However, the issue is not what they can or can't do. The issue is where they want to spend their money. They choose to hire cheaper FX designers rather than programmers. That's why we have all this lovely scenery and nothing to do with it. This is a fact. One of the guru's stated in an interview before release that the engine was designed in a way that they wouldn't need to hire "expensive engineers" to make changes. (Which is most likely why there is very little added gameplay.) And in another interview a guru stated that the FX designers had so little to do that they literally tried to find things to do. That's why we got such details as the subtle curtains blowing around...but we can't open windows. And this is also why CL has an amazing background and no new real gameplay. It's also why there are no new systems added to the game - like interests or attractions - and everything new is object based interactions. - even groups and clubs are all object or interaction based. Sims don't do things TOGETHER, they do them in tandem. As in...near each other and talking. Those things were already in the game, they just slapped a label on it.
snip
No, it's not a fact, it's a false rumor. They haven't hired FX designers instead of programmers. There are two FX artists credited on TS4 (Don Livingston and Art Matsuura), both of them are credited on various packs since TS2. No new FX artist was hired for TS4. Check the credits.
Do you just choose to misinterpret?
It was stated in two separate interviews.
Where's your source then ?
I don't see how I can misinterpret a list of names in credits by the way. Just check yourselves for all the TS4 packs, there are only two people credited as FX artists. Just look when these two people have started working on the Sims.
(Pls ignore website, couldn't find the direct link to MTS) Screenshot, Grahamns comments are in the quote.
FX people got whatever they wanted, because their work is cheap and doesn't take very long. I find it hilarious that Graham says they didn't have enough to do seeing how every world is completely made up of VFX. They had too much to do.
Either way, this interview is from before launch - you know when they deliberately lied, and misled ALL of us trying to sell this game. I wouldn't be surprised if even this explaination was inflated to sound better than reality.
SimGuruGraham never said they hired more FX artists for TS4 though. Yes FX artists were not scoped against, yes, they had their own list of suggestions of things to do. But they didn't hire more FX artists, they were already there ! And I'm glad they kept them, these are the guys who provided us with all the Seasons and other FX I loved in the past, and based on their work on TS4, I think they are getting even better. I want them for my TS4 Seasons too !
I didn't say they hired anyone. I said their work was quick and cheap so they were allowed to do what they wanted. Do you think other departments got so lucky? Probably not.
VFX doesn't add to a game. Sure it might add to the players visual enjoyment, but that is 100% valueless to the game, which is what I paid for. Graham's comments demonstrate the mindset that Maxis has where they can make decorations, tell us how AMAZING they are, and sell us packs full of functionless content. Look @ CL - they went gaga over the world, and most of every neighborhood is set dressing. To each their own I guess, I would prefer some meat on my sandwhich not just a fancy wrapper.
I'm guessing GTA has cars because it's about cars?? There's a lot Sims has that GTA or Fallout don't. But fundamentally, they're different creatures. And all of them are more than a laundry list of objects.
Sims is about simulating life. Cars in most countries are part of daily life. So I don't really follow this argument.
(I do think holding hands is really hard to do in this game by the way, but it would be awesome)
However, the issue is not what they can or can't do. The issue is where they want to spend their money. They choose to hire cheaper FX designers rather than programmers. That's why we have all this lovely scenery and nothing to do with it. This is a fact. One of the guru's stated in an interview before release that the engine was designed in a way that they wouldn't need to hire "expensive engineers" to make changes. (Which is most likely why there is very little added gameplay.) And in another interview a guru stated that the FX designers had so little to do that they literally tried to find things to do. That's why we got such details as the subtle curtains blowing around...but we can't open windows. And this is also why CL has an amazing background and no new real gameplay. It's also why there are no new systems added to the game - like interests or attractions - and everything new is object based interactions. - even groups and clubs are all object or interaction based. Sims don't do things TOGETHER, they do them in tandem. As in...near each other and talking. Those things were already in the game, they just slapped a label on it.
snip
No, it's not a fact, it's a false rumor. They haven't hired FX designers instead of programmers. There are two FX artists credited on TS4 (Don Livingston and Art Matsuura), both of them are credited on various packs since TS2. No new FX artist was hired for TS4. Check the credits.
Do you just choose to misinterpret?
It was stated in two separate interviews.
Where's your source then ?
I don't see how I can misinterpret a list of names in credits by the way. Just check yourselves for all the TS4 packs, there are only two people credited as FX artists. Just look when these two people have started working on the Sims.
(Pls ignore website, couldn't find the direct link to MTS) Screenshot, Grahamns comments are in the quote.
FX people got whatever they wanted, because their work is cheap and doesn't take very long. I find it hilarious that Graham says they didn't have enough to do seeing how every world is completely made up of VFX. They had too much to do.
Either way, this interview is from before launch - you know when they deliberately lied, and misled ALL of us trying to sell this game. I wouldn't be surprised if even this explaination was inflated to sound better than reality.
SimGuruGraham never said they hired more FX artists for TS4 though. Yes FX artists were not scoped against, yes, they had their own list of suggestions of things to do. But they didn't hire more FX artists, they were already there ! And I'm glad they kept them, these are the guys who provided us with all the Seasons and other FX I loved in the past, and based on their work on TS4, I think they are getting even better. I want them for my TS4 Seasons too !
I didn't say they hired anyone. I said their work was quick and cheap so they were allowed to do what they wanted. Do you think other departments got so lucky? Probably not.
VFX doesn't add to a game. Sure it might add to the players visual enjoyment, but that is 100% valueless to the game, which is what I paid for. Graham's comments demonstrate the mindset that Maxis has where they can make decorations, tell us how AMAZING they are, and sell us packs full of functionless content. Look @ CL - they went gaga over the world, and most of every neighborhood is set dressing. To each their own I guess, I would prefer some meat on my sandwhich not just a fancy wrapper.
Since you quoted my post about source for hiring, I thought you were answering about that.
We don't know if all FX are quick and cheap. The tram was apparently "very low risk, very low complexity", but some other FX may be more complicated. VFX have always been part of the game, it's not something new with TS4, and I think it's essential in some packs (like Seasons !), and greatly improve the general atmosphere. It's not my top priority, but it's still important for me. Most of San Myshuno isn't FX by the way, there's a lot more people involved in the making of a world : building the environment, creating all the assets (models, textures, audio), behaviors of townies, etc.
Visual enjoyment may be 100% valueless to you, but then there was quite a lot of feedback about the look of the environment chipmunk in Granite Falls for example, so some people care a lot about this sort of things I guess. And I don't think hand holding would have added more to the game than FX.
However, the issue is not what they can or can't do. The issue is where they want to spend their money. They choose to hire cheaper FX designers rather than programmers. That's why we have all this lovely scenery and nothing to do with it. This is a fact. One of the guru's stated in an interview before release that the engine was designed in a way that they wouldn't need to hire "expensive engineers" to make changes. (Which is most likely why there is very little added gameplay.) And in another interview a guru stated that the FX designers had so little to do that they literally tried to find things to do. That's why we got such details as the subtle curtains blowing around...but we can't open windows. And this is also why CL has an amazing background and no new real gameplay. It's also why there are no new systems added to the game - like interests or attractions - and everything new is object based interactions. - even groups and clubs are all object or interaction based. Sims don't do things TOGETHER, they do them in tandem. As in...near each other and talking. Those things were already in the game, they just slapped a label on it.
snip
No, it's not a fact, it's a false rumor. They haven't hired FX designers instead of programmers. There are two FX artists credited on TS4 (Don Livingston and Art Matsuura), both of them are credited on various packs since TS2. No new FX artist was hired for TS4. Check the credits.
Do you just choose to misinterpret?
It was stated in two separate interviews.
Where's your source then ?
I don't see how I can misinterpret a list of names in credits by the way. Just check yourselves for all the TS4 packs, there are only two people credited as FX artists. Just look when these two people have started working on the Sims.
(Pls ignore website, couldn't find the direct link to MTS) Screenshot, Grahamns comments are in the quote.
FX people got whatever they wanted, because their work is cheap and doesn't take very long. I find it hilarious that Graham says they didn't have enough to do seeing how every world is completely made up of VFX. They had too much to do.
Either way, this interview is from before launch - you know when they deliberately lied, and misled ALL of us trying to sell this game. I wouldn't be surprised if even this explaination was inflated to sound better than reality.
SimGuruGraham never said they hired more FX artists for TS4 though. Yes FX artists were not scoped against, yes, they had their own list of suggestions of things to do. But they didn't hire more FX artists, they were already there ! And I'm glad they kept them, these are the guys who provided us with all the Seasons and other FX I loved in the past, and based on their work on TS4, I think they are getting even better. I want them for my TS4 Seasons too !
Semantics again...you deliberately misinterpret and disregard everything after what you decided to counter argue. Unfortunately for you, if semantics is your only talking point...you don't really have one.
Sorry I didn't use the appropriate wording for you, professor of language arts. But considering I'm not getting college credit for this...I really don't care.
However, the issue is not what they can or can't do. The issue is where they want to spend their money. They choose to hire cheaper FX designers rather than programmers. That's why we have all this lovely scenery and nothing to do with it. This is a fact. One of the guru's stated in an interview before release that the engine was designed in a way that they wouldn't need to hire "expensive engineers" to make changes. (Which is most likely why there is very little added gameplay.) And in another interview a guru stated that the FX designers had so little to do that they literally tried to find things to do. That's why we got such details as the subtle curtains blowing around...but we can't open windows. And this is also why CL has an amazing background and no new real gameplay. It's also why there are no new systems added to the game - like interests or attractions - and everything new is object based interactions. - even groups and clubs are all object or interaction based. Sims don't do things TOGETHER, they do them in tandem. As in...near each other and talking. Those things were already in the game, they just slapped a label on it.
snip
No, it's not a fact, it's a false rumor. They haven't hired FX designers instead of programmers. There are two FX artists credited on TS4 (Don Livingston and Art Matsuura), both of them are credited on various packs since TS2. No new FX artist was hired for TS4. Check the credits.
Do you just choose to misinterpret?
It was stated in two separate interviews.
Where's your source then ?
I don't see how I can misinterpret a list of names in credits by the way. Just check yourselves for all the TS4 packs, there are only two people credited as FX artists. Just look when these two people have started working on the Sims.
(Pls ignore website, couldn't find the direct link to MTS) Screenshot, Grahamns comments are in the quote.
