September 20 - Friday Highlight is here! Check it out!
September 17 - We just released a small patch for The Sims 4 on PC/Mac - click here for more details.

Why isn't TS4 inclusive of family players?

Comments

  • darrenfroggydarrenfroggy Posts: 622 Member
    I think the problem with changing babies to a life state is that currently, they're technically an interactive item. I agree with @Writin_Reg, it's absolutely a different process than adding in toddlers.

    Toddlers were done from scratch and the rewrite for the existing game was: make sure babies age to toddlers (and not children). All other steps were adding code that wasn't there before. With babies, they need to make sure that the existing ones in-game would acquire functionality they currently don't have (unless they'd just remove all existing "baby items" & have everyone start from scratch for the ones currently in saves).

    And since it's rewriting code from a technically inanimate object that's (unfortunately) no more complicated than a broken sink with interactions to fix it into a whole life form with autonomy, it's most definitely not "easy". It's not impossible, of course, but it's definitely not simple.
    As for the existing baby assets not working: I'm pretty sure if they kept babies looking the way they do now, there'd be riots. So that's a layer of design on top of functionality.

    That all said, I really hope they do have something in the works.

    I’m sorry but that is not true. Babies get a lot of flack for being tied to an object, but the babies themselves contain Sim data. They are a Sim complete with a genetic profile, needs, animations, interactions, etc. To say they are like a broken sink is incredibly far off.

    Sims can already remove them and interact with them outside of the bassinet. The issue is that there is no programming for Sims to do anything other than place them back into the bassinet. Expanding upon that is totally doable, it just requires a lot of animation work.

    I didn't say it was not doable. All I said is that it's very likely not as simple as it may seem to change an item into a full-fledged Sim.
  • HestiaHestia Posts: 1,639 Member
    I think the problem with changing babies to a life state is that currently, they're technically an interactive item. I agree with @Writin_Reg, it's absolutely a different process than adding in toddlers.

    Toddlers were done from scratch and the rewrite for the existing game was: make sure babies age to toddlers (and not children). All other steps were adding code that wasn't there before. With babies, they need to make sure that the existing ones in-game would acquire functionality they currently don't have (unless they'd just remove all existing "baby items" & have everyone start from scratch for the ones currently in saves).

    And since it's rewriting code from a technically inanimate object that's (unfortunately) no more complicated than a broken sink with interactions to fix it into a whole life form with autonomy, it's most definitely not "easy". It's not impossible, of course, but it's definitely not simple.
    As for the existing baby assets not working: I'm pretty sure if they kept babies looking the way they do now, there'd be riots. So that's a layer of design on top of functionality.

    That all said, I really hope they do have something in the works.

    I’m sorry but that is not true. Babies get a lot of flack for being tied to an object, but the babies themselves contain Sim data. They are a Sim complete with a genetic profile, needs, animations, interactions, etc. To say they are like a broken sink is incredibly far off.

    Sims can already remove them and interact with them outside of the bassinet. The issue is that there is no programming for Sims to do anything other than place them back into the bassinet. Expanding upon that is totally doable, it just requires a lot of animation work.

    I didn't say it was not doable. All I said is that it's very likely not as simple as it may seem to change an item into a full-fledged Sim.

    With how complicated the backend programming is for The Sims and it's foundation originally being an online-only young adult chat sim game, it would provide some difficulty and challenges for the team to adjust the "baby object". However, I don't see that as being something impossible if they have a dedicated team on improving family play.
    OriginID: hestiah23 | Showcase
    jfIpSFy.png
  • drake_mccartydrake_mccarty Posts: 5,662 Member
    I think the problem with changing babies to a life state is that currently, they're technically an interactive item. I agree with @Writin_Reg, it's absolutely a different process than adding in toddlers.

