Going to answer your questions in-line: doesn't necessarily mean it "is Olympus." Right?
>Yes, the UI is Olympus. Olympus was never the whole game, it was the UI project that the UI designer showed off on his own website. Because online elements were present in the concept video, people just started associating Olympus with the whole game. In reality, "Icarus" was likely the name of the online elements (this was found on a maxis employee's resume at one point). It's common for corporate environments to section off development teams under different project codenames.
so I'm confused as to what it would have to do with TS4 code and Olympus?
Actually you're spot on, the point is that TSM wasn't in the works back during Olympus. (or maybe it was... but it was a completely separate game either way). The reason it's mentioned is because rumors sprouted up after TSM's launch that "TSM must be Olympus". I'm saying that no, TSM has nothing to do with Olympus.
I was under the impression that large-scale online stuff requires a heck of a lot more than that.
Yes, the stuff in the C++ code are basically scraps of code they didn't bother removing. They aren't hurting anything since they're unused, it's more common than most developers would care to admit. For sake of brevity I didn't go into the Python code in depth because it's fairly common knowledge by now, but if you read my first bullet point you'll see I mention the whole game is designed in a way to support multiplayer (See comment on Protocol Buffers). We have functions like add_client and remove_client, client_manager, etc. These functions are all designed in a way to add multiple players to a single zone. The code has just been adapted for singleplayer, the infrastructure is still very much a multiplayer design. The distributor class is particularly interesting,
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Yeah. It started out as Olympus, built on an Olympus engine. But what is a video game engine? It's not a literal engine. It's a set of tools that can be used to make a game. It's been stated million times that it can be expanded and changed if the need may arise. And it has been tweaked a million times to accommodate for all the features we have now. So the engine is no longer the Olympus engine.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Olympus wasn't the engine, it was/is the UI component. The point of this article wasn't to be hostile about the development decisions but to just give some closure on this long drawn out speculation.
Also while things can be tweaked, it offers insight into how the base of the game came to be. Core functionality can not be easily changed after an entire game has been built off of it.
Or to fit your analogy, If you're born a human, does it mean you're going to be a human forever? Probably.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Yeah. It started out as Olympus, built on an Olympus engine. But what is a video game engine? It's not a literal engine. It's a set of tools that can be used to make a game. It's been stated million times that it can be expanded and changed if the need may arise. And it has been tweaked a million times to accommodate for all the features we have now. So the engine is no longer the Olympus engine.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Because it still limits whether we can have an open district/neighborhood let alone full open world. It makes it more difficult and time consuming if at all even possible. Many would like at least an open neighborhood without having to go to a loading screen when the house next door is literally one step away.
No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 open neighborhood even now. The only thing is that they won't do it, because of a few reasons.
1. Performance impact. The impact on performance would be worse than in sims 3 because Sims 4 doesn't use rabbit holes. The minimum and recommended spec requirements would have to be raised. Some of the players that already own and play the game would be enraged because they would no longer be able to play the game that they payed money for.
2. Price/profit.
Opening neighborhoods would be time consuming and therefore pricy (EA needs to pay their workers for their time, you know). It may not be profitable to them. EA is a pro-profit company. Their first goal is to make money. They would not want to spend on something if it's not going to pay off.
3. It's already too late. Many players actually like close worlds. EA would not want to change something so fundamental this far in the development.
Intel i7-6700HQ; nvidia gtx970m 3 gb; 1tb HHD and 256gb SSD; my drivers are always up to date.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Yeah. It started out as Olympus, built on an Olympus engine. But what is a video game engine? It's not a literal engine. It's a set of tools that can be used to make a game. It's been stated million times that it can be expanded and changed if the need may arise. And it has been tweaked a million times to accommodate for all the features we have now. So the engine is no longer the Olympus engine.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Olympus wasn't the engine, it was/is the UI component. The point of this article wasn't to be hostile about the development decisions but to just give some closure on this long drawn out speculation.
Also while things can be tweaked, it offers insight into how the base of the game came to be. Core functionality can not be easily changed after an entire game has been built off of it.
Or to fit your analogy, If you're born a human, does it mean you're going to be a human forever? Probably.
I know that the point of this thread wasn't to instill hostility. I was replying to people that were blaming Olympus for Sims 4 failures and saying that Sims 4 can't succeed because it was meant to be an online game.