FX people got whatever they wanted, because their work is cheap and doesn't take very long. I find it hilarious that Graham says they didn't have enough to do seeing how every world is completely made up of VFX. They had too much to do.
Either way, this interview is from before launch - you know when they deliberately lied, and misled ALL of us trying to sell this game. I wouldn't be surprised if even this explaination was inflated to sound better than reality.
SimGuruGraham never said they hired more FX artists for TS4 though. Yes FX artists were not scoped against, yes, they had their own list of suggestions of things to do. But they didn't hire more FX artists, they were already there ! And I'm glad they kept them, these are the guys who provided us with all the Seasons and other FX I loved in the past, and based on their work on TS4, I think they are getting even better. I want them for my TS4 Seasons too !
Semantics again...you deliberately misinterpret and disregard everything after what you decided to counter argue. Unfortunately for you, if semantics is your only talking point...you don't really have one.
Sorry I didn't use the appropriate wording for you, professor of language arts. But considering I'm not getting college credit for this...I really don't care.
I'm providing info, not counter arguing. I've seen you mentionned this rumor of new FX artists several times, I thought you (and other people reading this thread) would be interested in knowing that it's just a false rumor.
However, the issue is not what they can or can't do. The issue is where they want to spend their money. They choose to hire cheaper FX designers rather than programmers. That's why we have all this lovely scenery and nothing to do with it. This is a fact. One of the guru's stated in an interview before release that the engine was designed in a way that they wouldn't need to hire "expensive engineers" to make changes. (Which is most likely why there is very little added gameplay.) And in another interview a guru stated that the FX designers had so little to do that they literally tried to find things to do. That's why we got such details as the subtle curtains blowing around...but we can't open windows. And this is also why CL has an amazing background and no new real gameplay. It's also why there are no new systems added to the game - like interests or attractions - and everything new is object based interactions. - even groups and clubs are all object or interaction based. Sims don't do things TOGETHER, they do them in tandem. As in...near each other and talking. Those things were already in the game, they just slapped a label on it.
snip
No, it's not a fact, it's a false rumor. They haven't hired FX designers instead of programmers. There are two FX artists credited on TS4 (Don Livingston and Art Matsuura), both of them are credited on various packs since TS2. No new FX artist was hired for TS4. Check the credits.
Do you just choose to misinterpret?
It was stated in two separate interviews.
Where's your source then ?
I don't see how I can misinterpret a list of names in credits by the way. Just check yourselves for all the TS4 packs, there are only two people credited as FX artists. Just look when these two people have started working on the Sims.
(Pls ignore website, couldn't find the direct link to MTS) Screenshot, Grahamns comments are in the quote.
FX people got whatever they wanted, because their work is cheap and doesn't take very long. I find it hilarious that Graham says they didn't have enough to do seeing how every world is completely made up of VFX. They had too much to do.
Either way, this interview is from before launch - you know when they deliberately lied, and misled ALL of us trying to sell this game. I wouldn't be surprised if even this explaination was inflated to sound better than reality.
SimGuruGraham never said they hired more FX artists for TS4 though. Yes FX artists were not scoped against, yes, they had their own list of suggestions of things to do. But they didn't hire more FX artists, they were already there ! And I'm glad they kept them, these are the guys who provided us with all the Seasons and other FX I loved in the past, and based on their work on TS4, I think they are getting even better. I want them for my TS4 Seasons too !
I didn't say they hired anyone. I said their work was quick and cheap so they were allowed to do what they wanted. Do you think other departments got so lucky? Probably not.
VFX doesn't add to a game. Sure it might add to the players visual enjoyment, but that is 100% valueless to the game, which is what I paid for. Graham's comments demonstrate the mindset that Maxis has where they can make decorations, tell us how AMAZING they are, and sell us packs full of functionless content. Look @ CL - they went gaga over the world, and most of every neighborhood is set dressing. To each their own I guess, I would prefer some meat on my sandwhich not just a fancy wrapper.
Since you quoted my post about source for hiring, I thought you were answering about that.
We don't know if all FX are quick and cheap. The tram was apparently "very low risk, very low complexity". VFX have always been part of the game, it's not something new with TS4, and I think it's essential in some packs (like Seasons !), and greatly improve the general atmosphere. It's not my top priority, but it's still important for me. Most of San Myshuno isn't FX by the way, there's a lot more people involved in the making of a world : building the environment, creating all the assets (models, textures, audio), behaviors of townies, etc.
Visual enjoyment may be 100% valueless to you, but then there was quite a lot of feedback about the look of the environment chipmunk in Granite Falls for example, so some people care a lot about this sort of things I guess. And I don't think hand holding would have added more to the game than FX.
As I said, to each their own. The props don't impress me. Functionless stuff doesn't impress me. I play for the content, and at the end of the day a world that's mostly fake doesn't impress me, or make me want to buy any pack.
Now I know VFX artists aren't the ones who make the worlds. They probably aren't even the ones who decide what goes into a world. I can understand that, but it doesn't change my feelings on how overused decorations are in Sims4.
If someone enjoys backdrops and decorations that offer nothing in the form of gameplay, then by all means rejoice because The Sims 4 is the game for them. There is a whole lot of time and energy spent setting up the look of the worlds, and I personally feel that is wasted time seeing how the majority of every world is unplayable. Others probably don't agree, and that's perfectly acceptable, but the reality for me is that these fake details do not add to the game.
I'm guessing GTA has cars because it's about cars?? There's a lot Sims has that GTA or Fallout don't. But fundamentally, they're different creatures. And all of them are more than a laundry list of objects.
Sims is about simulating life. Cars in most countries are part of daily life. So I don't really follow this argument.
(I do think holding hands is really hard to do in this game by the way, but it would be awesome)
I agree the sims should have cars but I believe what @luthienrising is trying to say is you can't compare the way other games are programed to the sims 4. They are all programed differently and each have a different type of game play. This includes Planet Coaster. Planet Coaster has some very high specs and is playing plum on the highest end computers. Imagine EA created such a game that the highest end computers could not handle it. I suspect steam is issuing a lot of refunds for Planet Coaster. Computers need to be affordable and be able to handle the games they are running. IMO EA should have stuck to the sims 3 engine and we probably would have gotten more game play out of the sims 4.
I'm guessing GTA has cars because it's about cars?? There's a lot Sims has that GTA or Fallout don't. But fundamentally, they're different creatures. And all of them are more than a laundry list of objects.
Sims is about simulating life. Cars in most countries are part of daily life. So I don't really follow this argument.
(I do think holding hands is really hard to do in this game by the way, but it would be awesome)
Sims is about all of life, of which cars are one small part, even if that's daily for some people. There's a difference between being about the full scope of life and being about driving.
EA CREATOR NETWORK MEMBER — Want to be notified of patches, new Broken Mods threads, and urgent Sims 4 news? Follow me at https://www.patreon.com/luthienrising.
I'm guessing GTA has cars because it's about cars?? There's a lot Sims has that GTA or Fallout don't. But fundamentally, they're different creatures. And all of them are more than a laundry list of objects.
I get your point, but in all honesty, The Sims 4 claims to be about the Sims, yet it lacks an integral life stage (the first title to scrap a life stage) as well as significant improvements to the AI. Sure, we have multitasking, but I have difficulty saying it warrants making an entire new iteration with that feature alone.
If it were truly about the Sims themselves, I think we should have seen much more advancements in them. As of right now, it still feels like minor, quality-of-life improvements over anything else.
GTA 5 online even manages to feel more like a Sims game than the dismal Sims 4. Sims 3 proved that sales don't decline if you target a market of higher end computers, and Sims 4 is proving that your sales can decline when you {pretend to} carter for low end computers. BTW planet coaster is running just fine on my comp and I have a pack to the rafters them park running perfectly
Sooooooo.... Basically Maxis/EA cannot afford the engine it would take to make the game more realistic and coincide with today's tech?.... OR they are concerned that not enough people would buy it because they wouldn't be able to afford the PC needed to play it on?
Back when the sims 3 was issued a lot of people could not afford a computer to run the game. PC's have come down in price since then. The average PC to run the sims 3 or 4 desktop $700 USD now. This was a big issue for many since back when the sims 3 was issued you were looking at a few thousand to run the game properly.
The sims 4 was originally olympus an on line game that they switched to PC. The engine is limited. Why they went this route with the game only EA can answer. The requirements are the same for TS3 and 4 only the games are programed differently. If they chose to continue with the same engine as TS3, TS4 might not be as limited.
We get people all the time in tech that want to spend $500 or less for a PC on this game. $500 or less gets you a PC for general use and is not meant to run any PC game that has actual requirements to run. Many dont want to spend the money on a PC but they are willing to drop a lot of money on the game and then find out their PC can't run it. There are a few heavy gamers that also play the sims however majority don't want to buy a gaming PC just to play the sims.
If EA made a game as powerful as coaster planet you would be looking at thousands of dollars on a desk top PC to run the game. Gaming laptops are even more expensive than desktop. Chester has a new top of the line desktop PC and is having issues with Coaster Planet. Imagine what it is doing to lesser PCs .
The Sims 3 was very successful despite its requirements for an expensive gaming PC; so successful it supported the release of 2 EPs a year, something The Sims 4 is unable to do even though it is designed to run on toasters. I don't think, if it is true, that The Sims 4 was designed to run on low spec computers was to increase sales, is working because they'd be releasing more content for it if it was selling well.
I personally knew 2 people who purchased new computers just so they could play The Sims 3 at launch. People will pay a lot of money to play a game they love. Gaming is an expensive hobby and if your computer is not designed to play games, you should not expect them to run on your general purpose machine. The Sims series should not be held back. There will never be innovation and improved A.I. if Maxis do not utilise modern technology. The series will stagnate.
The Sims 4 bought nothing new to the series. The Sims in it could not even react as well as sims in the predecessors until they patched the game a year after release.
If a game wows players, is innovative and has fantastic gameplay, players will upgrade to play it.