    Toddlers were done from scratch and the rewrite for the existing game was: make sure babies age to toddlers (and not children). All other steps were adding code that wasn't there before. With babies, they need to make sure that the existing ones in-game would acquire functionality they currently don't have (unless they'd just remove all existing "baby items" & have everyone start from scratch for the ones currently in saves).

    And since it's rewriting code from a technically inanimate object that's (unfortunately) no more complicated than a broken sink with interactions to fix it into a whole life form with autonomy, it's most definitely not "easy". It's not impossible, of course, but it's definitely not simple.
    As for the existing baby assets not working: I'm pretty sure if they kept babies looking the way they do now, there'd be riots. So that's a layer of design on top of functionality.

    That all said, I really hope they do have something in the works.

    I’m sorry but that is not true. Babies get a lot of flack for being tied to an object, but the babies themselves contain Sim data. They are a Sim complete with a genetic profile, needs, animations, interactions, etc. To say they are like a broken sink is incredibly far off.

    Sims can already remove them and interact with them outside of the bassinet. The issue is that there is no programming for Sims to do anything other than place them back into the bassinet. Expanding upon that is totally doable, it just requires a lot of animation work.

    I didn't say it was not doable. All I said is that it's very likely not as simple as it may seem to change an item into a full-fledged Sim.

    The bassinet would not be converted into a Sim? Babies are considered full fledge Sims by the game already, I don’t understand what you mean by turning an item into a Sim. Babies are not the “object”, I know they are not mobile, but the static object is the bassinet only. Babies have Sim data and are considered Sims; they aren’t an item like a microwave or a sink.

    I think that in itself is causing confusion for people. The bassinet has no Sim data, it’s the only space programmed to hold a baby. The babies have data and that’s retained when they outgrow the bassinet and flip into a toddler. It definitely requires some work but they have plenty of completed assets available that would make the earnest work part of it all much easier than starting from scratch as someone else’s suggested.
  • HestiaHestia Posts: 1,639 Member
    edited August 17
    Since it is extremely restricted as such, i wouldn’t mind them having that as a legitimate newborn, then introduce the infant stage similar to The Sims 2 babies and then toddlers.

    That way, it would also make more sense that you can’t really see their genetics as much.

    There’s a huge missing link between those two life stages that need to be filled in but hey - it’s still the team from TS4. I may be stretching my hopes a little too high on that.
    OriginID: hestiah23 | Showcase
    jfIpSFy.png
  • darrenfroggydarrenfroggy Posts: 622 Member
    Full-fledged Sims to me are ones that have autonomy. Babies show none of that and I don't know whether they even have programming included that's necessary for more than "cry after x amount of time" "cry if hunger is low" and similar. If they were to be given autonomy, I'd expect them to, say, start crawling if left alone on the ground for a while, rather than just being wherever another Sim puts them. That's what I mean by more complicated changes than simply untie them from the bassinet.
    And I'm done repeating that I never said it's impossible, just that I believe it's not a "just don't lock them to the bassinet" issue.

    Sure, they could be programmed similarly to pets, if they were to be kept as they are (aka with no way to control them without mods), but even pets have fears and autonomous interactions with Sims and other pets and items around the world. That's the key point to me that I believe as of now is missing in babies. And I also believe that it's easier to start from scratch for a life stage of a Sim than rewriting what's there. From my (limited, yes, but not non-existent programming experience, rewriting existing code, one that was potentially done by other people, is nothing short of a nightmare).

    @Hestia oooh, I like that idea. That would allow for an easier transition for sure and for everything that babies should have (visible genetics, CAS, autonomy, etc).
  • JoAnne65JoAnne65 Posts: 22,326 Member
    edited August 17
    I think the problem with changing babies to a life state is that currently, they're technically an interactive item. I agree with @Writin_Reg, it's absolutely a different process than adding in toddlers.

