Would liked open neighborhood too or divided residential and commercial lots, because honestly annoying to have to load every time you visit neighbors. Completely kill any neighborhood immersion of neighbors asking to join your pool party, or coming over to grill with you etc. Annoying you have to constantly invite or do events to do simple things.
I really dislike the open world in TS4. All of the neighbourhoods seem so disconnected to eachother and there is no continuation of the Sims at home if one leaves the house.
I personally would like an open world in TS3, but when you want to go to a different lot in Live mode, you get a loading screen. I think this could be a good compromise, because you would still kind of have an open world feeling, but still better performance since not all of te homes have to be filled. If this can't be possible then I would really like a full open neighbourhood without loading screen like the OP.
I hate how the world maps look in TS4 btw. It's all just stupid drawings (we can't even see our terrain paint on the lots in the map) and the one from TS3 looked way better, because it seemed like an actual overview of the town.
I love Open World, so that's where my vote goes. Now for the people are saying they don't want open world because of lag, error 12, poor optimisation, I don't think anyone wants that. Try imagining an open world without all of those things and then rethink the question.
I don't get this whole white space argument *scratches head* I'm currently in game at in the University world and most everywhere I can see, my Sim can get there.
Yeah, if I could have open world without error 12, it would be great. But I don't know if it's possible. I would like a much larger world than they are giving us, something the size of Beach City in Sims3.
I would think that this day in age, it SHOULD be possible. TS3 was too technologically advanced for computers and both of moved on since 2009. EA just needs to tap into it!
What is this Beach City you speak of it? Is it a player made world?
I'm not sure what you mean by TS3 being too technologically advanced for computers? Way back in 2009? Maybe some computers, maybe some laptops? Not all. I never had problems on any of the desktop PC's I played on (and still don't) unless there are problems like some routing errors or other glitches that seem to be in certain worlds and those errors are on EA not my PC.
I meant that TS3 was way ahead of its time. You're right, maybe not the computers but the game not being properly optimised. TS3 was very ambitious I think.
I'd hate to think it was too ambitious! I wish they had done it better. And carried it on through into Sims 4.
I love Open World, so that's where my vote goes. Now for the people are saying they don't want open world because of lag, error 12, poor optimisation, I don't think anyone wants that. Try imagining an open world without all of those things and then rethink the question.
I don't get this whole white space argument *scratches head* I'm currently in game at in the University world and most everywhere I can see, my Sim can get there.
Yeah, if I could have open world without error 12, it would be great. But I don't know if it's possible. I would like a much larger world than they are giving us, something the size of Beach City in Sims3.
I would think that this day in age, it SHOULD be possible. TS3 was too technologically advanced for computers and both of moved on since 2009. EA just needs to tap into it!
What is this Beach City you speak of it? Is it a player made world?
I'm not sure what you mean by TS3 being too technologically advanced for computers? Way back in 2009? Maybe some computers, maybe some laptops? Not all. I never had problems on any of the desktop PC's I played on (and still don't) unless there are problems like some routing errors or other glitches that seem to be in certain worlds and those errors are on EA not my PC.
I meant that TS3 was way ahead of its time. You're right, maybe not the computers but the game not being properly optimised. TS3 was very ambitious I think.
I'd hate to think it was too ambitious! I wish they had done it better. And carried it on through into Sims 4.
You don't think CASt, CAW, and Open World were ambitious?
They must have thought they could do it and for the most part, they did.
The answer to problems with it was not to remove it and Create-a-Style and everything else for Sims 4 but to make it better. That they didn't do. It's like they just gave up and went backwards to Sims 1.
I love Open World, so that's where my vote goes. Now for the people are saying they don't want open world because of lag, error 12, poor optimisation, I don't think anyone wants that. Try imagining an open world without all of those things and then rethink the question.
I don't get this whole white space argument *scratches head* I'm currently in game at in the University world and most everywhere I can see, my Sim can get there.
Yeah, if I could have open world without error 12, it would be great. But I don't know if it's possible. I would like a much larger world than they are giving us, something the size of Beach City in Sims3.
I would think that this day in age, it SHOULD be possible. TS3 was too technologically advanced for computers and both of moved on since 2009. EA just needs to tap into it!
What is this Beach City you speak of it? Is it a player made world?
I'm not sure what you mean by TS3 being too technologically advanced for computers? Way back in 2009? Maybe some computers, maybe some laptops? Not all. I never had problems on any of the desktop PC's I played on (and still don't) unless there are problems like some routing errors or other glitches that seem to be in certain worlds and those errors are on EA not my PC.
I meant that TS3 was way ahead of its time. You're right, maybe not the computers but the game not being properly optimised. TS3 was very ambitious I think.
I'd hate to think it was too ambitious! I wish they had done it better. And carried it on through into Sims 4.
You don't think CASt, CAW, and Open World were ambitious?
They must have thought they could do it and for the most part, they did.
The answer to problems with it was not to remove it and Create-a-Style and everything else for Sims 4 but to make it better. That they didn't do. It's like they just gave up and went backwards to Sims 1.
What is the alternative to having backdrops? Blank, white space? xD LOL. Every game has backdrops.
Yes, but they are usually much farther away. Not the house next door.
Yeah, but if your house is at the edge, it will always be the house next door.
I feel like Simmers especially, don't really understand why backdrops exist (and should exist). They kind of want a game where there's no decoration at all, which is why The Sims 2 & 3 have aged terribly by todays standards.
Say what you want about 4, but it will still look as fresh in 10 years as it does now. Bustin Out is proof to that. Detail counts.
Decorations made Bustin Out the incredible experience it is.
The Sims 3 suffers majorly from looking like a playable City Builder map instead of an Open World (even then, I would have taken SimCity Societies over TS3).
Having Sims 4 type backdrops would have made the game look fresh for much longer, because it feels realistic that Sims 3 maps are a small area of a larger city, not a remote island in the middle of the ocean.
I agree with Joanne65 open world all the way for 5- no loading screens, no rabbit holes, no disappearing into the void. A proper Sims game.
I don't mind rabbitholes as such actually I do mind them when they are used out of 'laziness', standing in the way of potential awesome gameplay (prom, restaurant, shop and ridingschool come to mind). So I'd love a Skyrim kind of system. Open world galore, but for certain lots - visible from the outside though - a loading screen (the purely functional lots like city hall, school and some of the careers can stay rabbithole afaic).