My thoughts exactly!!!! For someone to say $40 and $60 is cheap twice a year is trippin... anyhow I KNOW FOR A FACT thousands if not millions of simmers (myself included) would spend ridiculous amounts of money for a game they loved... Hell we've got sports fans who spend thousands to see a game that may last 1-3 hours at most depending on the sport and or if not purchase season tickets... Im sure most would agree, my hobby has no price limitations... plus people will find a way to get what they want. Anyhow, I could go on forever... I hope their issues is personal financial limitations and not because they think we couldn't afford a better PC... That's just ridiculous. I digress
OT - but I wanted to add that I wanted to buy Planet Coaster. So I went looking for videos and checked the requirements. Yeah...looks amazing, but my aging gaming laptop doesn't have the muscles to run it, not at its best. So I decided to finally buy the desktop I've been eyeing for a while. Which reiterates that when someone wants something enough, they do what's necessary for it. I love playing games and I always have to upgrade. And since Nvidia came out with their Pascal architecture, I have been biding my time for a new desktop.
Sooooooo.... Basically Maxis/EA cannot afford the engine it would take to make the game more realistic and coincide with today's tech?.... OR they are concerned that not enough people would buy it because they wouldn't be able to afford the PC needed to play it on?
The definitely can't afford it at this point. While in development, possibly, but not now.
However, the issue is not what they can or can't do. The issue is where they want to spend their money. They choose to hire cheaper FX designers rather than programmers. That's why we have all this lovely scenery and nothing to do with it. This is a fact. One of the guru's stated in an interview before release that the engine was designed in a way that they wouldn't need to hire "expensive engineers" to make changes. (Which is most likely why there is very little added gameplay.) And in another interview a guru stated that the FX designers had so little to do that they literally tried to find things to do. That's why we got such details as the subtle curtains blowing around...but we can't open windows. And this is also why CL has an amazing background and no new real gameplay. It's also why there are no new systems added to the game - like interests or attractions - and everything new is object based interactions. - even groups and clubs are all object or interaction based. Sims don't do things TOGETHER, they do them in tandem. As in...near each other and talking. Those things were already in the game, they just slapped a label on it.
And as for sales...I think their release cycle speaks for itself. Obviously, more people are willing to buy the cheap stuff pack, but not the game packs or the EPs. So basically, they wanted the mobile crowd and they got them. Customers that are not willing to spend all at once, but instead in small bursts. And whether or not they meant to leave their old customers behind, they did. And I bet their bottom line is feeling it. One thing they have always said about this game..."we don't know why people buy The Sims, but they just do". They always expected simmers to buy everything and anything. Well, I think it would have done their marketing department a little service to actually try and understand why. If I was in charge, anyone who said "Olympus" would be fired right now. The Sims was once the only successful title besides sports. It made a steady income for EA. Everyone knows the label. Now it is considered a joke. And I don't mean the laughing with you kind.
mouth just hit the floor.... it's painful to read... I have so many emotions going on right now..... Sad, depressed, ANGRY, and constant looping of 🐸🐸🐸🐸 going on in my head... Sad part, I knew these were the reasons, somehow I thought by now some smart business EA/MAXIS employee would shake the s**t out someone and say hey this ish don't work. This is a piece of plum.
THIS is disgusting
>"This is a fact. One of the guru's stated in an interview before release that the engine was designed in a way that they wouldn't need to hire "expensive engineers" to make changes. (Which is most likely why there is very little added gameplay.) And in another interview a guru stated that the FX designers had so little to do that they literally tried to find things to do. That's why we got such details as the subtle curtains blowing around...but we can't open windows. And this is also why CL has an amazing background and no new real gameplay."
They just sabotaged their rep with that one... Did they take a poll and found out that the SIMMMER population is poor so the decided to adjust?
And yes, I know someone on here said don't compare sims to other games, but how about this ... Lets talk about WW ONLINE Game... FO4, GTA, FINAL FANTASY, Red Dead Redemption (which I plan on buying, the graphics on the new on is out of this frikken world) MINE CRAFT, PS4, XBOX, VR Gaming.... and on and on... PROOOOOOVE!!! people will spend their mortgages to buy, and play what they like.... The dumbest thing ever... Im sick right now...
Sooooooo.... Basically Maxis/EA cannot afford the engine it would take to make the game more realistic and coincide with today's tech?.... OR they are concerned that not enough people would buy it because they wouldn't be able to afford the PC needed to play it on?
Back when the sims 3 was issued a lot of people could not afford a computer to run the game. PC's have come down in price since then. The average PC to run the sims 3 or 4 desktop $700 USD now. This was a big issue for many since back when the sims 3 was issued you were looking at a few thousand to run the game properly.
The sims 4 was originally olympus an on line game that they switched to PC. The engine is limited. Why they went this route with the game only EA can answer. The requirements are the same for TS3 and 4 only the games are programed differently. If they chose to continue with the same engine as TS3, TS4 might not be as limited.
We get people all the time in tech that want to spend $500 or less for a PC on this game. $500 or less gets you a PC for general use and is not meant to run any PC game that has actual requirements to run. Many dont want to spend the money on a PC but they are willing to drop a lot of money on the game and then find out their PC can't run it. There are a few heavy gamers that also play the sims however majority don't want to buy a gaming PC just to play the sims.
If EA made a game as powerful as coaster planet you would be looking at thousands of dollars on a desk top PC to run the game. Gaming laptops are even more expensive than desktop. Chester has a new top of the line desktop PC and is having issues with Coaster Planet. Imagine what it is doing to lesser PCs .
The Sims 3 was very successful despite its requirements for an expensive gaming PC; so successful it supported the release of 2 EPs a year, something The Sims 4 is unable to do even though it is designed to run on toasters. I don't think, if it is true, that The Sims 4 was designed to run on low spec computers was to increase sales, is working because they'd be releasing more content for it if it was selling well.
I personally knew 2 people who purchased new computers just so they could play The Sims 3 at launch. People will pay a lot of money to play a game they love. Gaming is an expensive hobby and if your computer is not designed to play games, you should not expect them to run on your general purpose machine. The Sims series should not be held back. There will never be innovation and improved A.I. if Maxis do not utilise modern technology. The series will stagnate.
The Sims 4 bought nothing new to the series. The Sims in it could not even react as well as sims in the predecessors until they patched the game a year after release.
If a game wows players, is innovative and has fantastic gameplay, players will upgrade to play it.
You know a few people who did. I know many more people who did not buy computer for the sims 3 or did not buy a computer until later when the computers dropped in price. Im one of them. I was not spending thousands of dollars on a computer to play the sims 3. I actually stopped buying the game when the computer I had at the time could not handle the game. I did not buy the rest of the game until I could afford a computer to play it. There is no way I would drop thousands of dollars on a computer for this game since I would rather play most games on console. There are plenty more like me. I do help in tech and the average person (which is a majority) would not spend thousands of dollars on a computer. There are more non PC gamers playing this game than there are heavy gamers that would spend thousands of dollars on a gaming computer. Again we get people all the time in TS3 Tech section stating they are coming back to sims 3 because they can now afford to buy a computer. They will ask what kind of computer they need. We also get newbees and the occasional person who still bought a plum computer and can't run the game.
EA wants to make money. The more people that can play the game, the more sales they make. If the sims 4 does not cater to you, don't play it. I don't play it. Im fine with still playing 2 and 3.
Not tryna be rude here but you gotta admit you personally couldn't vouch for over a billion people world wide... I don't think you can make the statement about what and how many people would buy what... I would need to see some sourcing on your claims about people not spending ridiculous amounts of money on what they really want and go to the ends of the earth to get it... My point? Too many people in the world and with just about everything in our life that is digital you can not make a claim like that with out proof. Even if you knew 100,000 people who made the same choice as you, the math on what you speak still wouldn't add up. Especially when a company who would aimlessly continue to produce a game to consumers they have no idea why they are buying their product but they do anyway... and paying for a game in smaller increments overtime doesn't reduce the price of the hobby one decides to invest in. ijs
Sooooooo.... Basically Maxis/EA cannot afford the engine it would take to make the game more realistic and coincide with today's tech?.... OR they are concerned that not enough people would buy it because they wouldn't be able to afford the PC needed to play it on?
Back when the sims 3 was issued a lot of people could not afford a computer to run the game. PC's have come down in price since then. The average PC to run the sims 3 or 4 desktop $700 USD now. This was a big issue for many since back when the sims 3 was issued you were looking at a few thousand to run the game properly.
The sims 4 was originally olympus an on line game that they switched to PC. The engine is limited. Why they went this route with the game only EA can answer. The requirements are the same for TS3 and 4 only the games are programed differently. If they chose to continue with the same engine as TS3, TS4 might not be as limited.
We get people all the time in tech that want to spend $500 or less for a PC on this game. $500 or less gets you a PC for general use and is not meant to run any PC game that has actual requirements to run. Many dont want to spend the money on a PC but they are willing to drop a lot of money on the game and then find out their PC can't run it. There are a few heavy gamers that also play the sims however majority don't want to buy a gaming PC just to play the sims.
If EA made a game as powerful as coaster planet you would be looking at thousands of dollars on a desk top PC to run the game. Gaming laptops are even more expensive than desktop. Chester has a new top of the line desktop PC and is having issues with Coaster Planet. Imagine what it is doing to lesser PCs .
The Sims 3 was very successful despite its requirements for an expensive gaming PC; so successful it supported the release of 2 EPs a year, something The Sims 4 is unable to do even though it is designed to run on toasters. I don't think, if it is true, that The Sims 4 was designed to run on low spec computers was to increase sales, is working because they'd be releasing more content for it if it was selling well.
I personally knew 2 people who purchased new computers just so they could play The Sims 3 at launch. People will pay a lot of money to play a game they love. Gaming is an expensive hobby and if your computer is not designed to play games, you should not expect them to run on your general purpose machine. The Sims series should not be held back. There will never be innovation and improved A.I. if Maxis do not utilise modern technology. The series will stagnate.
The Sims 4 bought nothing new to the series. The Sims in it could not even react as well as sims in the predecessors until they patched the game a year after release.
If a game wows players, is innovative and has fantastic gameplay, players will upgrade to play it.
You know a few people who did. I know many more people who did not buy computer for the sims 3 or did not buy a computer until later when the computers dropped in price. Im one of them. I was not spending thousands of dollars on a computer to play the sims 3. I actually stopped buying the game when the computer I had at the time could not handle the game. I did not buy the rest of the game until I could afford a computer to play it. There is no way I would drop thousands of dollars on a computer for this game since I would rather play most games on console. There are plenty more like me. I do help in tech and the average person (which is a majority) would not spend thousands of dollars on a computer. There are more non PC gamers playing this game than there are heavy gamers that would spend thousands of dollars on a gaming computer. Again we get people all the time in TS3 Tech section stating they are coming back to sims 3 because they can now afford to buy a computer. They will ask what kind of computer they need. We also get newbees and the occasional person who still bought a plum computer and can't run the game.