    Toddlers were done from scratch and the rewrite for the existing game was: make sure babies age to toddlers (and not children). All other steps were adding code that wasn't there before. With babies, they need to make sure that the existing ones in-game would acquire functionality they currently don't have (unless they'd just remove all existing "baby items" & have everyone start from scratch for the ones currently in saves).

    And since it's rewriting code from a technically inanimate object that's (unfortunately) no more complicated than a broken sink with interactions to fix it into a whole life form with autonomy, it's most definitely not "easy". It's not impossible, of course, but it's definitely not simple.
    As for the existing baby assets not working: I'm pretty sure if they kept babies looking the way they do now, there'd be riots. So that's a layer of design on top of functionality.

    That all said, I really hope they do have something in the works.

    I’m sorry but that is not true. Babies get a lot of flack for being tied to an object, but the babies themselves contain Sim data. They are a Sim complete with a genetic profile, needs, animations, interactions, etc. To say they are like a broken sink is incredibly far off.

    Sims can already remove them and interact with them outside of the bassinet. The issue is that there is no programming for Sims to do anything other than place them back into the bassinet. Expanding upon that is totally doable, it just requires a lot of animation work.

    I didn't say it was not doable. All I said is that it's very likely not as simple as it may seem to change an item into a full-fledged Sim.

    The bassinet would not be converted into a Sim? Babies are considered full fledge Sims by the game already, I don’t understand what you mean by turning an item into a Sim. Babies are not the “object”, I know they are not mobile, but the static object is the bassinet only. Babies have Sim data and are considered Sims; they aren’t an item like a microwave or a sink.

    I think that in itself is causing confusion for people. The bassinet has no Sim data, it’s the only space programmed to hold a baby. The babies have data and that’s retained when they outgrow the bassinet and flip into a toddler. It definitely requires some work but they have plenty of completed assets available that would make the earnest work part of it all much easier than starting from scratch as someone else’s suggested.
    I could blow up a baby to enormous proportions though, like you can objects in the game. But I suppose that was not a real baby? Because it wasn’t tied to its bassinet and couldn’t move (it wasn’t the actual baby in that family, this was just for storytelling). Always thought it was kind of strange I could do this.

    zHt8Rbe.jpg

    I also remember changing the colour of the bassinet once and all of a sudden the boy in there became a girl. So the connection between bassinet and baby is a strong one and an odd one.

  • drake_mccartydrake_mccarty Posts: 5,662 Member
    JoAnne65 wrote: »
    I think the problem with changing babies to a life state is that currently, they're technically an interactive item. I agree with @Writin_Reg, it's absolutely a different process than adding in toddlers.

    Toddlers were done from scratch and the rewrite for the existing game was: make sure babies age to toddlers (and not children). All other steps were adding code that wasn't there before. With babies, they need to make sure that the existing ones in-game would acquire functionality they currently don't have (unless they'd just remove all existing "baby items" & have everyone start from scratch for the ones currently in saves).

    And since it's rewriting code from a technically inanimate object that's (unfortunately) no more complicated than a broken sink with interactions to fix it into a whole life form with autonomy, it's most definitely not "easy". It's not impossible, of course, but it's definitely not simple.
    As for the existing baby assets not working: I'm pretty sure if they kept babies looking the way they do now, there'd be riots. So that's a layer of design on top of functionality.

    That all said, I really hope they do have something in the works.

    I’m sorry but that is not true. Babies get a lot of flack for being tied to an object, but the babies themselves contain Sim data. They are a Sim complete with a genetic profile, needs, animations, interactions, etc. To say they are like a broken sink is incredibly far off.

    Sims can already remove them and interact with them outside of the bassinet. The issue is that there is no programming for Sims to do anything other than place them back into the bassinet. Expanding upon that is totally doable, it just requires a lot of animation work.

    I didn't say it was not doable. All I said is that it's very likely not as simple as it may seem to change an item into a full-fledged Sim.