A lot of those are actually because Open World limits how lots vary. When they explained the Rugs for the Savvy Seller Collection, they explained because the lots don't load separately, all lots are coded the same. So they had to use rugs which served as coding for the objects above to be have differently. I imagine it literally wouldn't be possible for them to have packs like Get To Work, Dine Out etc. that change the way the game plays.
Because you couldn't seamlessly switch from running a Restaurant to not and then back again. The game would have to change modes which would need to change how the whole game performs, which I'm guessing would require a loading screen.
I think Rabbit Holes weren't really laziness, but more a case of EA running into limitations of how these lots would work, because they can't code the lot any differently, all gameplay was based on object coding and attraction.
World Adventures alone proves you wrong there. I wouldn't mind an open world with loading screens leading you to such lots though, if it would be easier. Just not to each and every lot.
I don't hate backdrops as such by the way, of course they are inevitable. I do hate when backdrops limit gameplay though. I don't mind my sim in 3 can't travel to the empty mountains in the far back. I do mind they can't cross the bridge to go to those houses. I would mind less if they could at least go there through a loading screen but they can't. The house doesn't exist, it's just a painting. It's like Pinocchio's Gepetto painting a fireplace on his wall with a boiling pot over it, pretending to be cooking a meal because he's too poor to afford it.
World Adventures actually proves my point entirely. A loading screen is needed to change how the game works. Same with all those other packs.
Calculating all the actions of every Sim in the world was never that big a draw for me, as those Sims just weren't that interesting.
Load screens are 30 seconds, tops. Big whoop. But apparently that's somehow inexcusable, even though TS3's load times could be upwards of 5 minutes.
Frankly, TS4 does a fine job of simulating a living, breathing world. But because it's missing a feature from a past game (even though it was a cra.p feature), people just won't let it go.
It's been 3 years, and frankly I'm sick of hearing about it.
Since when does Sims 3 need load time when visiting your neighbour? (we're not talking to you when adressing this loading time galore we don't like by the way so please don't feel adressed to; you can skip it)
Calculating all the actions of every Sim in the world was never that big a draw for me, as those Sims just weren't that interesting.
Load screens are 30 seconds, tops. Big whoop. But apparently that's somehow inexcusable, even though TS3's load times could be upwards of 5 minutes.
Frankly, TS4 does a fine job of simulating a living, breathing world. But because it's missing a feature from a past game (even though it was a cra.p feature), people just won't let it go.
It's been 3 years, and frankly I'm sick of hearing about it.
That kind of justifies Sims 3's loading times. If a loading screen in S4 is 30 sec max and if I visit 10 places in a session I've now equated Sims 3's 5 minutes loading screen. If I visit 20 places in S4 I've now spent 10 minutes in loading screens. Give me one long load at the start so I can be done with loading screens. And yes Joanne65 some rabbit holes were fun school I liked but if going to wish for future content might as well aim high lol
That only works if you change locations every in-game day.
If your Sims spend their lives at home and only go out occasionally, then it's an unnecessary burden.
Huh..? (I don't understand what you're suggesting here, to play the game between the four walls of your sims' house or am I misunderstanding?)
You know it is true. Sims 3 fans should stop acting like the way they play applies to everyone and that everyone should want what they do. I hated open world for many stated reason, but the main one being the Sims 3 pretty much limited you to one family and one world. If you tried to play multiple household, they were always ruined. Many of those commenting only think of the neighbors as backdrops and extra for their own Sims. For player like me all the Sims are mine, there are no extras that I don't care about. I don't do the one family thing, I don't do the so called legacy thing. I do multiple stories with multiple sims.
I love Open World, so that's where my vote goes. Now for the people are saying they don't want open world because of lag, error 12, poor optimisation, I don't think anyone wants that. Try imagining an open world without all of those things and then rethink the question.
I don't get this whole white space argument *scratches head* I'm currently in game at in the University world and most everywhere I can see, my Sim can get there.
Yeah, if I could have open world without error 12, it would be great. But I don't know if it's possible. I would like a much larger world than they are giving us, something the size of Beach City in Sims3.
I would think that this day in age, it SHOULD be possible. TS3 was too technologically advanced for computers and both of moved on since 2009. EA just needs to tap into it!
What is this Beach City you speak of it? Is it a player made world?
I'm not sure what you mean by TS3 being too technologically advanced for computers? Way back in 2009? Maybe some computers, maybe some laptops? Not all. I never had problems on any of the desktop PC's I played on (and still don't) unless there are problems like some routing errors or other glitches that seem to be in certain worlds and those errors are on EA not my PC.
I meant that TS3 was way ahead of its time. You're right, maybe not the computers but the game not being properly optimised. TS3 was very ambitious I think.
I'd hate to think it was too ambitious! I wish they had done it better. And carried it on through into Sims 4.
You don't think CASt, CAW, and Open World were ambitious?
They must have thought they could do it and for the most part, they did.
The answer to problems with it was not to remove it and Create-a-Style and everything else for Sims 4 but to make it better. That they didn't do.
For the most part, they failed. A game should perform with little to no issues, it shouldn't be technically challenged.
The Sims 3 was technically challenged.
If CASt, CAW or Open World run into issues during a play session, they failed.
Remember, this isn't a program (CAW gets a free pass here since it is), it's a game. The Sims 4 has issues, but never does it feel like a program running at capacity during play. It never feels like it's being overloaded.
The Sims 3 lags as if it's a photo or video editing software. It's hard to explain, but a game should literally play without you seeing it struggle.
If they couldn't produce CASt or Open World without the game suffering because of it (very important) then they can wait until The Sims 5, and try again.
That will be a time when 64 bit is standard, and they can use around 8GB or Ram as the minimum specs. That's what it will probably take.
The Sims 3 is great on paper, but they should have held onto that idea, when the tech caught up.
It's like they just gave up and went backwards to Sims 1.
Yes, because The Sims 2, the highest rated game by critics and fans, doesn't exist.
The Sims 4 is closer to The Sims 2, and honestly, is so far away from The Sims 1. The Sims 2 literally has two benefits.
1) Editable lot placement with subhoods.
2) Seperate Swatches per object.
That's literally it from a CASt/CAW/World point of view. Everything else in 4 is miles ahead.
I don't understand the hate for backdrops. Every good game should have them.