EA wants to make money. The more people that can play the game, the more sales they make. If the sims 4 does not cater to you, don't play it. I don't play it. Im fine with still playing 2 and 3.
Not tryna be rude here but you gotta admit you personally couldn't vouch for over a billion people world wide... I don't think you can make the statement about what and how many people would buy what... I would need to see some sourcing on your claims about people not spending ridiculous amounts of money on what they really want and go to the ends of the earth to get it... My point? Too many people in the world and with just about everything in our life that is digital you can not make a claim like that with out proof. Even if you knew 100,000 people who made the same choice as you, the math on what you speak still wouldn't add up. Especially when a company who would aimlessly continue to produce a game to consumers they have no idea why they are buying their product but they do anyway... and paying for a game in smaller increments overtime doesn't reduce the price of the hobby one decides to invest in. ijs
One could say the same for you. Yes you are rude and should not speak for others ( Two People ) .. EA is in the USA. We are in financial crisis but Im not getting into politics here. I can only tell you what I see in tech and so can others that help in tech. Most do not want to spend the money. Same happened with the sims 3. They want to play the game but don't want to or cant afford to buy the hardware to play it even though the game itself is expensive.Some get the game packs for birthdays or holidays as gifts because they can't just go out and buy the game. A lot of people come in tech stating they don't want to spend the money for a gaming computer when all they do is play the sims. The proof is all over the forum if you came into tech to help, or search the forum for every post. Have fun searching
To keep this on topic as I stated in a previous post , You want a sims game like planet coaster? Good luck with that. That game is so poorly optimized it wont play on the highest end of computers. A lot of people having problems with that game. If EA made such a game they would loose a lot of money.
Im sorry you did not get the game you wanted with the sims 4 but no need to take it out on your fellow players. At this point your just baiting so I am done discussing anything with you.
Sooooooo.... Basically Maxis/EA cannot afford the engine it would take to make the game more realistic and coincide with today's tech?.... OR they are concerned that not enough people would buy it because they wouldn't be able to afford the PC needed to play it on?
Back when the sims 3 was issued a lot of people could not afford a computer to run the game. PC's have come down in price since then. The average PC to run the sims 3 or 4 desktop $700 USD now. This was a big issue for many since back when the sims 3 was issued you were looking at a few thousand to run the game properly.
The sims 4 was originally olympus an on line game that they switched to PC. The engine is limited. Why they went this route with the game only EA can answer. The requirements are the same for TS3 and 4 only the games are programed differently. If they chose to continue with the same engine as TS3, TS4 might not be as limited.
We get people all the time in tech that want to spend $500 or less for a PC on this game. $500 or less gets you a PC for general use and is not meant to run any PC game that has actual requirements to run. Many dont want to spend the money on a PC but they are willing to drop a lot of money on the game and then find out their PC can't run it. There are a few heavy gamers that also play the sims however majority don't want to buy a gaming PC just to play the sims.
If EA made a game as powerful as coaster planet you would be looking at thousands of dollars on a desk top PC to run the game. Gaming laptops are even more expensive than desktop. Chester has a new top of the line desktop PC and is having issues with Coaster Planet. Imagine what it is doing to lesser PCs .
The Sims 3 was very successful despite its requirements for an expensive gaming PC; so successful it supported the release of 2 EPs a year, something The Sims 4 is unable to do even though it is designed to run on toasters. I don't think, if it is true, that The Sims 4 was designed to run on low spec computers was to increase sales, is working because they'd be releasing more content for it if it was selling well.
I personally knew 2 people who purchased new computers just so they could play The Sims 3 at launch. People will pay a lot of money to play a game they love. Gaming is an expensive hobby and if your computer is not designed to play games, you should not expect them to run on your general purpose machine. The Sims series should not be held back. There will never be innovation and improved A.I. if Maxis do not utilise modern technology. The series will stagnate.
The Sims 4 bought nothing new to the series. The Sims in it could not even react as well as sims in the predecessors until they patched the game a year after release.
If a game wows players, is innovative and has fantastic gameplay, players will upgrade to play it.
You know a few people who did. I know many more people who did not buy computer for the sims 3 or did not buy a computer until later when the computers dropped in price. Im one of them. I was not spending thousands of dollars on a computer to play the sims 3. I actually stopped buying the game when the computer I had at the time could not handle the game. I did not buy the rest of the game until I could afford a computer to play it. There is no way I would drop thousands of dollars on a computer for this game since I would rather play most games on console. There are plenty more like me. I do help in tech and the average person (which is a majority) would not spend thousands of dollars on a computer. There are more non PC gamers playing this game than there are heavy gamers that would spend thousands of dollars on a gaming computer. Again we get people all the time in TS3 Tech section stating they are coming back to sims 3 because they can now afford to buy a computer. They will ask what kind of computer they need. We also get newbees and the occasional person who still bought a plum computer and can't run the game.
EA wants to make money. The more people that can play the game, the more sales they make. If the sims 4 does not cater to you, don't play it. I don't play it. Im fine with still playing 2 and 3.
Not tryna be rude here but you gotta admit you personally couldn't vouch for over a billion people world wide... I don't think you can make the statement about what and how many people would buy what... I would need to see some sourcing on your claims about people not spending ridiculous amounts of money on what they really want and go to the ends of the earth to get it... My point? Too many people in the world and with just about everything in our life that is digital you can not make a claim like that with out proof. Even if you knew 100,000 people who made the same choice as you, the math on what you speak still wouldn't add up. Especially when a company who would aimlessly continue to produce a game to consumers they have no idea why they are buying their product but they do anyway... and paying for a game in smaller increments overtime doesn't reduce the price of the hobby one decides to invest in. ijs
One could say the same for you. Yes you are rude and should not speak for others ( Two People ) .. EA is in the USA. We are in financial crisis but Im not getting into politics here. I can only tell you what I see in tech and so can others that help in tech. Most do not want to spend the money. Same happened with the sims 3. They want to play the game but don't want to or cant afford to buy the hardware to play it even though the game itself is expensive.Some get the game packs for birthdays or holidays as gifts because they can't just go out and buy the game. A lot of people come in tech stating they don't want to spend the money for a gaming computer when all they do is play the sims. The proof is all over the forum if you came into tech to help, or search the forum for every post. Have fun searching
To keep this on topic as I stated in a previous post , You want a sims game like planet coaster? Good luck with that. That game is so poorly optimized it wont play on the highest end of computers. A lot of people having problems with that game. If EA made such a game they would loose a lot of money.
Im sorry you did not get the game you wanted with the sims 4 but no need to take it out on your fellow players. At this point your just baiting so I am done discussing anything with you.
@phoebebebe13
I was sincere when I said that my goal was not to be rude, and I am sorry you took it that way. In no way am I taking anything out on players I am just expressing the opposite of what you are saying... I do understand that it is impossible to observe the tone of comments on an impersonal platform so I choose not to take offense to what people say to me about my comments, I think it is the cordial thing to do. Anyhow, I see your point, though I still disagree.
Sooooooo.... Basically Maxis/EA cannot afford the engine it would take to make the game more realistic and coincide with today's tech?.... OR they are concerned that not enough people would buy it because they wouldn't be able to afford the PC needed to play it on?
Back when the sims 3 was issued a lot of people could not afford a computer to run the game. PC's have come down in price since then. The average PC to run the sims 3 or 4 desktop $700 USD now. This was a big issue for many since back when the sims 3 was issued you were looking at a few thousand to run the game properly.
The sims 4 was originally olympus an on line game that they switched to PC. The engine is limited. Why they went this route with the game only EA can answer. The requirements are the same for TS3 and 4 only the games are programed differently. If they chose to continue with the same engine as TS3, TS4 might not be as limited.
We get people all the time in tech that want to spend $500 or less for a PC on this game. $500 or less gets you a PC for general use and is not meant to run any PC game that has actual requirements to run. Many dont want to spend the money on a PC but they are willing to drop a lot of money on the game and then find out their PC can't run it. There are a few heavy gamers that also play the sims however majority don't want to buy a gaming PC just to play the sims.
If EA made a game as powerful as coaster planet you would be looking at thousands of dollars on a desk top PC to run the game. Gaming laptops are even more expensive than desktop. Chester has a new top of the line desktop PC and is having issues with Coaster Planet. Imagine what it is doing to lesser PCs .
The Sims 3 was very successful despite its requirements for an expensive gaming PC; so successful it supported the release of 2 EPs a year, something The Sims 4 is unable to do even though it is designed to run on toasters. I don't think, if it is true, that The Sims 4 was designed to run on low spec computers was to increase sales, is working because they'd be releasing more content for it if it was selling well.
I personally knew 2 people who purchased new computers just so they could play The Sims 3 at launch. People will pay a lot of money to play a game they love. Gaming is an expensive hobby and if your computer is not designed to play games, you should not expect them to run on your general purpose machine. The Sims series should not be held back. There will never be innovation and improved A.I. if Maxis do not utilise modern technology. The series will stagnate.
The Sims 4 bought nothing new to the series. The Sims in it could not even react as well as sims in the predecessors until they patched the game a year after release.
If a game wows players, is innovative and has fantastic gameplay, players will upgrade to play it.
You know a few people who did. I know many more people who did not buy computer for the sims 3 or did not buy a computer until later when the computers dropped in price. Im one of them. I was not spending thousands of dollars on a computer to play the sims 3. I actually stopped buying the game when the computer I had at the time could not handle the game. I did not buy the rest of the game until I could afford a computer to play it. There is no way I would drop thousands of dollars on a computer for this game since I would rather play most games on console. There are plenty more like me. I do help in tech and the average person (which is a majority) would not spend thousands of dollars on a computer. There are more non PC gamers playing this game than there are heavy gamers that would spend thousands of dollars on a gaming computer. Again we get people all the time in TS3 Tech section stating they are coming back to sims 3 because they can now afford to buy a computer. They will ask what kind of computer they need. We also get newbees and the occasional person who still bought a plum computer and can't run the game.
EA wants to make money. The more people that can play the game, the more sales they make. If the sims 4 does not cater to you, don't play it. I don't play it. Im fine with still playing 2 and 3.