    The bassinet would not be converted into a Sim? Babies are considered full fledge Sims by the game already, I don’t understand what you mean by turning an item into a Sim. Babies are not the “object”, I know they are not mobile, but the static object is the bassinet only. Babies have Sim data and are considered Sims; they aren’t an item like a microwave or a sink.

    I think that in itself is causing confusion for people. The bassinet has no Sim data, it’s the only space programmed to hold a baby. The babies have data and that’s retained when they outgrow the bassinet and flip into a toddler. It definitely requires some work but they have plenty of completed assets available that would make the earnest work part of it all much easier than starting from scratch as someone else’s suggested.
    I could blow up a baby to enormous proportions though, like you can objects in the game. But I suppose that was not a real baby? Because it wasn’t tied to its bassinet and couldn’t move (it wasn’t the actual baby in that family, this was just for storytelling). Always thought it was kind of strange I could do this.

    I also remember changing the colour of the bassinet once and all of a sudden the boy in there became a girl. So the connection between bassinet and baby is a strong one and an odd one.

    Yes I believe there is a version of the baby in the debug items for whatever reason. It’s just the model though.
    Full-fledged Sims to me are ones that have autonomy. Babies show none of that and I don't know whether they even have programming included that's necessary for more than "cry after x amount of time" "cry if hunger is low" and similar. If they were to be given autonomy, I'd expect them to, say, start crawling if left alone on the ground for a while, rather than just being wherever another Sim puts them. That's what I mean by more complicated changes than simply untie them from the bassinet.
    And I'm done repeating that I never said it's impossible, just that I believe it's not a "just don't lock them to the bassinet" issue.

    Sure, they could be programmed similarly to pets, if they were to be kept as they are (aka with no way to control them without mods), but even pets have fears and autonomous interactions with Sims and other pets and items around the world. That's the key point to me that I believe as of now is missing in babies. And I also believe that it's easier to start from scratch for a life stage of a Sim than rewriting what's there. From my (limited, yes, but not non-existent programming experience, rewriting existing code, one that was potentially done by other people, is nothing short of a nightmare).

    @Hestia oooh, I like that idea. That would allow for an easier transition for sure and for everything that babies should have (visible genetics, CAS, autonomy, etc).

    I think your definition misses the point of the baby life stage. Do you not consider them a full fledge life stage in Sims 2 or 3? I mean that’s the standard that’s trying to be met here, I don’t think players are asking for mini-toddlers who crawl instead of walk.
  • ChadSims2ChadSims2 Posts: 3,100 Member
    I think your definition misses the point of the baby life stage. Do you not consider them a full fledge life stage in Sims 2 or 3? I mean that’s the standard that’s trying to be met here, I don’t think players are asking for mini-toddlers who crawl instead of walk.
    I sure am after waiting 5 years they owe us to do it right and going from a baby to a walking toddler is just weird. They're the ones who decided to make the toddlers play older and skip a huge step in life and development.
    Sims 4 went from "You Rule" to "One of the stories we want you to tell"
  • HestiaHestia Posts: 1,639 Member
    edited August 18
    @drake_mccarty Yep! I would have said the same thing.

    I want this!



    Newborn = The crib babies we have now.
    Infant = The Sims 2 babies from above video.
    Toddlers = The life stage after infants.
    OriginID: hestiah23 | Showcase
    jfIpSFy.png
  • darrenfroggydarrenfroggy Posts: 622 Member

    I think your definition misses the point of the baby life stage. Do you not consider them a full fledge life stage in Sims 2 or 3? I mean that’s the standard that’s trying to be met here, I don’t think players are asking for mini-toddlers who crawl instead of walk.