Open World games have them too (Skyrim & GTA V both have them).
It's embarrassing and poor design when a world suddenly comes to a halt because the no one bothered to make backdrops. Your world literally stops as soon as you reach the playable area border.
The Sims 3 would have looked a lot better had their been backdrops surrounding the explorable area. The size difference wouldn't have changed. All they had to do was make the worlds bigger but keep the routable area the same.
It's grating to see a City like Bridgeport literally be an island the size of a small town. Had there been a city that continued around Bridgeport it would have looked a lot better.
The Sims 3 on Xbox/PS have backdrops in it's worlds alongside the normal world and it looks great. Not just distant terrain, but houses, objects, decorative pieces. Not just endless Ocean.
It was nice to play a Sims 3 world that wasn't a town on a random island.
Worlds in The Sims 3 had a 'distant terrain' object that honestly serves the same purpose as the backdrops in Sims 4. The 'playable area' did not extend to the border of the map in any world, nor did the camera. There was a point of collision between the DT object and the terrain that hid the connection.
Bridgeport wasn't an island, it was a peninsula. The distant terrain wraps around the side making the 'ocean' more of a gulf and continues backward.
I don't know what you were doing to see nothing but oceans in Sims 3, because that's not possible using the standard camera mode. Sure you can see that using camera-man mode and scrolling to the unroutable edges of the map, but you can see the same thing in 4 except it's not ocean it's nothing because Sims 4's world(s) are floating decorative pieces assembled to look like a world.
The distant terrain is what they used in the early days when games couldn't handle proper backdrops (I wish I was joking). There is no game in 6th gen of gaming onwards, let alone 2009 (mid 6th gen) that uses distant terrain as the only backdrop. It looks terrible.
The worlds in The Sims 3 that have hills in the background, still don't connect with roads etc as if there is more to the world than what you see, so aesthetically there's no difference. It's still isolated, it still is on an island. And no, I'm not talking about cheats, I'm talking about what you see normally.
The Sims 3 *should* have looked like this:
Obviously graphics aside, in SimCity Societies, there were backdrops to the cities you made. So imagine the world where the Sim is is the playable area of a Sims 3 world, but instead of looking at really badly made mountains, or water, you saw a City or building like that.
Another example, where you could see the benefit of having a backdrop rather than just water.
Now even something like this, where there's a backdrop that allures to more (obviously replace the City with the Sims 3 world) I think would have looked better than nothing and staring at an ocean where you can see it end.
Now this isn't a "bash The Sims 3" post, this is literally me saying, that if Open World were to return (which I'm happy for them to do if they develop it with 64 bit SOLEY), it would need backdrops.
The Sims 3 failed because it was a 32 bit game, at the end of the day. The Sims 4 not having an Open World or CASt was a great decision, as they were building a 32 bit game.
You need 4GB of Ram minimum for an Open World game to run decently. Obviously they had to build The Sims 4 as a 32 bit game under direct orders. Now that everyone is updating to 64 bit, and TS4 will now only support 64 bit, I'm fine with them building a game to use that advantage.
A better version of The Sims 3 Open World design would look terrible, no matter how good the graphics are. They would need backdrops. You can only make mountains and water so pretty with editing tools, unless they made the mountains as objects which would be (surprise surprise) the definition of a backdrop.
What is the alternative to having backdrops? Blank, white space? xD LOL. Every game has backdrops.
Yes, but they are usually much farther away. Not the house next door.
Yeah, but if your house is at the edge, it will always be the house next door.
I feel like Simmers especially, don't really understand why backdrops exist (and should exist). They kind of want a game where there's no decoration at all, which is why The Sims 2 & 3 have aged terribly by todays standards.
Say what you want about 4, but it will still look as fresh in 10 years as it does now. Bustin Out is proof to that. Detail counts.
Decorations made Bustin Out the incredible experience it is.
The Sims 3 suffers majorly from looking like a playable City Builder map instead of an Open World (even then, I would have taken SimCity Societies over TS3).
Having Sims 4 type backdrops would have made the game look fresh for much longer, because it feels realistic that Sims 3 maps are a small area of a larger city, not a remote island in the middle of the ocean.
I'll throw in something I posted in another topic the other day, hope it will explain the difference where it comes to backdrops and backdrops.
I think my main issue with Sims 4 is that I'm constantly confronted with the edge of the world, which is not the case in Sims 3. I love to pause the game sometimes, press tab and then just look around what's happening outside my sim's bubble. So she's exploring a tomb and then I decide to see what time it actually is (we both tend to forget while exploring). So I play:
And then I go up.
I play.
And I check it out outside.
I use tomb/Egypt examples now because that's what I'm currently doing, this is hot off the press, but I do this all the time, constantly. Looking around, making a 360° turn, getting a broader picture of where my sim is living for me is important. The set up of Sims 4 hinders that, which I guess makes the world so dead for me. I went into my game this afternoon and took some pictures that look quite pretty to me.
The art style is a matter of taste but I can very well live with this. But then I start playing with the camera, just looking around, and I see this.
It actually looks better here than in the game, because in the game you can really see those mountains are flat, billboards. That way my sim's no longer part of a world, it's as if he's on a stage in a play.
For me playing the game is more than turning the camera in ways that makes it look nice, it's the whole experience. I also feel this backdrop thing causes the environment looks more static, it's always the very same view. In Sims 3 there seems to be more variety, probably because most of what you see isn't stage but actual interactable world.
My problem here is, that I didn't look for the edge of the world. It was just right there and it never is with Sims 3's open world. In fact zooming out with tab in Sims 3 can get you amazing pictures.
Calculating all the actions of every Sim in the world was never that big a draw for me, as those Sims just weren't that interesting.
Load screens are 30 seconds, tops. Big whoop. But apparently that's somehow inexcusable, even though TS3's load times could be upwards of 5 minutes.
Frankly, TS4 does a fine job of simulating a living, breathing world. But because it's missing a feature from a past game (even though it was a cra.p feature), people just won't let it go.
It's been 3 years, and frankly I'm sick of hearing about it.
Since when does Sims 3 need load time when visiting your neighbour? (we're not talking to you when adressing this loading time galore we don't like by the way so please don't feel adressed to; you can skip it)
Calculating all the actions of every Sim in the world was never that big a draw for me, as those Sims just weren't that interesting.