Not tryna be rude here but you gotta admit you personally couldn't vouch for over a billion people world wide... I don't think you can make the statement about what and how many people would buy what... I would need to see some sourcing on your claims about people not spending ridiculous amounts of money on what they really want and go to the ends of the earth to get it... My point? Too many people in the world and with just about everything in our life that is digital you can not make a claim like that with out proof. Even if you knew 100,000 people who made the same choice as you, the math on what you speak still wouldn't add up. Especially when a company who would aimlessly continue to produce a game to consumers they have no idea why they are buying their product but they do anyway... and paying for a game in smaller increments overtime doesn't reduce the price of the hobby one decides to invest in. ijs
One could say the same for you. Yes you are rude and should not speak for others ( Two People ) .. EA is in the USA. We are in financial crisis but Im not getting into politics here. I can only tell you what I see in tech and so can others that help in tech. Most do not want to spend the money. Same happened with the sims 3. They want to play the game but don't want to or cant afford to buy the hardware to play it even though the game itself is expensive.Some get the game packs for birthdays or holidays as gifts because they can't just go out and buy the game. A lot of people come in tech stating they don't want to spend the money for a gaming computer when all they do is play the sims. The proof is all over the forum if you came into tech to help, or search the forum for every post. Have fun searching
To keep this on topic as I stated in a previous post , You want a sims game like planet coaster? Good luck with that. That game is so poorly optimized it wont play on the highest end of computers. A lot of people having problems with that game. If EA made such a game they would loose a lot of money.
Im sorry you did not get the game you wanted with the sims 4 but no need to take it out on your fellow players. At this point your just baiting so I am done discussing anything with you.
@phoebebebe13
I was sincere when I said that my goal was not to be rude, and I am sorry you took it that way. In no way am I taking anything out on players I am just expressing the opposite of what you are saying... I do understand that it is impossible to observe the tone of comments on an impersonal platform so I choose not to take offense to what people say to me about my comments, I think it is the cordial thing to do. Anyhow, I see your point, though I still disagree.
I can only tell you what I see from helping in tech for both 3 and 4. I do have friends in here that game heavy and ones that don't. The old sims 3 forum, I did have friends and many did leave because they did not have the hardware to run the game. Many were not expecting EA to up their game from sims 2 to 3 but they did. Everyone was use to the sims 1 and 2 running on almost any computer. There also seems to be a lot more kids playing the sims 4 than 3. We have spoken to many of them in tech and tell them to save their money if their budget is $500 or less for a computer. Most parents don't or will not buy a $2000 + computer for their children. You can buy 4 or 5 consoles for that. Most of the people who game on computer and have expensive hardware are the adults. When I got my gaming laptop I would not let my son near it. I bought him a cheap laptop which he destroyed. Taking care of a gaming computer takes a little bit more effort and kids destroy things.
Sooooooo.... Basically Maxis/EA cannot afford the engine it would take to make the game more realistic and coincide with today's tech?.... OR they are concerned that not enough people would buy it because they wouldn't be able to afford the PC needed to play it on?
Back when the sims 3 was issued a lot of people could not afford a computer to run the game. PC's have come down in price since then. The average PC to run the sims 3 or 4 desktop $700 USD now. This was a big issue for many since back when the sims 3 was issued you were looking at a few thousand to run the game properly.
The sims 4 was originally olympus an on line game that they switched to PC. The engine is limited. Why they went this route with the game only EA can answer. The requirements are the same for TS3 and 4 only the games are programed differently. If they chose to continue with the same engine as TS3, TS4 might not be as limited.
We get people all the time in tech that want to spend $500 or less for a PC on this game. $500 or less gets you a PC for general use and is not meant to run any PC game that has actual requirements to run. Many dont want to spend the money on a PC but they are willing to drop a lot of money on the game and then find out their PC can't run it. There are a few heavy gamers that also play the sims however majority don't want to buy a gaming PC just to play the sims.
If EA made a game as powerful as coaster planet you would be looking at thousands of dollars on a desk top PC to run the game. Gaming laptops are even more expensive than desktop. Chester has a new top of the line desktop PC and is having issues with Coaster Planet. Imagine what it is doing to lesser PCs .
The Sims 3 was very successful despite its requirements for an expensive gaming PC; so successful it supported the release of 2 EPs a year, something The Sims 4 is unable to do even though it is designed to run on toasters. I don't think, if it is true, that The Sims 4 was designed to run on low spec computers was to increase sales, is working because they'd be releasing more content for it if it was selling well.
I personally knew 2 people who purchased new computers just so they could play The Sims 3 at launch. People will pay a lot of money to play a game they love. Gaming is an expensive hobby and if your computer is not designed to play games, you should not expect them to run on your general purpose machine. The Sims series should not be held back. There will never be innovation and improved A.I. if Maxis do not utilise modern technology. The series will stagnate.
The Sims 4 bought nothing new to the series. The Sims in it could not even react as well as sims in the predecessors until they patched the game a year after release.
If a game wows players, is innovative and has fantastic gameplay, players will upgrade to play it.
You know a few people who did. I know many more people who did not buy computer for the sims 3 or did not buy a computer until later when the computers dropped in price. Im one of them. I was not spending thousands of dollars on a computer to play the sims 3. I actually stopped buying the game when the computer I had at the time could not handle the game. I did not buy the rest of the game until I could afford a computer to play it. There is no way I would drop thousands of dollars on a computer for this game since I would rather play most games on console. There are plenty more like me. I do help in tech and the average person (which is a majority) would not spend thousands of dollars on a computer. There are more non PC gamers playing this game than there are heavy gamers that would spend thousands of dollars on a gaming computer. Again we get people all the time in TS3 Tech section stating they are coming back to sims 3 because they can now afford to buy a computer. They will ask what kind of computer they need. We also get newbees and the occasional person who still bought a plum computer and can't run the game.
EA wants to make money. The more people that can play the game, the more sales they make. If the sims 4 does not cater to you, don't play it. I don't play it. Im fine with still playing 2 and 3.
Not tryna be rude here but you gotta admit you personally couldn't vouch for over a billion people world wide... I don't think you can make the statement about what and how many people would buy what... I would need to see some sourcing on your claims about people not spending ridiculous amounts of money on what they really want and go to the ends of the earth to get it... My point? Too many people in the world and with just about everything in our life that is digital you can not make a claim like that with out proof. Even if you knew 100,000 people who made the same choice as you, the math on what you speak still wouldn't add up. Especially when a company who would aimlessly continue to produce a game to consumers they have no idea why they are buying their product but they do anyway... and paying for a game in smaller increments overtime doesn't reduce the price of the hobby one decides to invest in. ijs
One could say the same for you. Yes you are rude and should not speak for others ( Two People ) .. EA is in the USA. We are in financial crisis but Im not getting into politics here. I can only tell you what I see in tech and so can others that help in tech. Most do not want to spend the money. Same happened with the sims 3. They want to play the game but don't want to or cant afford to buy the hardware to play it even though the game itself is expensive.Some get the game packs for birthdays or holidays as gifts because they can't just go out and buy the game. A lot of people come in tech stating they don't want to spend the money for a gaming computer when all they do is play the sims. The proof is all over the forum if you came into tech to help, or search the forum for every post. Have fun searching
To keep this on topic as I stated in a previous post , You want a sims game like planet coaster? Good luck with that. That game is so poorly optimized it wont play on the highest end of computers. A lot of people having problems with that game. If EA made such a game they would loose a lot of money.
Im sorry you did not get the game you wanted with the sims 4 but no need to take it out on your fellow players. At this point your just baiting so I am done discussing anything with you.
@phoebebebe13
I was sincere when I said that my goal was not to be rude, and I am sorry you took it that way. In no way am I taking anything out on players I am just expressing the opposite of what you are saying... I do understand that it is impossible to observe the tone of comments on an impersonal platform so I choose not to take offense to what people say to me about my comments, I think it is the cordial thing to do. Anyhow, I see your point, though I still disagree.
I can only tell you what I see from helping in tech for both 3 and 4. I do have friends in here that game heavy and ones that don't. The old sims 3 forum, I did have friends and many did leave because they did not have the hardware to run the game. Many were not expecting EA to up their game from sims 2 to 3 but they did. Everyone was use to the sims 1 and 2 running on almost any computer. There also seems to be a lot more kids playing the sims 4 than 3. We have spoken to many of them in tech and tell them to save their money if their budget is $500 or less for a computer. Most parents don't or will not buy a $2000 + computer for their children. You can buy 4 or 5 consoles for that. Most of the people who game on computer and have expensive hardware are the adults. When I got my gaming laptop I would not let my son near it. I bought him a cheap laptop which he destroyed. Taking care of a gaming computer takes a little bit more effort and kids destroy things.
Your friends are not representative of the whole crowd. The proof, despite the fact that TS3 needed major hardware, it still sold in record breaking numbers. If people are gamers, they will find a way to play. Yes there were some who couldn't, but the game still sold. It sold so well that there was an endless barrage of content released. And people still bought that. Even when it was ridiculously overpriced. Because that game with its innovative design and game changing features was worth it.
I have no clue the real numbers of TS4. What I do know is their release cycle is nowhere near as aggressive and is mostly counterintuitive to the game selling well. They are counting free updates as part of the cycle. Free! What I see is that people who are buying this game are not willing to spend more then a stuff pack and probably prefer just the free content. I think the release cycle speaks to how the game is performing overall. And EA overall does not see The Sims as a viable source of revenue...it doesn't even get a blurb in quarterly earnings calls like it used to. Before release - it's The Sims, it will sell. Now - *crickets
Sooooooo.... Basically Maxis/EA cannot afford the engine it would take to make the game more realistic and coincide with today's tech?.... OR they are concerned that not enough people would buy it because they wouldn't be able to afford the PC needed to play it on?
Back when the sims 3 was issued a lot of people could not afford a computer to run the game. PC's have come down in price since then. The average PC to run the sims 3 or 4 desktop $700 USD now. This was a big issue for many since back when the sims 3 was issued you were looking at a few thousand to run the game properly.
The sims 4 was originally olympus an on line game that they switched to PC. The engine is limited. Why they went this route with the game only EA can answer. The requirements are the same for TS3 and 4 only the games are programed differently. If they chose to continue with the same engine as TS3, TS4 might not be as limited.