    Maybe some don't and just want a few interactions on top of what we have. My personal wishlist and why I think it'd take a bunch of re-coding what's there?
    - Sims being able to take babies out of the bassinet and carry them around
    - Sims being able to sit on furniture like chairs and sofas and cuddle babies
    - Babies having CAS options, even minimal: hair, eye color, onesies, skin color (not necessarily being able to create a baby in CAS the way we can make toddlers)
    - Changing tables (as an optional way to change a diaper)
    - Babies going from, say, day 1 of infancy and being unable to hold up heads to being able to sit up
    - and on that note: baby cribs that aren't just bassinets
    - Baby activities: rockers, play mats, baby swings
    - Babies crawling when they're put on the floor
    - Sims being able to practice walking with babies
    - Being able to give babies a bath

    There are some things I'd be happy without if at least some of these happened. (the first two are the absolute minimum imo)
    The babies we have currently qualify as the newborn stage. Considering how TS4 started toddlers at starting to walk, there's a whole first year or so of a RL baby skipped, which is what I'd love to see added.

    All that said, if they only ever add the "be able to take baby out of crib, talk to them when a Sim is holding them, be able to sit down on a chair with them, and maybe have a changing table", then you're right, that wouldn't take as much work in reprogramming. I'd still be glad for that but there's potential for so much more. For me, there's a difference between the current baby life stage and what babies could be.

    (full disclosure: I have had my hopes raised by toddlers in TS4 and by babies/infants in Freeplay.)
  • JoAnne65JoAnne65 Posts: 22,326 Member
    edited August 18
    Hestia wrote: »
    @drake_mccarty Yep! I would have said the same thing.

    I want this!



    Newborn = The crib babies we have now.
    Infant = The Sims 2 babies from above video.
    Toddlers = The life stage after infants.
    For me:
    Infant/baby
    maxresdefault.jpg
    This is Freeplay, this is one life stage - the infant lying down in the crib and the little one sitting up - and I’d love that (without the way it works in Freeplay to raise them because I don’t like Freeplay’s gameplay). No tying to crib for me, I ‘d love the ability to bath them or change them on a changing table, or take them for a stroll and I’d want them to be like in Sims 2. Another picture (FP):

    latest?cb=20151019182318

    Toddler
    The ones in Sims 4. Five year olds who can walk and run around and climb stairs, be more independent. I’d love kindergarden in the game too.
  • HestiaHestia Posts: 1,639 Member
    @JoAnne65 That moment when an old mobile game does it better than the PC version. Intense sweating
    OriginID: hestiah23 | Showcase
    jfIpSFy.png
  • darrenfroggydarrenfroggy Posts: 622 Member
    Hestia wrote: »
    @JoAnne65 That moment when an old mobile game does it better than the PC version. Intense sweating

    Eh, to be completely fair, it did take FP 4+ years to change the babies from... well, what they are now in TS4 with fewer interactions... to what we have now. But they did it, eventually, which gives me hope for TS4.
  • DragonCat159DragonCat159 Posts: 1,736 Member
    The reason/cause of why TS4 isn't inclusive could the fault of The Sims Olympus, the lack of incentive there was for family play. In other thread, I posted a bit of the cause where TS4 ended being TS4, and where I think is could be the fault of lack of family play emphasis. If they had focus on completing the game and going over to improve every life stage, even If they didn't intend to add toddlers at a time, TS4 would have at least been a bit bearable to play.
    Probably the lack of direction for this game since start is what ruined it. Focus too much on revolutionizing on how Sims act based on feelings (emotion) should have been done with the help of W. Wright. He maybe well have know how to do it, since he relied of human behavior he studied which put said knowledge in investing this genre The Sims series is known for. Also, thinking that throwing wee little bit of partying and superficial socialization narrative in a game, that is loved and popular for family/genetic/legacy play, was doomed to fail. I wish we known better from the start.

