Forum Announcement, Click Here to Read More From EA_Cade.
On TS4 & Options
SimTrippy
Posts: 7,651 Member
a) Are there more or less options in TS4 than in previous sims games?
b) Does the inclusion of new features warrant the exclusion of previous ones, thereby removing certain options that used to be available?
What I mean to say is: I really don't want this to be a flame war, but a somewhat productive discussion on the general relationship between the sims and options, and on the overall validity of adding/removing existing game features.
Also, if anyone wants to participate in this thread, please try not to insult one another for liking or disliking the game. And please, challenge opinions - not people. Trying to advance a somewhat solid argument is always, always better than insulting people - and in the end, it's always possible to peacefully agree to disagree
#jsPost edited by SimStaffBethelle on
4
Comments
- Sims 1: Brand new restaurant with an outstanding menu, especially for its time,
- Sims 2: Complete restaurant remodel with a menu overhaul with upgrades to their cuisines and several new menu items,
- Sims 3: A buffet, where you can order anything you want, but has a pest control problem (bugs), and probably slime in the ice machine,
- Sims 4: New paint on the building's exterior, but they only serve low-sodium mashed potatoes with 47 different types of gravy. (I can only eat mashed potatoes for so long.)
b) ...and this is my opinion, but while I understand the EA team in trying to add new things to the Sims 4 to fulfill their vision, I feel like the new "things" they are adding is not a satisfying as the gameplay, features, objects, etc they are excluding. I know it's a new game engine and production take time, but...eh.
I personally feel like the sims is for the younger generation--I don't feel a connection towards the game as I did with the previous ones. I like the Sims 4 for what it is, and I don't think is a "bad" game, but I try so hard to like it more--I want to like it more. It's just very, very boring to me.
Then again, this is my opinion.
b) Does the inclusion of new features warrant the exclusion of previous ones, thereby removing certain options that used to be available? Yes and no. IMO, it definitely could have, but with the features that they *did* take out, and the ones they *did* put in, there isn't really any connection between those that would exclude either one or the other from being present in the same game... Except for everything that truly isn't possible engine-wise, for which they only really have themselves to blame tho, and have to understand that some people are not going to accept certain missing features and will not be buying the game. (Which is fine, but if the amount of people not buying the game was too large, they'd obviously have problems. Which hasn't happened yet, and I personally don't think will
I actually meant to keep my answers fairly short, but it was just a bit too much in the end.
EA made a completely new game engine for TS4. At that time EA had every opportunity to include all things from the previous game. But that wasn't at all the idea behind making a completely new game engine. The idea instead of course was to make TS4 into a completely new game whith another focus. The focus in TS3 was family play and the big open world. But the game engine for TS4 was intended to move the focus to other things instead. So toddlers and the open world weren't included in the game engine and neither was the option for hills in the terrain.
But other things were included instead: multitasking, new emotions, a completely new CAS with more details and the new buildmode. This was meant to give new options for all the expansions such that the game could be taken in a new direction.
You could almost as well have asked about the options in TS4 and in GTA and why the options from TS4 aren't included in GTA
@Sel haha don't worry, I'm not particularly great at keeping my answers short either
I'm sorry if my answers aren't very explicit and that I haven't answered to everything you wrote. I might do so later on, but right now, I really need to wake up before going to teach my class
I've got to go now, but those are some of the ones I could think of to start with. For the most part, TS4 doesn't fare as well as the others in those comparisons, but there are plenty more points to compare. I didn't have time to go into "More options" but there are definitely some aspects where you have more options in TS4.
Add Manage Neighbourhood Options - assign your own Sim to NPC jobs!
The Problems with Death in The Sims 4
Distinguish Elder gameplay with Elder-only reward traits
Filter Rugs by Room Size
I have no idea why they would have done this but to me, those options in the settings are a must in The Sims as it gives players even more control over the game than otherwise.
I mean we had Seasons options in TS3. If TS4 gets Seasons, would you never be able to turn off some effects? Your game would be constantly flooded with rain!
EA therefore doesn't see things which were in TS3 as "missing" in TS4 because those things were never planned to be in TS4 at all.