We get people all the time in tech that want to spend $500 or less for a PC on this game. $500 or less gets you a PC for general use and is not meant to run any PC game that has actual requirements to run. Many dont want to spend the money on a PC but they are willing to drop a lot of money on the game and then find out their PC can't run it. There are a few heavy gamers that also play the sims however majority don't want to buy a gaming PC just to play the sims.
If EA made a game as powerful as coaster planet you would be looking at thousands of dollars on a desk top PC to run the game. Gaming laptops are even more expensive than desktop. Chester has a new top of the line desktop PC and is having issues with Coaster Planet. Imagine what it is doing to lesser PCs .
The Sims 3 was very successful despite its requirements for an expensive gaming PC; so successful it supported the release of 2 EPs a year, something The Sims 4 is unable to do even though it is designed to run on toasters. I don't think, if it is true, that The Sims 4 was designed to run on low spec computers was to increase sales, is working because they'd be releasing more content for it if it was selling well.
I personally knew 2 people who purchased new computers just so they could play The Sims 3 at launch. People will pay a lot of money to play a game they love. Gaming is an expensive hobby and if your computer is not designed to play games, you should not expect them to run on your general purpose machine. The Sims series should not be held back. There will never be innovation and improved A.I. if Maxis do not utilise modern technology. The series will stagnate.
The Sims 4 bought nothing new to the series. The Sims in it could not even react as well as sims in the predecessors until they patched the game a year after release.
If a game wows players, is innovative and has fantastic gameplay, players will upgrade to play it.
You know a few people who did. I know many more people who did not buy computer for the sims 3 or did not buy a computer until later when the computers dropped in price. Im one of them. I was not spending thousands of dollars on a computer to play the sims 3. I actually stopped buying the game when the computer I had at the time could not handle the game. I did not buy the rest of the game until I could afford a computer to play it. There is no way I would drop thousands of dollars on a computer for this game since I would rather play most games on console. There are plenty more like me. I do help in tech and the average person (which is a majority) would not spend thousands of dollars on a computer. There are more non PC gamers playing this game than there are heavy gamers that would spend thousands of dollars on a gaming computer. Again we get people all the time in TS3 Tech section stating they are coming back to sims 3 because they can now afford to buy a computer. They will ask what kind of computer they need. We also get newbees and the occasional person who still bought a plum computer and can't run the game.
EA wants to make money. The more people that can play the game, the more sales they make. If the sims 4 does not cater to you, don't play it. I don't play it. Im fine with still playing 2 and 3.
Not tryna be rude here but you gotta admit you personally couldn't vouch for over a billion people world wide... I don't think you can make the statement about what and how many people would buy what... I would need to see some sourcing on your claims about people not spending ridiculous amounts of money on what they really want and go to the ends of the earth to get it... My point? Too many people in the world and with just about everything in our life that is digital you can not make a claim like that with out proof. Even if you knew 100,000 people who made the same choice as you, the math on what you speak still wouldn't add up. Especially when a company who would aimlessly continue to produce a game to consumers they have no idea why they are buying their product but they do anyway... and paying for a game in smaller increments overtime doesn't reduce the price of the hobby one decides to invest in. ijs
One could say the same for you. Yes you are rude and should not speak for others ( Two People ) .. EA is in the USA. We are in financial crisis but Im not getting into politics here. I can only tell you what I see in tech and so can others that help in tech. Most do not want to spend the money. Same happened with the sims 3. They want to play the game but don't want to or cant afford to buy the hardware to play it even though the game itself is expensive.Some get the game packs for birthdays or holidays as gifts because they can't just go out and buy the game. A lot of people come in tech stating they don't want to spend the money for a gaming computer when all they do is play the sims. The proof is all over the forum if you came into tech to help, or search the forum for every post. Have fun searching
To keep this on topic as I stated in a previous post , You want a sims game like planet coaster? Good luck with that. That game is so poorly optimized it wont play on the highest end of computers. A lot of people having problems with that game. If EA made such a game they would loose a lot of money.
Im sorry you did not get the game you wanted with the sims 4 but no need to take it out on your fellow players. At this point your just baiting so I am done discussing anything with you.
@phoebebebe13
I was sincere when I said that my goal was not to be rude, and I am sorry you took it that way. In no way am I taking anything out on players I am just expressing the opposite of what you are saying... I do understand that it is impossible to observe the tone of comments on an impersonal platform so I choose not to take offense to what people say to me about my comments, I think it is the cordial thing to do. Anyhow, I see your point, though I still disagree.
I can only tell you what I see from helping in tech for both 3 and 4. I do have friends in here that game heavy and ones that don't. The old sims 3 forum, I did have friends and many did leave because they did not have the hardware to run the game. Many were not expecting EA to up their game from sims 2 to 3 but they did. Everyone was use to the sims 1 and 2 running on almost any computer. There also seems to be a lot more kids playing the sims 4 than 3. We have spoken to many of them in tech and tell them to save their money if their budget is $500 or less for a computer. Most parents don't or will not buy a $2000 + computer for their children. You can buy 4 or 5 consoles for that. Most of the people who game on computer and have expensive hardware are the adults. When I got my gaming laptop I would not let my son near it. I bought him a cheap laptop which he destroyed. Taking care of a gaming computer takes a little bit more effort and kids destroy things.
Your friends are not representative of the whole crowd. The proof, despite the fact that TS3 needed major hardware, it still sold in record breaking numbers. If people are gamers, they will find a way to play. Yes there were some who couldn't, but the game still sold. It sold so well that there was an endless barrage of content released. And people still bought that. Even when it was ridiculously overpriced. Because that game with its innovative design and game changing features was worth it.
I have no clue the real numbers of TS4. What I do know is their release cycle is nowhere near as aggressive and is mostly counterintuitive to the game selling well. They are counting free updates as part of the cycle. Free! What I see is that people who are buying this game are not willing to spend more then a stuff pack and probably prefer just the free content. I think the release cycle speaks to how the game is performing overall. And EA overall does not see The Sims as a viable source of revenue...it doesn't even get a blurb in quarterly earnings calls like it used to. Before release - it's The Sims, it will sell. Now - *crickets
Its not just my friends. I do help in tech and you don't. I feel like a broken record and some of you are taking this thread way off topic and borderline trolling and baiting. Yes the sims 3 sold and still sells however I can tell you how many people in tech still cant play the game because they still buy plum computers that cant run it. There are also many people now buying better computers because they are more affordable and can now afford computers to play the sims 3.Many watch videos to get free sim points. Just because a game sells does not mean it's being played. I bought the sims 4 however I have not bought more for the game and I don't play it. Many more in here like me. Try putting this thread back on topic.
Sorry, but do you realize that the minimum requirements for Sims 4 list technology that is a DECADE old? And if the base game updated no longer works with minimum requirements, I'll go find a lawyer for a class action lawsuit because minimum requirements are a guarantee by Maxis that the game will work as long as your computer meets them. No, you can bet a million dollars that the minimum requirements are still enough to play the base game with updates, because EA/Maxis is literally betting this with each and every update. Should they fail, it'll cost them millions in court.
And yes, today's top-of-the-line tablets have the same or equivalent processing power as the decade old minimum requirement needs. I mean there are low requirements, and then there's the ridiculous tablet level low requirements of the Sims 4, something that is unprecedented for an AAA release. Show me another AAA game with such low requirements.
Sorry, but do you realize that the minimum requirements for Sims 4 list technology that is a DECADE old? And if the base game updated no longer works with minimum requirements, I'll go find a lawyer for a class action lawsuit because minimum requirements are a guarantee by Maxis that the game will work as long as your computer meets them. No, you can bet a million dollars that the minimum requirements are still enough to play the base game with updates, because EA/Maxis is literally betting this with each and every update. Should they fail, it'll cost them millions in court.
And yes, today's top-of-the-line tablets have the same or equivalent processing power as the decade old minimum requirement needs. I mean there are low requirements, and then there's the ridiculous tablet level low requirements of the Sims 4, something that is unprecedented for an AAA release. Show me another AAA game with such low requirements.
And my daughter has TS4 installed on her surface tab so...yeah, it can run on a tablet. She had it installed on there since day 1.
I'm guessing GTA has cars because it's about cars?? There's a lot Sims has that GTA or Fallout don't. But fundamentally, they're different creatures. And all of them are more than a laundry list of objects.
Sims is about simulating life. Cars in most countries are part of daily life. So I don't really follow this argument.
(I do think holding hands is really hard to do in this game by the way, but it would be awesome)
Sims is about all of life, of which cars are one small part, even if that's daily for some people. There's a difference between being about the full scope of life and being about driving.
Not 100% on this, but I believe in Planet Coaster, some people move as groups and are therefore "attached" when walking around. One person in the group turns left, everyone in the group turns left. You could easily match this question of yours with "why can't people in Planet Coaster stop holding hands?" Because aside from when they're on a ride, they're treated as one mobile unit.
Secondly, it's important to realize Planet Coaster has people doing two things: walking and riding rides. As such, of course they focus more attention to this detail. The Sims? Where would they hold hands and walk? All the neighborhoods are really small so it'd be a short trip no matter where you are. Not really worth the effort.
I disagree, you can compare. Sims in 4 often act as a single group in Get Together.
Don't sims walk as a group in Get Together? One turns left, they all turn left.
The same when they group dance. They are not acting as individuals; they are one unit all performing the exact same actions.
Hand-holding in The Sims would be the same as in Planet Coaster, whilst doing it, the two sims would be one mobile unit whilst walking to a particular destination.
I agree that the worlds are so small in 4 it'd be a short trip, but still it'd be a nice feature for a couple to do it randomly now and then. This is the fourth iteration; one would expect it be more nuanced and it is little things like this that woudl make the sims appear more human.
And in response to the bold part, not all npcs in Planet Coaster hold hands, and the ones that do, as far as I am aware, do not do it all the time. There are also family units walking around that have couples holding hands with children not holding anyone's hand at all, yet they all move as one unit. NPCsalso put their arms around each other and can walk whilst doing so.
This is a roller coaster sim. If Maxis were making it, they would have used the excuse that they wanted to focus on the roller coasters themselves and so thought it would be a waste of budget to add complex animations to the random NPCs. It is little details like this that make a game feel more immersive.
Planet Coaster is being praised so much because they have made a solid game that has detail in all areas like a modern game should have. They did not work with the modus operandi of what can we cut like Maxis appear to do with every release, but instead put in what they could to make the game more immersive.