    Than again, poor management and Olympus is what reflects how TS4 isn't getting enough credit. Pretty much almost to everything, every corner is shown that love and passion for the franchise was gone after TS4 release. Not much of laid back engagement is shown with the community from sims team, as it was some back in TS3. At least we now learn from it to be wary of these stuff. TS5 is the last chance, and if it will repeat the mistake(s) of TS4 - I don't want anything to do with it or be apart of it. I will be gone and erase the two games from my memory. Maxis and ea can suck on it; celebrate if they wish that I'm one complainer down and gone.
  • HestiaHestia Posts: 1,639 Member
    edited August 18
    Hestia wrote: »
    @JoAnne65 That moment when an old mobile game does it better than the PC version. Intense sweating

    Eh, to be completely fair, it did take FP 4+ years to change the babies from... well, what they are now in TS4 with fewer interactions... to what we have now. But they did it, eventually, which gives me hope for TS4.

    @darrenfroggy The Sims Freeplay has been out since 2011 and that seems to be a reasonable time to implement babies since they may not have the right tools to build it on mobile.

    The Sims 4 released at 2014 and is a PC game. The tools developers have now to create games aren’t as difficult or limited to mobile games or in the past years. Technology is far more superior. Indie game developers made huge hits throughout the past years. The Sims 4 isn’t made by indie developers.

    If let’s say they did program the game for family play, I believe that what we received would have been more fleshed out. I don’t find the length of time required to release content bit by bit excusable at any rate by a AAA company and especially when creating a life simulation game. It isn’t an unfamiliar game type for them.

    I’m still skeptical about its early development phase. It’s connection with Project Olympus making it a big reason why the game is in its current state.

    If The Sims 4 released with all the patches we have now for the base game way back then in 2014, I strongly believe that it wouldn’t have had the immense backlash from players back then and crunch time the developers need to deal with now.

    It is obvious enough that a lot of the coding of family play, the things we experienced from past sequels weren’t meant to be there and they are now squashing in as much as possible into one single DLC. At the same time, they are sacrificing other parts that should have been in released packs on different dates to be split into smaller paid DLCs.

    Look carefully. Which parts of The Sims 4 is most buggy? Things related to family play, inventory management, routing or placement between the lot + outer boundaries, occult’s, genetics, routing issues with multiple Sims in one household and group activities.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of the aspects on what Simmers enjoyed in the past will never make it into the game because the foundation of TS4 was never meant to support such things. It isn’t easy for game developers to flip things around to reimplement things for something that was originally meant as an always online young adult Sims chat room.

    It is not easy and whoever made the decision to do so did not make the life of the developers any better. It is awful and unethical. It needs to stop and this is one of the biggest reasons why I truly wish The Sims 4 would just end already.
    OriginID: hestiah23 | Showcase
    jfIpSFy.png
  • Noree_DoreeNoree_Doree Posts: 1,325 Member
    Hestia wrote: »
    Hestia wrote: »
    @JoAnne65 That moment when an old mobile game does it better than the PC version. Intense sweating

    Eh, to be completely fair, it did take FP 4+ years to change the babies from... well, what they are now in TS4 with fewer interactions... to what we have now. But they did it, eventually, which gives me hope for TS4.

    @darrenfroggy The Sims Freeplay has been out since 2011 and that seems to be a reasonable time to implement babies since they may not have the right tools to build it on mobile.

    The Sims 4 released at 2014 and is a PC game. The tools developers have now to create games aren’t as difficult or limited to mobile games or in the past years. Technology is far more superior. Indie game developers made huge hits throughout the past years. The Sims 4 isn’t made by indie developers.

    If let’s say they did program the game for family play, I believe that what we received would have been more fleshed out. I don’t find the length of time required to release content bit by bit excusable at any rate by a AAA company and especially when creating a life simulation game. It isn’t an unfamiliar game type for them.

    I’m still skeptical about its early development phase. It’s connection with Project Olympus making it a big reason why the game is in its current state.

    If The Sims 4 released with all the patches we have now for the base game way back then in 2014, I strongly believe that it wouldn’t have had the immense backlash from players back then and crunch time the developers need to deal with now.