Load screens are 30 seconds, tops. Big whoop. But apparently that's somehow inexcusable, even though TS3's load times could be upwards of 5 minutes.
Frankly, TS4 does a fine job of simulating a living, breathing world. But because it's missing a feature from a past game (even though it was a cra.p feature), people just won't let it go.
It's been 3 years, and frankly I'm sick of hearing about it.
That kind of justifies Sims 3's loading times. If a loading screen in S4 is 30 sec max and if I visit 10 places in a session I've now equated Sims 3's 5 minutes loading screen. If I visit 20 places in S4 I've now spent 10 minutes in loading screens. Give me one long load at the start so I can be done with loading screens. And yes Joanne65 some rabbit holes were fun school I liked but if going to wish for future content might as well aim high lol
That only works if you change locations every in-game day.
If your Sims spend their lives at home and only go out occasionally, then it's an unnecessary burden.
Huh..? (I don't understand what you're suggesting here, to play the game between the four walls of your sims' house or am I misunderstanding?)
You know it is true. Sims 3 fans should stop acting like the way they play applies to everyone and that everyone should want what they do. I hated open world for many stated reason, but the main one being the Sims 3 pretty much limited you to one family and one world. If you tried to play multiple household, they were always ruined. Many of those commenting only think of the neighbors as backdrops and extra for their own Sims. For player like me all the Sims are mine, there are no extras that I don't care about. I don't do the one family thing, I don't do the so called legacy thing. I do multiple stories with multiple sims.
No, I don't? Sims 3 has some loading screens when you start playing the game (around three, four minutes for me) and then there's no more loading screens. Unless you go adventuring. Playing rotational is best in Sims 2, that indeed is something that's a problem in Sims 3. I didn't say anything about that though did I?
I agree with Joanne65 open world all the way for 5- no loading screens, no rabbit holes, no disappearing into the void. A proper Sims game.
I don't mind rabbitholes as such actually I do mind them when they are used out of 'laziness', standing in the way of potential awesome gameplay (prom, restaurant, shop and ridingschool come to mind). So I'd love a Skyrim kind of system. Open world galore, but for certain lots - visible from the outside though - a loading screen (the purely functional lots like city hall, school and some of the careers can stay rabbithole afaic).
A lot of those are actually because Open World limits how lots vary. When they explained the Rugs for the Savvy Seller Collection, they explained because the lots don't load separately, all lots are coded the same. So they had to use rugs which served as coding for the objects above to be have differently. I imagine it literally wouldn't be possible for them to have packs like Get To Work, Dine Out etc. that change the way the game plays.
Because you couldn't seamlessly switch from running a Restaurant to not and then back again. The game would have to change modes which would need to change how the whole game performs, which I'm guessing would require a loading screen.
I think Rabbit Holes weren't really laziness, but more a case of EA running into limitations of how these lots would work, because they can't code the lot any differently, all gameplay was based on object coding and attraction.
World Adventures alone proves you wrong there. I wouldn't mind an open world with loading screens leading you to such lots though, if it would be easier. Just not to each and every lot.
I don't hate backdrops as such by the way, of course they are inevitable. I do hate when backdrops limit gameplay though. I don't mind my sim in 3 can't travel to the empty mountains in the far back. I do mind they can't cross the bridge to go to those houses. I would mind less if they could at least go there through a loading screen but they can't. The house doesn't exist, it's just a painting. It's like Pinocchio's Gepetto painting a fireplace on his wall with a boiling pot over it, pretending to be cooking a meal because he's too poor to afford it.
World Adventures actually proves my point entirely. A loading screen is needed to change how the game works. Same with all those other packs.
Why by the way? The status of lots in the open world defines how they function. In fact they even managed to change the status of ordinary houses when they added the ghosthunter and firefighter careers.
Many pople had incredibly long loading screens when switching to a sub world (holidays for example). I personally loved world adventures, but found myself using it less and less, because I had 5 minutes loading screens, so I would hope they could change that if there is a sims 5. Another huge improvement that I would hope they would do is that you can travel between worlds. They could each be open and there could only be a loading screen between worlds (short). What I did not like in sims 3 was that every time a new world came, it required a new save. I think it limited everything so much. I only play one save, so now I actually am able to use all worlds and features offered in EPs.
While I believe all the necessary changes to make an open world great could be done, I am worried that loading screens would be crazy long.
I don't understand the hate for backdrops. Every good game should have them.
Open World games have them too (Skyrim & GTA V both have them).
It's embarrassing and poor design when a world suddenly comes to a halt because the no one bothered to make backdrops. Your world literally stops as soon as you reach the playable area border.
The Sims 3 would have looked a lot better had their been backdrops surrounding the explorable area. The size difference wouldn't have changed. All they had to do was make the worlds bigger but keep the routable area the same.
It's grating to see a City like Bridgeport literally be an island the size of a small town. Had there been a city that continued around Bridgeport it would have looked a lot better.
The Sims 3 on Xbox/PS have backdrops in it's worlds alongside the normal world and it looks great. Not just distant terrain, but houses, objects, decorative pieces. Not just endless Ocean.
It was nice to play a Sims 3 world that wasn't a town on a random island.
Worlds in The Sims 3 had a 'distant terrain' object that honestly serves the same purpose as the backdrops in Sims 4. The 'playable area' did not extend to the border of the map in any world, nor did the camera. There was a point of collision between the DT object and the terrain that hid the connection.
Bridgeport wasn't an island, it was a peninsula. The distant terrain wraps around the side making the 'ocean' more of a gulf and continues backward.
I don't know what you were doing to see nothing but oceans in Sims 3, because that's not possible using the standard camera mode. Sure you can see that using camera-man mode and scrolling to the unroutable edges of the map, but you can see the same thing in 4 except it's not ocean it's nothing because Sims 4's world(s) are floating decorative pieces assembled to look like a world.
The distant terrain is what they used in the early days when games couldn't handle proper backdrops (I wish I was joking). There is no game in 6th gen of gaming onwards, let alone 2009 (mid 6th gen) that uses distant terrain as the only backdrop. It looks terrible.
The worlds in The Sims 3 that have hills in the background, still don't connect with roads etc as if there is more to the world than what you see, so aesthetically there's no difference. It's still isolated, it still is on an island. And no, I'm not talking about cheats, I'm talking about what you see normally.