Honestly, who'd've thought they would have gone to that much detail for the NPCs that are often out of focus due to the level of zoom? It just shows the dedication of the company and their developers to make a fantastic game that wows their players.
What have we had in 4 that wows? All we ever get is short cuts, limitations and lack of detail all for a premium price.
I agree that the level of detail in PC is beyond amazing & I think Maxis could really learn from their approach of actually listening to customers & not cutting corners whenever they feel like it for ridiculous reasons like "our engine is so darn unique" (which I'm sure it isn't, but anyway). And the best part is, PC cost me only 27 EUR, so that's about what the TS4 base game costs when it's half off lol. Weird, innit ..
Sooooooo.... Basically Maxis/EA cannot afford the engine it would take to make the game more realistic and coincide with today's tech?.... OR they are concerned that not enough people would buy it because they wouldn't be able to afford the PC needed to play it on?
Back when the sims 3 was issued a lot of people could not afford a computer to run the game. PC's have come down in price since then. The average PC to run the sims 3 or 4 desktop $700 USD now. This was a big issue for many since back when the sims 3 was issued you were looking at a few thousand to run the game properly.
The sims 4 was originally olympus an on line game that they switched to PC. The engine is limited. Why they went this route with the game only EA can answer. The requirements are the same for TS3 and 4 only the games are programed differently. If they chose to continue with the same engine as TS3, TS4 might not be as limited.
We get people all the time in tech that want to spend $500 or less for a PC on this game. $500 or less gets you a PC for general use and is not meant to run any PC game that has actual requirements to run. Many dont want to spend the money on a PC but they are willing to drop a lot of money on the game and then find out their PC can't run it. There are a few heavy gamers that also play the sims however majority don't want to buy a gaming PC just to play the sims.
If EA made a game as powerful as coaster planet you would be looking at thousands of dollars on a desk top PC to run the game. Gaming laptops are even more expensive than desktop. Chester has a new top of the line desktop PC and is having issues with Coaster Planet. Imagine what it is doing to lesser PCs .
The Sims 3 was very successful despite its requirements for an expensive gaming PC; so successful it supported the release of 2 EPs a year, something The Sims 4 is unable to do even though it is designed to run on toasters. I don't think, if it is true, that The Sims 4 was designed to run on low spec computers was to increase sales, is working because they'd be releasing more content for it if it was selling well.
I personally knew 2 people who purchased new computers just so they could play The Sims 3 at launch. People will pay a lot of money to play a game they love. Gaming is an expensive hobby and if your computer is not designed to play games, you should not expect them to run on your general purpose machine. The Sims series should not be held back. There will never be innovation and improved A.I. if Maxis do not utilise modern technology. The series will stagnate.
The Sims 4 bought nothing new to the series. The Sims in it could not even react as well as sims in the predecessors until they patched the game a year after release.
If a game wows players, is innovative and has fantastic gameplay, players will upgrade to play it.
You know a few people who did. I know many more people who did not buy computer for the sims 3 or did not buy a computer until later when the computers dropped in price. Im one of them. I was not spending thousands of dollars on a computer to play the sims 3. I actually stopped buying the game when the computer I had at the time could not handle the game. I did not buy the rest of the game until I could afford a computer to play it. There is no way I would drop thousands of dollars on a computer for this game since I would rather play most games on console. There are plenty more like me. I do help in tech and the average person (which is a majority) would not spend thousands of dollars on a computer. There are more non PC gamers playing this game than there are heavy gamers that would spend thousands of dollars on a gaming computer. Again we get people all the time in TS3 Tech section stating they are coming back to sims 3 because they can now afford to buy a computer. They will ask what kind of computer they need. We also get newbees and the occasional person who still bought a plum computer and can't run the game.
EA wants to make money. The more people that can play the game, the more sales they make. If the sims 4 does not cater to you, don't play it. I don't play it. Im fine with still playing 2 and 3.
Not tryna be rude here but you gotta admit you personally couldn't vouch for over a billion people world wide... I don't think you can make the statement about what and how many people would buy what... I would need to see some sourcing on your claims about people not spending ridiculous amounts of money on what they really want and go to the ends of the earth to get it... My point? Too many people in the world and with just about everything in our life that is digital you can not make a claim like that with out proof. Even if you knew 100,000 people who made the same choice as you, the math on what you speak still wouldn't add up. Especially when a company who would aimlessly continue to produce a game to consumers they have no idea why they are buying their product but they do anyway... and paying for a game in smaller increments overtime doesn't reduce the price of the hobby one decides to invest in. ijs
One could say the same for you. Yes you are rude and should not speak for others ( Two People ) .. EA is in the USA. We are in financial crisis but Im not getting into politics here. I can only tell you what I see in tech and so can others that help in tech. Most do not want to spend the money. Same happened with the sims 3. They want to play the game but don't want to or cant afford to buy the hardware to play it even though the game itself is expensive.Some get the game packs for birthdays or holidays as gifts because they can't just go out and buy the game. A lot of people come in tech stating they don't want to spend the money for a gaming computer when all they do is play the sims. The proof is all over the forum if you came into tech to help, or search the forum for every post. Have fun searching
To keep this on topic as I stated in a previous post , You want a sims game like planet coaster? Good luck with that. That game is so poorly optimized it wont play on the highest end of computers. A lot of people having problems with that game. If EA made such a game they would loose a lot of money.
Im sorry you did not get the game you wanted with the sims 4 but no need to take it out on your fellow players. At this point your just baiting so I am done discussing anything with you.
@phoebebebe13
I was sincere when I said that my goal was not to be rude, and I am sorry you took it that way. In no way am I taking anything out on players I am just expressing the opposite of what you are saying... I do understand that it is impossible to observe the tone of comments on an impersonal platform so I choose not to take offense to what people say to me about my comments, I think it is the cordial thing to do. Anyhow, I see your point, though I still disagree.
I can only tell you what I see from helping in tech for both 3 and 4. I do have friends in here that game heavy and ones that don't. The old sims 3 forum, I did have friends and many did leave because they did not have the hardware to run the game. Many were not expecting EA to up their game from sims 2 to 3 but they did. Everyone was use to the sims 1 and 2 running on almost any computer. There also seems to be a lot more kids playing the sims 4 than 3. We have spoken to many of them in tech and tell them to save their money if their budget is $500 or less for a computer. Most parents don't or will not buy a $2000 + computer for their children. You can buy 4 or 5 consoles for that. Most of the people who game on computer and have expensive hardware are the adults. When I got my gaming laptop I would not let my son near it. I bought him a cheap laptop which he destroyed. Taking care of a gaming computer takes a little bit more effort and kids destroy things.
Your friends are not representative of the whole crowd. The proof, despite the fact that TS3 needed major hardware, it still sold in record breaking numbers. If people are gamers, they will find a way to play. Yes there were some who couldn't, but the game still sold. It sold so well that there was an endless barrage of content released. And people still bought that. Even when it was ridiculously overpriced. Because that game with its innovative design and game changing features was worth it.
I have no clue the real numbers of TS4. What I do know is their release cycle is nowhere near as aggressive and is mostly counterintuitive to the game selling well. They are counting free updates as part of the cycle. Free! What I see is that people who are buying this game are not willing to spend more then a stuff pack and probably prefer just the free content. I think the release cycle speaks to how the game is performing overall. And EA overall does not see The Sims as a viable source of revenue...it doesn't even get a blurb in quarterly earnings calls like it used to. Before release - it's The Sims, it will sell. Now - *crickets
Its not just my friends. I do help in tech and you don't. I feel like a broken record and some of you are taking this thread way off topic and borderline trolling and baiting. Yes the sims 3 sold and still sells however I can tell you how many people in tech still cant play the game because they still buy plum computers that cant run it. There are also many people now buying better computers because they are more affordable and can now afford computers to play the sims 3.Many watch videos to get free sim points. Just because a game sells does not mean it's being played. I bought the sims 4 however I have not bought more for the game and I don't play it. Many more in here like me. Try putting this thread back on topic.
Well, from a business standpoint, it doesn't really matter if people continue to play the game. It matters that they continue to buy for it. And more people proved they were willing to keep buying for TS3 even if they didn't play it. That's why they invested heavily into it. TS4 on the other hand is not being heavily invested in. Which, from a business standpoint, is a telling sign.
I'm guessing GTA has cars because it's about cars?? There's a lot Sims has that GTA or Fallout don't. But fundamentally, they're different creatures. And all of them are more than a laundry list of objects.
Sims is about simulating life. Cars in most countries are part of daily life. So I don't really follow this argument.
(I do think holding hands is really hard to do in this game by the way, but it would be awesome)
I agree the sims should have cars but I believe what @luthienrising is trying to say is you can't compare the way other games are programed to the sims 4. They are all programed differently and each have a different type of game play. This includes Planet Coaster. Planet Coaster has some very high specs and is playing plum on the highest end computers. Imagine EA created such a game that the highest end computers could not handle it. I suspect steam is issuing a lot of refunds for Planet Coaster. Computers need to be affordable and be able to handle the games they are running. IMO EA should have stuck to the sims 3 engine and we probably would have gotten more game play out of the sims 4.
PC runs just fine on my computer, and although it's a very solid gaming computer, it's not the newest of the newest. Also, the patches they release are truly focused on fixing what doesn't work and adding what people want (already so shortly after release) that I'm sure they'll iron out a lot of issues as time goes on. And, actually, most people in the PC communities also have faith in these devs & believe they want to make this playable to anyone owning a gaming computer. What bugs me is that people think their games should run on low-end laptops (not saying you said that though ). It's never been like that. Games are for gaming PC's, if you don't own one, then don't expect to run most games. Even TS4, since CL, doesn't run too well on my laptop anymore (but I have almost no issues on my gaming computer). It's just not possible to make a really, really good game with lots of options & features, a decent amount of simulation, and excellent specs available to just about anyone and any device. And I sincerely hope they'll remember this when they make TS5. And everyone who asks for a refund because a pc game doesn't run on their laptop without solid graphics card, should get their refund & realize that sometimes, you need to spend a little more for quality - especially in the realm of technology. Anyway, just my opinion ...
Comments
I didn't say they hired anyone. I said their work was quick and cheap so they were allowed to do what they wanted. Do you think other departments got so lucky? Probably not.