    It is obvious enough that a lot of the coding of family play, the things we experienced from past sequels weren’t meant to be there and they are now squashing in as much as possible into one single DLC. At the same time, they are sacrificing other parts that should have been in released packs on different dates to be split into smaller paid DLCs.

    Look carefully. Which parts of The Sims 4 is most buggy? Things related to family play, inventory management, routing or placement between the lot + outer boundaries, occult’s, genetics, routing issues with multiple Sims in one household and group activities.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of the aspects on what Simmers enjoyed in the past will never make it into the game because the foundation of TS4 was never meant to support such things. It isn’t easy for game developers to flip things around to reimplement things for something that was originally meant as an always online young adult Sims chat room.

    It is not easy and whoever made the decision to do so did not make the life of the developers any better. It is awful and unethical. It needs to stop and this is one of the biggest reasons why I truly wish The Sims 4 would just end already.

    I always play as a family. I may start with one sim but. It always ends up as a family and I do have bugs and issues in my game. But I don't feel that's the only reason. I think the way they set this up made it hard for them to find and fix bugs as well as no proper testing when new packs are close to being ready to release. I don't think it's because we all have different spec necessarily either. The same can be said about previous games and there weren't this many issues... Then again I'm not sure as I wasn't active in forums in the past
    CxDhQOn.gif
    "Bada su the gorn bada su the brawn bada bady oda aba donk donk donk gerbits, gerbits, vo gerbits!!!"
  • HestiaHestia Posts: 1,639 Member
    edited August 18
    Post edited by Hestia on
    OriginID: hestiah23 | Showcase
    jfIpSFy.png
  • darrenfroggydarrenfroggy Posts: 622 Member
    That's a whole lotta rant for "well no, FP didn't have all those features for babies from the start". Which is literally all I said.

    Should we have had more to babies and other life stages from the start? I'm not contesting that, I never have. All I'm saying is that there still is space to include them. It depends on each person whether they still want improvements like this to be done to TS4 or whether they want EA to just leave the game as is now. I also absolutely agree that where TS4 started from (Olympus) has caused a lot of the issues and missing features some of which have since been added into the game. But honestly, I think they should have delayed the release and should have put in the work first (though I understand why that didn't happen. doesn't mean I agree with it. Since we don't have a time machine, it's irrelevant anyway).

    I don't disagree with TS4 not being perfect. I just happen to think that a) it's not a scrap pile that needs to be trashed, b) that it's ignoring family players in general or c) that there's no more point in improving the game in general or family play in particular.

    (I don't think it's fair to bring up indie developers into this since the comparison here was TS4 and SFP. For all intents and purposes, EA Mobile wasn't indie when they first developed SFP. Firemonkeys now isn't indie either. And issues with both those are for a different board and thread.)

    End of my rant: yes, there's stuff lacking in TS4 that should have been there from the start. That does not make stuff that IS there non-existent.
  • HestiaHestia Posts: 1,639 Member
    @darrenfroggy Ah. I didn’t mean to describe Firemonkey or Freeplay as an indie game company. I meant by EA Games in general.

    At this point it would be inevitable for The Sims Studio to ignore how much of us want more family play and the game should be abandoned cold turkey (Mass Effect Andromeda for example).

    Releasing content in such a late time and taking longer than expected just gives less hope for players.
    OriginID: hestiah23 | Showcase
    jfIpSFy.png
  • JoAnne65JoAnne65 Posts: 22,326 Member
    edited August 18
    Hestia wrote: »
    @JoAnne65 That moment when an old mobile game does it better than the PC version. Intense sweating

    LOL, yes.

    I think a Sims game should have all life stages up and ready and all fleshed out and thought through in a basegame, not needing any patches or packs to improve (or add even).
  • darrenfroggydarrenfroggy Posts: 622 Member
    EA most definitely messed up the start of TS4 and I understand the disappointment and lack of hope from long-term players. Knowing that it happened and why the game is what it is now and what it has been so far doesn't mean I think it was a good thing. I'm just looking at it from the point of "well, we know they still have plans for this iteration" and I'm mostly thinking I'd rather wait for the next one instead of having that just as rushed as TS4 was at the start.