The Sims 3 *should* have looked like this:
Obviously graphics aside, in SimCity Societies, there were backdrops to the cities you made. So imagine the world where the Sim is is the playable area of a Sims 3 world, but instead of looking at really badly made mountains, or water, you saw a City or building like that.
Another example, where you could see the benefit of having a backdrop rather than just water.
Now even something like this, where there's a backdrop that allures to more (obviously replace the City with the Sims 3 world) I think would have looked better than nothing and staring at an ocean where you can see it end.
Now this isn't a "bash The Sims 3" post, this is literally me saying, that if Open World were to return (which I'm happy for them to do if they develop it with 64 bit SOLEY), it would need backdrops.
The Sims 3 failed because it was a 32 bit game, at the end of the day. The Sims 4 not having an Open World or CASt was a great decision, as they were building a 32 bit game.
You need 4GB of Ram minimum for an Open World game to run decently. Obviously they had to build The Sims 4 as a 32 bit game under direct orders. Now that everyone is updating to 64 bit, and TS4 will now only support 64 bit, I'm fine with them building a game to use that advantage.
A better version of The Sims 3 Open World design would look terrible, no matter how good the graphics are. They would need backdrops. You can only make mountains and water so pretty with editing tools, unless they made the mountains as objects which would be (surprise surprise) the definition of a backdrop.
@jackjack_k Sims 3 had backdrops. I already said that in my post, please don't tag me in stuff that deflects away from the original idea. You said Sims 3 didn't have backdrops and that each world is an island. That is false and I corrected you. Instead of typing out long posts that have absolutely nothing to do with that just take the correction and leave it be. You don't always have to try to have the last word, especially like now it's not making much sense on your end and it leads me to believe you don't even understand what you're talking about.
I love Open World, so that's where my vote goes. Now for the people are saying they don't want open world because of lag, error 12, poor optimisation, I don't think anyone wants that. Try imagining an open world without all of those things and then rethink the question.
I don't get this whole white space argument *scratches head* I'm currently in game at in the University world and most everywhere I can see, my Sim can get there.
Yeah, if I could have open world without error 12, it would be great. But I don't know if it's possible. I would like a much larger world than they are giving us, something the size of Beach City in Sims3.
I would think that this day in age, it SHOULD be possible. TS3 was too technologically advanced for computers and both of moved on since 2009. EA just needs to tap into it!
What is this Beach City you speak of it? Is it a player made world?
I'm not sure what you mean by TS3 being too technologically advanced for computers? Way back in 2009? Maybe some computers, maybe some laptops? Not all. I never had problems on any of the desktop PC's I played on (and still don't) unless there are problems like some routing errors or other glitches that seem to be in certain worlds and those errors are on EA not my PC.
I meant that TS3 was way ahead of its time. You're right, maybe not the computers but the game not being properly optimised. TS3 was very ambitious I think.
I'd hate to think it was too ambitious! I wish they had done it better. And carried it on through into Sims 4.
You don't think CASt, CAW, and Open World were ambitious?
They must have thought they could do it and for the most part, they did.
The answer to problems with it was not to remove it and Create-a-Style and everything else for Sims 4 but to make it better. That they didn't do.
For the most part, they failed. A game should perform with little to no issues, it shouldn't be technically challenged.
The Sims 3 was technically challenged.
If CASt, CAW or Open World run into issues during a play session, they failed.
Remember, this isn't a program (CAW gets a free pass here since it is), it's a game. The Sims 4 has issues, but never does it feel like a program running at capacity during play. It never feels like it's being overloaded.
The Sims 3 lags as if it's a photo or video editing software. It's hard to explain, but a game should literally play without you seeing it struggle.
If they couldn't produce CASt or Open World without the game suffering because of it (very important) then they can wait until The Sims 5, and try again.
That will be a time when 64 bit is standard, and they can use around 8GB or Ram as the minimum specs. That's what it will probably take.
The Sims 3 is great on paper, but they should have held onto that idea, when the tech caught up.
It's like they just gave up and went backwards to Sims 1.
Yes, because The Sims 2, the highest rated game by critics and fans, doesn't exist.
The Sims 4 is closer to The Sims 2, and honestly, is so far away from The Sims 1. The Sims 2 literally has two benefits.
1) Editable lot placement with subhoods.
2) Seperate Swatches per object.
That's literally it from a CASt/CAW/World point of view. Everything else in 4 is miles ahead.
I love Sims 2. I outgrew Sims 2. For me the only things Sims 4 has in common with 2 is no open world and no Create-a-Style. Sims 4 is much more rigid and more like 1 in that respect, you can't edit the worlds for example.
Open neighborhood vs Open World... both are great but it depends which the future could handle. Not everybody gets a new computer for every Sims game.
Loading time vs lag.
Despite all the good things about Sims 4, sometimes it feels terribly small. The neighbourhoods are filled up so quickly, not with families but with the bars and gyms you need to go to. Having just one of each limits your style. I'd rather have larger neighborhoods than more worlds, to be honest.
Prepping a list of mods to add after Infants are placed into the game. Because real life isn't 'nice'.
I'd like an open neighborhood verses an open world so that the game could focus upon a particular area at a time verses an entire one.
I think it would be a waste of the game engine's resources, especially if my main sim is only in a particular region at that moment.
I am hoping one day, to play a sim, probably a teenage boy who happens to enjoy watching his crush, who lives next door, moving about their house on automation and seeing a neighborhood come alive with people mowing their lawns and visiting one another w/o loading screens.
A nightlife scene with a couple sitting outside at a beach and their kids can run about a nearby shopping strip mall to various stores on separate lots that are simultaneously running. Right now it's done with vendors but to me, it's not quite the same.
I'm a terrible sim God, I leave households in the sims 3 and go out wandering with one or two sims. I never check on them. As long as their portraits are green I figure they are fine. If a fire broke out I would get a notification.
That's the one thing I do like about 3. I find it harder to do that with 4 when I can see the sims at home need bars are tanked. Sometimes they fix them themselves but always when I get back to the hole lot, if it's late at night every sim, elder, adult, child or toddler or teen will be out of bed. So you have to do the whole putting them to bed routine.
It's funny because I do that too. I will be off with one sim, having the work or collect things, forgetting about the others in the family. And for the most part, they are fine. And I love that. It's a hard habit to break when playing Sims 4. I want to switch from one family member to the other, and then I remember that I can't.