VFX doesn't add to a game. Sure it might add to the players visual enjoyment, but that is 100% valueless to the game, which is what I paid for. Graham's comments demonstrate the mindset that Maxis has where they can make decorations, tell us how AMAZING they are, and sell us packs full of functionless content. Look @ CL - they went gaga over the world, and most of every neighborhood is set dressing. To each their own I guess, I would prefer some meat on my sandwhich not just a fancy wrapper.
(I do think holding hands is really hard to do in this game by the way, but it would be awesome)
Since you quoted my post about source for hiring, I thought you were answering about that.
We don't know if all FX are quick and cheap. The tram was apparently "very low risk, very low complexity", but some other FX may be more complicated. VFX have always been part of the game, it's not something new with TS4, and I think it's essential in some packs (like Seasons !), and greatly improve the general atmosphere. It's not my top priority, but it's still important for me. Most of San Myshuno isn't FX by the way, there's a lot more people involved in the making of a world : building the environment, creating all the assets (models, textures, audio), behaviors of townies, etc.
Visual enjoyment may be 100% valueless to you, but then there was quite a lot of feedback about the look of the environment chipmunk in Granite Falls for example, so some people care a lot about this sort of things I guess. And I don't think hand holding would have added more to the game than FX.
Semantics again...you deliberately misinterpret and disregard everything after what you decided to counter argue. Unfortunately for you, if semantics is your only talking point...you don't really have one.
Sorry I didn't use the appropriate wording for you, professor of language arts. But considering I'm not getting college credit for this...I really don't care.
I'm providing info, not counter arguing. I've seen you mentionned this rumor of new FX artists several times, I thought you (and other people reading this thread) would be interested in knowing that it's just a false rumor.
As I said, to each their own. The props don't impress me. Functionless stuff doesn't impress me. I play for the content, and at the end of the day a world that's mostly fake doesn't impress me, or make me want to buy any pack.
Now I know VFX artists aren't the ones who make the worlds. They probably aren't even the ones who decide what goes into a world. I can understand that, but it doesn't change my feelings on how overused decorations are in Sims4.
If someone enjoys backdrops and decorations that offer nothing in the form of gameplay, then by all means rejoice because The Sims 4 is the game for them. There is a whole lot of time and energy spent setting up the look of the worlds, and I personally feel that is wasted time seeing how the majority of every world is unplayable. Others probably don't agree, and that's perfectly acceptable, but the reality for me is that these fake details do not add to the game.
I agree the sims should have cars but I believe what @luthienrising is trying to say is you can't compare the way other games are programed to the sims 4. They are all programed differently and each have a different type of game play. This includes Planet Coaster. Planet Coaster has some very high specs and is playing plum on the highest end computers. Imagine EA created such a game that the highest end computers could not handle it. I suspect steam is issuing a lot of refunds for Planet Coaster. Computers need to be affordable and be able to handle the games they are running. IMO EA should have stuck to the sims 3 engine and we probably would have gotten more game play out of the sims 4.
Sims is about all of life, of which cars are one small part, even if that's daily for some people. There's a difference between being about the full scope of life and being about driving.
And that is what this entire series is based off of. TS4 is just Olympus 2.0.
I get your point, but in all honesty, The Sims 4 claims to be about the Sims, yet it lacks an integral life stage (the first title to scrap a life stage) as well as significant improvements to the AI. Sure, we have multitasking, but I have difficulty saying it warrants making an entire new iteration with that feature alone.
If it were truly about the Sims themselves, I think we should have seen much more advancements in them. As of right now, it still feels like minor, quality-of-life improvements over anything else.
My thoughts exactly!!!! For someone to say $40 and $60 is cheap twice a year is trippin... anyhow I KNOW FOR A FACT thousands if not millions of simmers (myself included) would spend ridiculous amounts of money for a game they loved... Hell we've got sports fans who spend thousands to see a game that may last 1-3 hours at most depending on the sport and or if not purchase season tickets... Im sure most would agree, my hobby has no price limitations... plus people will find a way to get what they want. Anyhow, I could go on forever... I hope their issues is personal financial limitations and not because they think we couldn't afford a better PC... That's just ridiculous. I digress
mouth just hit the floor.... it's painful to read... I have so many emotions going on right now..... Sad, depressed, ANGRY, and constant looping of 🐸🐸🐸🐸 going on in my head... Sad part, I knew these were the reasons, somehow I thought by now some smart business EA/MAXIS employee would shake the s**t out someone and say hey this ish don't work. This is a piece of plum.
THIS is disgusting
>"This is a fact. One of the guru's stated in an interview before release that the engine was designed in a way that they wouldn't need to hire "expensive engineers" to make changes. (Which is most likely why there is very little added gameplay.) And in another interview a guru stated that the FX designers had so little to do that they literally tried to find things to do. That's why we got such details as the subtle curtains blowing around...but we can't open windows. And this is also why CL has an amazing background and no new real gameplay."
They just sabotaged their rep with that one... Did they take a poll and found out that the SIMMMER population is poor so the decided to adjust?
And yes, I know someone on here said don't compare sims to other games, but how about this ... Lets talk about WW ONLINE Game... FO4, GTA, FINAL FANTASY, Red Dead Redemption (which I plan on buying, the graphics on the new on is out of this frikken world) MINE CRAFT, PS4, XBOX, VR Gaming.... and on and on... PROOOOOOVE!!! people will spend their mortgages to buy, and play what they like.... The dumbest thing ever... Im sick right now...
Not tryna be rude here but you gotta admit you personally couldn't vouch for over a billion people world wide... I don't think you can make the statement about what and how many people would buy what... I would need to see some sourcing on your claims about people not spending ridiculous amounts of money on what they really want and go to the ends of the earth to get it... My point? Too many people in the world and with just about everything in our life that is digital you can not make a claim like that with out proof. Even if you knew 100,000 people who made the same choice as you, the math on what you speak still wouldn't add up. Especially when a company who would aimlessly continue to produce a game to consumers they have no idea why they are buying their product but they do anyway... and paying for a game in smaller increments overtime doesn't reduce the price of the hobby one decides to invest in. ijs
One could say the same for you. Yes you are rude and should not speak for others ( Two People
To keep this on topic as I stated in a previous post , You want a sims game like planet coaster? Good luck with that. That game is so poorly optimized it wont play on the highest end of computers. A lot of people having problems with that game. If EA made such a game they would loose a lot of money.
Im sorry you did not get the game you wanted with the sims 4 but no need to take it out on your fellow players. At this point your just baiting so I am done discussing anything with you.
@phoebebebe13
I was sincere when I said that my goal was not to be rude, and I am sorry you took it that way. In no way am I taking anything out on players I am just expressing the opposite of what you are saying... I do understand that it is impossible to observe the tone of comments on an impersonal platform so I choose not to take offense to what people say to me about my comments, I think it is the cordial thing to do. Anyhow, I see your point, though I still disagree.
I can only tell you what I see from helping in tech for both 3 and 4. I do have friends in here that game heavy and ones that don't. The old sims 3 forum, I did have friends and many did leave because they did not have the hardware to run the game. Many were not expecting EA to up their game from sims 2 to 3 but they did. Everyone was use to the sims 1 and 2 running on almost any computer. There also seems to be a lot more kids playing the sims 4 than 3. We have spoken to many of them in tech and tell them to save their money if their budget is $500 or less for a computer. Most parents don't or will not buy a $2000 + computer for their children. You can buy 4 or 5 consoles for that. Most of the people who game on computer and have expensive hardware are the adults. When I got my gaming laptop I would not let my son near it. I bought him a cheap laptop which he destroyed. Taking care of a gaming computer takes a little bit more effort and kids destroy things.
Your friends are not representative of the whole crowd. The proof, despite the fact that TS3 needed major hardware, it still sold in record breaking numbers. If people are gamers, they will find a way to play. Yes there were some who couldn't, but the game still sold. It sold so well that there was an endless barrage of content released. And people still bought that. Even when it was ridiculously overpriced. Because that game with its innovative design and game changing features was worth it.
I have no clue the real numbers of TS4. What I do know is their release cycle is nowhere near as aggressive and is mostly counterintuitive to the game selling well. They are counting free updates as part of the cycle. Free! What I see is that people who are buying this game are not willing to spend more then a stuff pack and probably prefer just the free content. I think the release cycle speaks to how the game is performing overall. And EA overall does not see The Sims as a viable source of revenue...it doesn't even get a blurb in quarterly earnings calls like it used to. Before release - it's The Sims, it will sell. Now - *crickets
Its not just my friends. I do help in tech and you don't. I feel like a broken record and some of you are taking this thread way off topic and borderline trolling and baiting. Yes the sims 3 sold and still sells however I can tell you how many people in tech still cant play the game because they still buy plum computers that cant run it. There are also many people now buying better computers because they are more affordable and can now afford computers to play the sims 3.Many watch videos to get free sim points. Just because a game sells does not mean it's being played. I bought the sims 4 however I have not bought more for the game and I don't play it. Many more in here like me. Try putting this thread back on topic.
And yes, today's top-of-the-line tablets have the same or equivalent processing power as the decade old minimum requirement needs. I mean there are low requirements, and then there's the ridiculous tablet level low requirements of the Sims 4, something that is unprecedented for an AAA release. Show me another AAA game with such low requirements.
And my daughter has TS4 installed on her surface tab so...yeah, it can run on a tablet. She had it installed on there since day 1.
I agree that the level of detail in PC is beyond amazing & I think Maxis could really learn from their approach of actually listening to customers & not cutting corners whenever they feel like it for ridiculous reasons like "our engine is so darn unique" (which I'm sure it isn't, but anyway). And the best part is, PC cost me only 27 EUR, so that's about what the TS4 base game costs when it's half off lol. Weird, innit ..
Well, from a business standpoint, it doesn't really matter if people continue to play the game. It matters that they continue to buy for it. And more people proved they were willing to keep buying for TS3 even if they didn't play it. That's why they invested heavily into it. TS4 on the other hand is not being heavily invested in. Which, from a business standpoint, is a telling sign.
PC runs just fine on my computer, and although it's a very solid gaming computer, it's not the newest of the newest. Also, the patches they release are truly focused on fixing what doesn't work and adding what people want (already so shortly after release) that I'm sure they'll iron out a lot of issues as time goes on. And, actually, most people in the PC communities also have faith in these devs & believe they want to make this playable to anyone owning a gaming computer. What bugs me is that people think their games should run on low-end laptops (not saying you said that though