Also people are ignoring the idea behind the new GPs which they just assume was some extra "gifts" that EA wanted to give them for some unknown reason. But EA never said that. EA never even said that more employees would be working on TS4 expansions than the number of employees that EA earlier had assigned to work on TS3 expansions. So who should make all those SPs and now also GPs if EA didn't reduce the number of EPs? Why should EA have moved developers from EA's other games to now work on TS4 GPs instead of taking them from those who otherwise would have worked on EPs?
Yeah, I think they even lowered the standard sale price for the base game to 40$ or something permanently.. (which would still make a pretty good profit, I think, since it probably didn't cost as much to develop as it's bringing in right now
But yeah I totally get you about ts4, in some parts it really isn't "fleshed out" as much as the other The Sims games
oh that's weird, i was coming from this article and the current origin sale on ts4 (or maybe it's over already, idk)
either way thanks for the info
Okay. The article is about US prices. But Origin can see my location and therefore alway shows me the prices in Danish valuta instead. TS4 has been a lot on sale also in Denmark though.
See, but this I personally have issues with. I think that if you're going to call a game The Sims 4 or GTA V or God of War III, then you're implying that this is in fact a sequel in line with the very games it originates from. That means people don't expect "a completely new game", they expect that game. Revised, yes, a little different, maybe. But completely new? No. See when I bought The Urbs at the time, I didn't expect the sims, even though the title said "sims in the city". I didn't because it wasn't called the sims, even if it implied a relationship.
Like I've said in another thread: sometimes games do change from one version to the next, but they should offer the same amount of features and options at least, and at best give you something just as valuable in return. I think Darksiders II is a perfect example of this for the simple reason that the second game was very different from the first game. However, in the first game you play War & in the second Death. The main reason, as they've explained, for why Death's game play is different, is because Death is simply a different character. You're no longer playing War's story (at least not primarily), you're now playing his. Death has different skills & abilities than War, he's more agile, can do different moves, and obviously, the world changed as well because you don't want to replay the exact same scenes with a different character. But in essence, no matter the differences, the games are still very similar. The quests, the overarching story - it still makes sense. It takes getting used to, and some prefer I over II and vice-versa, but most people can accept the changes & understand why they are there. They also know that if Darksiders III is ever made, it will feature one of the other horsemen of the apocalypse - and it will, again, be different from Death & War's stories and style. This is the franchise, it's known (Khaleesi).
If TS4 had been called "The Quest: Sims Reloaded" (or whatever), then I wouldn't care too much about things being very different, because I'd expect them to be different. I wouldn't have bought the game, or I would've bought it knowing that this is a game related to, but not essentially the same as, the overall sims franchise. I would even understand that it is no longer aimed at previous customers, but other ones, those that want more quest-like game play, want to achieve medals and don't care too much for family or unmodded rotational play. But it isn't. It's The Sims 4. What if the makers of any other big franchise decided "oh well, we'll call it GTA V" but it won't feel like it. You'll no longer be able to enjoy open world, there's no longer any mafia-related content. From now on, it's just a guy in the city who has his own car & can no longer steal any either. For example. It's a stupid example, of course, but I think you get what I mean.
Isn't it a little sleazy to make a game, take out a whole lot of features, then accuse people for not "getting" your vision? They thought it would be the classic sims vision, that's just to be expected. And if EA hadn't expected this as well, they would've quite likely chosen another name.
Like @king_of_simcity7 and @Terra mentioned: you could set the age of your sims as you wished (giving you a great amount of flexibility), CAW has been somewhat existent since TS2 even without open world, babies became toddlers before they became children, there was no real relationship culling / decay, there were stories about the town and the sims in it that allowed you to choose to follow them (or not) - but they were present either way - and EPs quickly followed to create more depth and realism asap. You always had the option to do or not do x. I feel like now x has been taken out of the equation, and people just have to "live with it". See, I know this is mean, but frankly I don't care how big their team is, or how exactly it's split up. What I as a customer care about is:
a) Is it a Sims game?
b) Can I do what I can always do in a base Sims game?
c) Is it therefore worth my money, even without having to buy any kind of DLC?
d) Does the DLC, in line with all the franchise's DLC, bring me the basic aspects of reality I need to feel like I'm simulating life?
I personally don't feel like I can answer yes to all those questions.