Another thing that really gets me is the fact that sims left on the home lot are frozen. At least with Sims 2 there is the community lot time mod, and when you return to the lot time passes and things go on. I hope someone makes a mod like that for Sims 4. Having a free flowing open world is so much funner in the long run.
Really? When I return to my sims 4 family with the sim I've been away with, the rest of the family are on the side walk or in various rooms with their needs low and if I've left them doing homework or I tell them to work on a skill in my absence they haven't!
I prefer the sims 2 where the lot does freeze and my sims are exactly where I left or the sims 3 where they are pretty independent and will take care of their needs.
That's strange, I wonder why your game does that. Though I just noticed last night while playing, when my sim returned from work her two teens were standing out in front of the house, and they were taking a photo together. Yet her husband was inside the house in the basement on the computer. So maybe it's a hit or miss thing. I'm not sure.
If I have them tidy up while my sim is on a community lot or at work, that never seems to work. My sim will come home to the same dishes on the table, or dirty toilet or shower. But if I have them work on a skill they will, or if I have them socialize on the phone they have no problem getting it done.
For me the most enjoyable is open world, and having all my sims available all the time.
I love Open World, so that's where my vote goes. Now for the people are saying they don't want open world because of lag, error 12, poor optimisation, I don't think anyone wants that. Try imagining an open world without all of those things and then rethink the question.
I don't get this whole white space argument *scratches head* I'm currently in game at in the University world and most everywhere I can see, my Sim can get there.
Yeah, if I could have open world without error 12, it would be great. But I don't know if it's possible. I would like a much larger world than they are giving us, something the size of Beach City in Sims3.
I would think that this day in age, it SHOULD be possible. TS3 was too technologically advanced for computers and both of moved on since 2009. EA just needs to tap into it!
What is this Beach City you speak of it? Is it a player made world?
I'm not sure what you mean by TS3 being too technologically advanced for computers? Way back in 2009? Maybe some computers, maybe some laptops? Not all. I never had problems on any of the desktop PC's I played on (and still don't) unless there are problems like some routing errors or other glitches that seem to be in certain worlds and those errors are on EA not my PC.
I meant that TS3 was way ahead of its time. You're right, maybe not the computers but the game not being properly optimised. TS3 was very ambitious I think.
I'd hate to think it was too ambitious! I wish they had done it better. And carried it on through into Sims 4.
I don't think it was to ambitious for its time. And I know I've been "jumped" upon in the past, but I can't help but going back to GTA IV. It, like Sims 3 is an open world. It was released in 2008. And it had no problems (lag, stuttering, etc.) like Sims 3. So I mean, if it is done right then there is no problem for the Sims to be an open world game. Especially now with all the advancements in gaming.
@GoldenBuffy very true! Sims have never been at the forefront of technological innovation. Mainly because of the main player base (go to the tech sections. More people play below requirements than you think)
I'm a terrible sim God, I leave households in the sims 3 and go out wandering with one or two sims. I never check on them. As long as their portraits are green I figure they are fine. If a fire broke out I would get a notification.
That's the one thing I do like about 3. I find it harder to do that with 4 when I can see the sims at home need bars are tanked. Sometimes they fix them themselves but always when I get back to the hole lot, if it's late at night every sim, elder, adult, child or toddler or teen will be out of bed. So you have to do the whole putting them to bed routine.
It's funny because I do that too. I will be off with one sim, having the work or collect things, forgetting about the others in the family. And for the most part, they are fine. And I love that. It's a hard habit to break when playing Sims 4. I want to switch from one family member to the other, and then I remember that I can't.
Another thing that really gets me is the fact that sims left on the home lot are frozen. At least with Sims 2 there is the community lot time mod, and when you return to the lot time passes and things go on. I hope someone makes a mod like that for Sims 4. Having a free flowing open world is so much funner in the long run.
Really? When I return to my sims 4 family with the sim I've been away with, the rest of the family are on the side walk or in various rooms with their needs low and if I've left them doing homework or I tell them to work on a skill in my absence they haven't!
I prefer the sims 2 where the lot does freeze and my sims are exactly where I left or the sims 3 where they are pretty independent and will take care of their needs.
That's strange, I wonder why your game does that. Though I just noticed last night while playing, when my sim returned from work her two teens were standing out in front of the house, and they were taking a photo together. Yet her husband was inside the house in the basement on the computer. So maybe it's a hit or miss thing. I'm not sure.
If I have them tidy up while my sim is on a community lot or at work, that never seems to work. My sim will come home to the same dishes on the table, or dirty toilet or shower. But if I have them work on a skill they will, or if I have them socialize on the phone they have no problem getting it done.
For me the most enjoyable is open world, and having all my sims available all the time.
I love Open World, so that's where my vote goes. Now for the people are saying they don't want open world because of lag, error 12, poor optimisation, I don't think anyone wants that. Try imagining an open world without all of those things and then rethink the question.
I don't get this whole white space argument *scratches head* I'm currently in game at in the University world and most everywhere I can see, my Sim can get there.
Yeah, if I could have open world without error 12, it would be great. But I don't know if it's possible. I would like a much larger world than they are giving us, something the size of Beach City in Sims3.
I would think that this day in age, it SHOULD be possible. TS3 was too technologically advanced for computers and both of moved on since 2009. EA just needs to tap into it!
What is this Beach City you speak of it? Is it a player made world?
I'm not sure what you mean by TS3 being too technologically advanced for computers? Way back in 2009? Maybe some computers, maybe some laptops? Not all. I never had problems on any of the desktop PC's I played on (and still don't) unless there are problems like some routing errors or other glitches that seem to be in certain worlds and those errors are on EA not my PC.
I meant that TS3 was way ahead of its time. You're right, maybe not the computers but the game not being properly optimised. TS3 was very ambitious I think.
I'd hate to think it was too ambitious! I wish they had done it better. And carried it on through into Sims 4.
I don't think it was to ambitious for its time. And I know I've been "jumped" upon in the past, but I can't help but going back to GTA IV. It, like Sims 3 is an open world. It was released in 2008. And it had no problems (lag, stuttering, etc.) like Sims 3. So I mean, if it is done right then there is no problem for the Sims to be an open world game. Especially now with all the advancements in gaming.
I'm not sure why. The sims standing outside the lot was bug that was fixed supposedly. I have the issue on my vanilla game and it's been repaired etc. I can handle that normally but at 2am in game it's a pain putting people back to bed.