    I think the last thing anyone would want is a new version that is equally as lacking in features as TS4 was at launch. And I think TS4 still has things I want to see added to it (and while I understand that some people don't think they will, I do still have hope).
  • JoAnne65JoAnne65 Posts: 22,326 Member
    I think the subject here is that the fact the basegame failed, means it can never be a fully fleshed out game. They’d better start over, properly this time around. With a fully fleshed out basegame and expansion packs that will sell themselves for being a great addition. Not some attempt to make up for things that should have been in there from the start and that only cause issues and bugs.
  • Noree_DoreeNoree_Doree Posts: 1,325 Member
    Hestia wrote: »

    Thanks for that perspective lol 😉 it really opens my eyes to all of the issues 3 had/still has and yet it's also sad because most of them seem like they could have easily been fixed.
    CxDhQOn.gif
    "Bada su the gorn bada su the brawn bada bady oda aba donk donk donk gerbits, gerbits, vo gerbits!!!"
  • comicsforlifecomicsforlife Posts: 5,529 Member
    That's a whole lotta rant for "well no, FP didn't have all those features for babies from the start". Which is literally all I said.

    Should we have had more to babies and other life stages from the start? I'm not contesting that, I never have. All I'm saying is that there still is space to include them. It depends on each person whether they still want improvements like this to be done to TS4 or whether they want EA to just leave the game as is now. I also absolutely agree that where TS4 started from (Olympus) has caused a lot of the issues and missing features some of which have since been added into the game. But honestly, I think they should have delayed the release and should have put in the work first (though I understand why that didn't happen. doesn't mean I agree with it. Since we don't have a time machine, it's irrelevant anyway).

    I don't disagree with TS4 not being perfect. I just happen to think that a) it's not a scrap pile that needs to be trashed, b) that it's ignoring family players in general or c) that there's no more point in improving the game in general or family play in particular.

    (I don't think it's fair to bring up indie developers into this since the comparison here was TS4 and SFP. For all intents and purposes, EA Mobile wasn't indie when they first developed SFP. Firemonkeys now isn't indie either. And issues with both those are for a different board and thread.)

    End of my rant: yes, there's stuff lacking in TS4 that should have been there from the start. That does not make stuff that IS there non-existent.

    babies like in free play would be great
    the sims 4 isn't getting new whims right now and I think they have dropped them all together if we want new whims in sims 4 we need to tweet the gurus and tell them we like whims
  • Sk8rblazeSk8rblaze Posts: 7,004 Member
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    anyway back on topic #freethebabies

    I wonder if the babies will get any stuff seeing we only ever got baby stuff for them through Sims 2 and Sims 3 stores and of course what little was in base games.

    stuff pack anyone ? I'd buy it

    If and only if they release the babies from the bassinet they shouldn't create anything for them if they're going to keep them immobilized. And as far as a stuff pack I don't know but I'm willing to compromise. Maybe a small patch to free the babies with a few starter items for the baby, like they did for toddlers, and then a stuff pack if someone wants to expand on baby items.

    I just wonder if that can be done - seeing babies never get a stuff pack and they are an object not a life state like toddlers are.

    First, babies need to be converted to actual Sims and not an object, IMHO. Once that is done, I feel there are a lot of more ways they could offer content for them, whether it's a stuff pack or game pack.

    In fact, I would gladly take an expansion that lacked any kind of new and crazy theme and just focused on expanding each and every life state, the core game, goals, game balancing, etc. Highly unlikely to happen, of course, and perhaps I'm better off just waiting for The Sims 5. :lol:

    I just think it's crazy we were shipped a game called The Sims and every life stage except YA and child was neglected.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Return to top