Now, if people tell me "alright I can't do x, y, z" but I don't care because it brings me "d, e, f" and these are equally valuable and grant me an equal amount of opportunities to tell a wide variety of different stories - then yes, what is brought to the table as "new options" warrants the removal of "previous options". what I'd like to know, therefore, is: what are the new features (emotions aside) that the sims 4 have brought me that add so much fundamental game play that all these old features can rightfully be taken out without rendering my experience any less enjoyable?
The Sims 2 was a game about raising children and families in the PC version. But in the version for consoles the Sims 2 was a completely different type of game where you couldn't even have children. So how could EA give the console game the same name?
I have fewer issues about EA calling this new game the Sims 4 because it at least is a sequel to the Sims 3 and also is mainly about buying a huge number of expansions of different types. So TS4 isn't so different from the previous big PC Sims games which also were quite different. The fact that a lot of people in this forum instead wanted TS4 to be more similar to TS3 or TS2 (myself included) is another matter. But clearly EA's vision was to make a completely new type of big Sims game instead.
But concerning TS2, idk, I don't think it was only a children-raising game to me at the time (but it's a long time ago, I admit). Thing with the console version though, and yes I hated TS on consoles, was that the classic PC version of TS2 did exist and was available to buy. So I guess to me, you still had the option: you want classic TS2 or weird console TS2?
I just find it difficult to say that people shouldn't want TS4 to be similar to (or incorporate & unite the best featues of) TS2 and TS3. It just makes sense to me for some reason. I felt TS2 was a huge and fun improvement on 1. I loved it from day one. I remember owning only a single EP and I barely ever used it. TS3 I admit, I missed tons of it. Simply because I'd moved on to very different games and didn't own a computer capable of handling big games for quite some time. So I just accepted that & didn't buy games my laptop couldn't handle. That's another thing that bugs me a little about TS4: I want games to become better, graphically but also technically. I expect a game made today to be bigger, larger & better than games made 5 or 10 years ago. If they were too ambitious, I expect them to now use the technology in a way that will make their previous ambitions possible to achieve - because the tech is simply there. But when I didn't have a good computer, I never ever expected classic games to be remade and watered down in such a way that even my crappy, absolutely non-gamer laptop can handle them as well. It never even occurred to me... And I don't fully accept their argument that this is the future, because when I look at other franchises I just don't see it. Hell, it took me hoooouuuuurs to download AC Black Flag (+ 15 hours) because Origin for some reason didn't use my full bandwidth capabilities. Annoying? Yup. On the other hand, I'd rather have a 50 x longer install time but get a really excellent game (no idea if it is though) than a quick install and a crappy game.
Of course, a quick install and an awesome game, like Stardew Valley = welcome, too
1. Desktop computers aren't as common anymore. People are now much more likely to have a laptop.
2. The Sims games are targeted mainly at teens who don't play difficult hardcore games.
3. EA didn't want TS4 to be too similar to TS3 because EA wanted people to buy both games.
4. The T rating for the Sims games is extremely important for EA.
Other games are instead targeted at experienced hardcore gamers who always buys expensive gaming computers instead of cheap handy laptops. Those gamers can only be impressed by advanced games which compare well with other hardcore games and such games are usually always M rated. So they are mainly played by young adults who can afford a good gaming computers. But EA needs to youngest teens to play the Sims games too because otherwise the sales numbers will become unacceptable low.
I wasn't upset over Dune and Dune 2 because I actually liked both games - but for very different reasons. Dune had a very interesting story which wasn't too hard to play through while you controlled the only playable character in the game. Dune 2 was a war game where you instead could choose between 3 factions, build a base and destroy your enemy's base to go on to the next level where new buildings and weapons became available. There were no adventure story and no character to control. But it was a challenging game which became hard at the higher levels. The two Dune games were impossible to compare (like the Sims games and Starcraft - or like SimCity and some RPG game.). But both Dune games were good in their own ways. Dune 2 also exists in a newer version called Dune 2000 btw.
But I fully agree with your argument @computers. It's just unfortunate that the sims needs to be the game that is no longer made for actual gaming computers, but even the worst of laptops. It could've been oh so much more and still so very much T rated if only it hadn't been reduced to "something that runs well on all platforms". I want this to be an actual, fleshed out game. Not an app