I would like to see an open world but if done correctly. Given the troubles with the sims 3 and the fact that on specs alone it eliminated a lot of players I'm not sure we will see it return.
If the majority of the simmers would have mid-range desktops/computers then I'm sure they can do open neighborhood. But only on the next game. Sims 4 already increased system requirements when it comes to pets, so having them in the next game will be much better.
Before they go back to open world, I would rather have them go to open neighborhoods first.If they immediately went open world, I doubt it will maintain every details that sims 4 neighborhoods have.
I love Open World, so that's where my vote goes. Now for the people are saying they don't want open world because of lag, error 12, poor optimisation, I don't think anyone wants that. Try imagining an open world without all of those things and then rethink the question.
I don't get this whole white space argument *scratches head* I'm currently in game at in the University world and most everywhere I can see, my Sim can get there.
Yeah, if I could have open world without error 12, it would be great. But I don't know if it's possible. I would like a much larger world than they are giving us, something the size of Beach City in Sims3.
I would think that this day in age, it SHOULD be possible. TS3 was too technologically advanced for computers and both of moved on since 2009. EA just needs to tap into it!
What is this Beach City you speak of it? Is it a player made world?
Yes, it was made by Rflong 7, it was one of the most popular player made worlds in sims3. It had everything, very well made. There was a beautiful beach with a pier, a city, parks, a cliff that beach houses along it, and a hillside lot where you could build a beach house. Then there was a area for the very rich with 64x64 lots, five of them. After that, a country area with a pond, houses around that, a farming area and a place for horses. It also had a bad part of town with run down buildings. There was a swamp area that lead to a waterfall. I loved that town, played it all the time. It was better than anything EA made. Another of my favorites was Arendale, which had the beginnings of a city, but it was a build it yourself kind of world, it had a huge bay to put anything you wanted.
I love Open World, so that's where my vote goes. Now for the people are saying they don't want open world because of lag, error 12, poor optimisation, I don't think anyone wants that. Try imagining an open world without all of those things and then rethink the question.
I don't get this whole white space argument *scratches head* I'm currently in game at in the University world and most everywhere I can see, my Sim can get there.
Yeah, if I could have open world without error 12, it would be great. But I don't know if it's possible. I would like a much larger world than they are giving us, something the size of Beach City in Sims3.
I would think that this day in age, it SHOULD be possible. TS3 was too technologically advanced for computers and both of moved on since 2009. EA just needs to tap into it!
What is this Beach City you speak of it? Is it a player made world?
I'm not sure what you mean by TS3 being too technologically advanced for computers? Way back in 2009? Maybe some computers, maybe some laptops? Not all. I never had problems on any of the desktop PC's I played on (and still don't) unless there are problems like some routing errors or other glitches that seem to be in certain worlds and those errors are on EA not my PC.
I meant that TS3 was way ahead of its time. You're right, maybe not the computers but the game not being properly optimised. TS3 was very ambitious I think.
I'd hate to think it was too ambitious! I wish they had done it better. And carried it on through into Sims 4.
You don't think CASt, CAW, and Open World were ambitious?
They must have thought they could do it and for the most part, they did.
The answer to problems with it was not to remove it and Create-a-Style and everything else for Sims 4 but to make it better. That they didn't do. It's like they just gave up and went backwards to Sims 1.
That's what I thought they were going to do for sims4. What a HUGE disappointment.
Comments
I personally would like an open world in TS3, but when you want to go to a different lot in Live mode, you get a loading screen. I think this could be a good compromise, because you would still kind of have an open world feeling, but still better performance since not all of te homes have to be filled. If this can't be possible then I would really like a full open neighbourhood without loading screen like the OP.
I hate how the world maps look in TS4 btw. It's all just stupid drawings (we can't even see our terrain paint on the lots in the map) and the one from TS3 looked way better, because it seemed like an actual overview of the town.
YouTube: https://goo.gl/PK7vxR | The Gallery: https://goo.gl/a5DZAK
Twitter: https://goo.gl/QzQVUK | Origin-ID: SimmerNickYT
@nickibitsward
You don't think CASt, CAW, and Open World were ambitious?
They must have thought they could do it and for the most part, they did.
The answer to problems with it was not to remove it and Create-a-Style and everything else for Sims 4 but to make it better. That they didn't do. It's like they just gave up and went backwards to Sims 1.
I definitely don't disagree!
Yeah, but if your house is at the edge, it will always be the house next door.
I feel like Simmers especially, don't really understand why backdrops exist (and should exist). They kind of want a game where there's no decoration at all, which is why The Sims 2 & 3 have aged terribly by todays standards.
Say what you want about 4, but it will still look as fresh in 10 years as it does now. Bustin Out is proof to that. Detail counts.
Decorations made Bustin Out the incredible experience it is.
The Sims 3 suffers majorly from looking like a playable City Builder map instead of an Open World (even then, I would have taken SimCity Societies over TS3).
Having Sims 4 type backdrops would have made the game look fresh for much longer, because it feels realistic that Sims 3 maps are a small area of a larger city, not a remote island in the middle of the ocean.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
World Adventures actually proves my point entirely. A loading screen is needed to change how the game works. Same with all those other packs.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
You know it is true. Sims 3 fans should stop acting like the way they play applies to everyone and that everyone should want what they do. I hated open world for many stated reason, but the main one being the Sims 3 pretty much limited you to one family and one world. If you tried to play multiple household, they were always ruined. Many of those commenting only think of the neighbors as backdrops and extra for their own Sims. For player like me all the Sims are mine, there are no extras that I don't care about. I don't do the one family thing, I don't do the so called legacy thing. I do multiple stories with multiple sims.
For the most part, they failed. A game should perform with little to no issues, it shouldn't be technically challenged.
The Sims 3 was technically challenged.
If CASt, CAW or Open World run into issues during a play session, they failed.
Remember, this isn't a program (CAW gets a free pass here since it is), it's a game. The Sims 4 has issues, but never does it feel like a program running at capacity during play. It never feels like it's being overloaded.
The Sims 3 lags as if it's a photo or video editing software. It's hard to explain, but a game should literally play without you seeing it struggle.
If they couldn't produce CASt or Open World without the game suffering because of it (very important) then they can wait until The Sims 5, and try again.
