an actual world.
    A part of where the sims came from the question of "what do the people of simcity do all day, what do they do in their little houses?"
    And now we know what they do. Angry poops.

    giphy.gif
    I'm getting closer... all the time
  • WeirdAlienWeirdAlien Posts: 19 Member
    Personally, I disliked TS3 from the start back in 2009. I am a long time player (from 2001 or something) and I absolutely adored TS1, TS2 and now I love TS4.

    I actually tried TS3 some days ago again after only trying it in 2009 to give it a chance, but I was disappointed for the second time. I don't really understand why it became so successful considering how horrible the sims in the game looks. But, the possibilities and the open world in it is amazing of course - and the expansion packs are exciting.

    I love TS4. The only thing I don't like is some of the bugs and that there are not many possibilities there without the expansion packs. Hopefully we will get vampires and other mystical magical elements as soon as possible - and a generation pack so we can get toddlers and more family focus. Family focus is a BIG part of TS, and I don't understand why they didn't make more of this when releasing 4.

    I don't mind the loading screen between switching lots, as I have been playing TS2 for about 12 years and I'm used to it. The loading screens in 4 are very quick too, so it's almost nothing of my time.
  • yhfhjrfuhejhfhuyhfhjrfuhejhfhu Posts: 1 New Member
    how do I start making people
  • MovottiMovotti Posts: 7,010 Member
    how do I start making people

    Oh noes! You necroposted in my thread!

    Making people is the first thing you do in TS4. You can't do anything on a map without first creating a family (or single sim), and moving them in. It's rather frustrating. Sometimes you want to edit lots in a world before you create people to go in it.
    *sigh*
    giphy.gif
    I'm getting closer... all the time
  • Renato10Renato10 Posts: 219 Member
    Movotti wrote: »
    how do I start making people

    Oh noes! You necroposted in my thread!

    Making people is the first thing you do in TS4. You can't do anything on a map without first creating a family (or single sim), and moving them in. It's rather frustrating. Sometimes you want to edit lots in a world before you create people to go in it.
    *sigh*

    I remeber in 2014 this was my very first frustration when I started the game. Still is one of the major frustrations for me today. Im not here to judge Maxis but I always do a big makeover of all worlds, since The Sims 1 xD
  • Renato10Renato10 Posts: 219 Member
    edited August 6
    Hermai wrote: »
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Remember during Sims 3 production they put out some lesser Sims games specifically made for playing on the lesser powerful laptops - well I swear Sims 4 had to have been meant to be one of those or if not it should have been - as it has always reminded me of those games even though I was never interested in buying any of them - some of my family owned them. Who'd ever think our "beloved" Sims series would become a side game. For some reason I kept picturing even bigger and better than Sims 2 and Sims 3 - a combo of those two even in 64 bit. Never in my wildest imagination could I even believe the great Sims would be reduced to this. Not ever!

    yeah, when I saw the world map right after I bought the game and started it... I was actually not believing it. "Ok, where is the town? where is the world map?" "where do I add lots?" "where are the terrain tools - HECK WHERE ARE THE POOLS??"

    What we had in TS1:
    latest?cb=20140721071053

    What we've got in TS4:
    Untitled.jpg


    WHAAAA-- talk about bad first impressions. It left a very bad impression on me. I had paid 100 bucks (in my currency) for what it seemed a glorified mobile game. Bad first impressions for games are a very bad thing. I am still not over this world map thing. I like the realistic looking maps. :|

    What I like the most is that The Sims 1 map is actually 3D but with a stuck isometric view. The Sims 4 are fake maps and sometimes lots look really weird depending on our building choices. I like to match things with the world environment like landscaping otherwise it will look out of place. This is what makes TS4 maps even more restricted than TS1 for me. And adding to this the fact that we can't edit worlds like in both TS2 and TS3 just makes TS4 worlds the worst for me. In this aspect I really missed the open world from TS3 and I think nowadays it can be hugely improved! So I hope they gave us back open world and costumizable 3D maps in TS5 again! Otherwise I will be not interested in this franchise anymore because for me this topic is actually a huge important part of my gameplay style. I love to build and worlds metter to me. Costumization was always the biggest selling point about this franchise for myself and TS4 is easly the biggest disappointment for a 2010's pc game.
  • HestiaHestia Posts: 1,640 Member
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    I've been playing since 2. For me, this is like an evolution of that, which is nice because 2 was my favorite. I did like the open world of 3, but it would crash a lot and sometimes just not even play. I've found that I'm enjoying 4 more now than I was at the beginning because of the packs they've been releasing. I believe it will become better as it goes.

    No, an evolution is when a magikarp turns into a gyaradus.

    TS2 has toddlers, doesn't have goal parties, has actual teens, has babies that aren't stuck in bassinets, has actual aspirations with a primary big goal, it doesn't matter how you get there, has carpools with entering animations, has an actual world instead of many little floating ones that make the player seem that it's one world because of the 2d map, has editable worlds, has a built-in world maker, has hair animations, firemen police and robber NPC's, has psychologists from when you get negative aspiration points, has fears, has the possibility of changing different parts of objects based on presets rather than the whole object I could honestly be all day here.

    TS4 has improved CAS, improved Build Mode (in certain areas), some nice gameplay additions and bigger multitasking and that's it. No toddlers, no carpools, floating cardboard worlds, cardboard sims with 0 personality...etc. Emotions are just annoyances to me, a person turning happy because of decor and some other random stuff, and forgetting someone dyed is not how the world works. They should be far more consistent and not change every 10 in game minutes.

    Well said.
    OriginID: hestiah23 | Showcase
    jfIpSFy.png
  • EA_JozEA_Joz Posts: 949 EA Moderator
    Hello everyone, please remember that necroposting is against the rules. I've gone ahead and closed the thread.

    Please review our Posting Rules & Guidelines here:

    https://forums.thesims.com/en_US/categories/forum-rules

    ~EA_Joz
This discussion has been closed.
Return to top