That will be a time when 64 bit is standard, and they can use around 8GB or Ram as the minimum specs. That's what it will probably take.
The Sims 3 is great on paper, but they should have held onto that idea, when the tech caught up.
Yes, because The Sims 2, the highest rated game by critics and fans, doesn't exist.
The Sims 4 is closer to The Sims 2, and honestly, is so far away from The Sims 1. The Sims 2 literally has two benefits.
1) Editable lot placement with subhoods.
2) Seperate Swatches per object.
That's literally it from a CASt/CAW/World point of view. Everything else in 4 is miles ahead.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
The distant terrain is what they used in the early days when games couldn't handle proper backdrops (I wish I was joking). There is no game in 6th gen of gaming onwards, let alone 2009 (mid 6th gen) that uses distant terrain as the only backdrop. It looks terrible.
The worlds in The Sims 3 that have hills in the background, still don't connect with roads etc as if there is more to the world than what you see, so aesthetically there's no difference. It's still isolated, it still is on an island. And no, I'm not talking about cheats, I'm talking about what you see normally.
The Sims 3 *should* have looked like this:
Obviously graphics aside, in SimCity Societies, there were backdrops to the cities you made. So imagine the world where the Sim is is the playable area of a Sims 3 world, but instead of looking at really badly made mountains, or water, you saw a City or building like that.
Another example, where you could see the benefit of having a backdrop rather than just water.
Now even something like this, where there's a backdrop that allures to more (obviously replace the City with the Sims 3 world) I think would have looked better than nothing and staring at an ocean where you can see it end.
Now this isn't a "bash The Sims 3" post, this is literally me saying, that if Open World were to return (which I'm happy for them to do if they develop it with 64 bit SOLEY), it would need backdrops.
The Sims 3 failed because it was a 32 bit game, at the end of the day. The Sims 4 not having an Open World or CASt was a great decision, as they were building a 32 bit game.
You need 4GB of Ram minimum for an Open World game to run decently. Obviously they had to build The Sims 4 as a 32 bit game under direct orders. Now that everyone is updating to 64 bit, and TS4 will now only support 64 bit, I'm fine with them building a game to use that advantage.
A better version of The Sims 3 Open World design would look terrible, no matter how good the graphics are. They would need backdrops. You can only make mountains and water so pretty with editing tools, unless they made the mountains as objects which would be (surprise surprise) the definition of a backdrop.
Insta: https://instagram.com/jkarajs?igshid=oef2ymrand3g
My problem here is, that I didn't look for the edge of the world. It was just right there and it never is with Sims 3's open world. In fact zooming out with tab in Sims 3 can get you amazing pictures.
While I believe all the necessary changes to make an open world great could be done, I am worried that loading screens would be crazy long.
@jackjack_k Sims 3 had backdrops. I already said that in my post, please don't tag me in stuff that deflects away from the original idea. You said Sims 3 didn't have backdrops and that each world is an island. That is false and I corrected you. Instead of typing out long posts that have absolutely nothing to do with that just take the correction and leave it be. You don't always have to try to have the last word, especially like now it's not making much sense on your end and it leads me to believe you don't even understand what you're talking about.
I love Sims 2. I outgrew Sims 2. For me the only things Sims 4 has in common with 2 is no open world and no Create-a-Style. Sims 4 is much more rigid and more like 1 in that respect, you can't edit the worlds for example.
Still, it's my opinion and your opinion is yours.
Loading time vs lag.
Despite all the good things about Sims 4, sometimes it feels terribly small. The neighbourhoods are filled up so quickly, not with families but with the bars and gyms you need to go to. Having just one of each limits your style. I'd rather have larger neighborhoods than more worlds, to be honest.
I think it would be a waste of the game engine's resources, especially if my main sim is only in a particular region at that moment.
I am hoping one day, to play a sim, probably a teenage boy who happens to enjoy watching his crush, who lives next door, moving about their house on automation and seeing a neighborhood come alive with people mowing their lawns and visiting one another w/o loading screens.
A nightlife scene with a couple sitting outside at a beach and their kids can run about a nearby shopping strip mall to various stores on separate lots that are simultaneously running. Right now it's done with vendors but to me, it's not quite the same.
That's strange, I wonder why your game does that. Though I just noticed last night while playing, when my sim returned from work her two teens were standing out in front of the house, and they were taking a photo together. Yet her husband was inside the house in the basement on the computer. So maybe it's a hit or miss thing. I'm not sure.
If I have them tidy up while my sim is on a community lot or at work, that never seems to work. My sim will come home to the same dishes on the table, or dirty toilet or shower. But if I have them work on a skill they will, or if I have them socialize on the phone they have no problem getting it done.
For me the most enjoyable is open world, and having all my sims available all the time.
I don't think it was to ambitious for its time. And I know I've been "jumped" upon in the past, but I can't help but going back to GTA IV. It, like Sims 3 is an open world. It was released in 2008. And it had no problems (lag, stuttering, etc.) like Sims 3. So I mean, if it is done right then there is no problem for the Sims to be an open world game. Especially now with all the advancements in gaming.
I'm not sure why. The sims standing outside the lot was bug that was fixed supposedly. I have the issue on my vanilla game and it's been repaired etc. I can handle that normally but at 2am in game it's a pain putting people back to bed.
I would like to see an open world but if done correctly. Given the troubles with the sims 3 and the fact that on specs alone it eliminated a lot of players I'm not sure we will see it return.
Before they go back to open world, I would rather have them go to open neighborhoods first.If they immediately went open world, I doubt it will maintain every details that sims 4 neighborhoods have.
http://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/924539/features-that-needs-depth-and-ways-to-improve
Yes, it was made by Rflong 7, it was one of the most popular player made worlds in sims3. It had everything, very well made. There was a beautiful beach with a pier, a city, parks, a cliff that beach houses along it, and a hillside lot where you could build a beach house. Then there was a area for the very rich with 64x64 lots, five of them. After that, a country area with a pond, houses around that, a farming area and a place for horses. It also had a bad part of town with run down buildings. There was a swamp area that lead to a waterfall. I loved that town, played it all the time. It was better than anything EA made. Another of my favorites was Arendale, which had the beginnings of a city, but it was a build it yourself kind of world, it had a huge bay to put anything you wanted.
That's what I thought they were going to do for sims4. What a HUGE disappointment.