Intel i7-6700HQ; nvidia gtx970m 3 gb; 1tb HHD and 256gb SSD; my drivers are always up to date.
Going to answer your questions in-line: doesn't necessarily mean it "is Olympus." Right?
>Yes, the UI is Olympus. Olympus was never the whole game, it was the UI project that the UI designer showed off on his own website. Because online elements were present in the concept video, people just started associating Olympus with the whole game. In reality, "Icarus" was likely the name of the online elements (this was found on a maxis employee's resume at one point). It's common for corporate environments to section off development teams under different project codenames.
so I'm confused as to what it would have to do with TS4 code and Olympus?
Actually you're spot on, the point is that TSM wasn't in the works back during Olympus. (or maybe it was... but it was a completely separate game either way). The reason it's mentioned is because rumors sprouted up after TSM's launch that "TSM must be Olympus". I'm saying that no, TSM has nothing to do with Olympus.
I was under the impression that large-scale online stuff requires a heck of a lot more than that.
Yes, the stuff in the C++ code are basically scraps of code they didn't bother removing. They aren't hurting anything since they're unused, it's more common than most developers would care to admit. For sake of brevity I didn't go into the Python code in depth because it's fairly common knowledge by now, but if you read my first bullet point you'll see I mention the whole game is designed in a way to support multiplayer (See comment on Protocol Buffers). We have functions like add_client and remove_client, client_manager, etc. These functions are all designed in a way to add multiple players to a single zone. The code has just been adapted for singleplayer, the infrastructure is still very much a multiplayer design. The distributor class is particularly interesting,
Makes sense, but I'm still not clear on this point:
For sake of brevity I didn't go into the Python code in depth because it's fairly common knowledge by now, but if you read my first bullet point you'll see I mention the whole game is designed in a way to support multiplayer (See comment on Protocol Buffers). We have functions like add_client and remove_client, client_manager, etc. These functions are all designed in a way to add multiple players to a single zone. The code has just been adapted for singleplayer, the infrastructure is still very much a multiplayer design. The distributor class is particularly interesting,
Couldn't this also be done in the case of support for co-op? Which, while certainly a kind of online, is not the same as creating a game that is intended to *only* be played online? Cause to me, co-op would make a lot more sense as something they wanted to do, but shelved. It would be something that introduces the series to the concept of playing with others in real-time, without abandoning the single-player structure that the game's dedicated fan base was built on. And it's not as though they've never shelved or put off something that they wanted to include at launch because they didn't have time to finish it; the prevailing theory seems to be that they saw the failure of SimCity on a business level and decided at that point to scrap TS4 from being a completely online game. But we now know that with toddlers, for example, they wanted to get them in pretty much as far back as launch, but were struggling to fit it in.
So I guess what I'm saying is, is this truly case-closed-shut that TS4 couldn't possibly have not been planned as an online-only game? Or just that it was built to support online play? (Big difference there, to me.)
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Yeah. It started out as Olympus, built on an Olympus engine. But what is a video game engine? It's not a literal engine. It's a set of tools that can be used to make a game. It's been stated million times that it can be expanded and changed if the need may arise. And it has been tweaked a million times to accommodate for all the features we have now. So the engine is no longer the Olympus engine.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Olympus wasn't the engine, it was/is the UI component. The point of this article wasn't to be hostile about the development decisions but to just give some closure on this long drawn out speculation.
Also while things can be tweaked, it offers insight into how the base of the game came to be. Core functionality can not be easily changed after an entire game has been built off of it.
Or to fit your analogy, If you're born a human, does it mean you're going to be a human forever? Probably.
I know that the point of this thread wasn't to instill hostility. I was replying to people that were blaming Olympus for Sims 4 failures and saying that Sims 4 can't succeed because it was meant to be an online game.
S.....I.....g.....h......If you read the whole article TwistedMexican wrote for SimsVIP explaining all these things you can understand why TS4 is limited and if you use common sense, considering TS4 is in it's third year, and these games usually go for about four years or 4.5 it stands to reason something may be plausible (but not feasible) or vice versa. Because TS4 was an online MMO it would be a heck of a lot harder to do certain things for this game....never said it wasn't possible just harder.....and the point companies make when deciding is the fact is it feasible....as in money, time, development time, assets, people resources etc. Think on it. Would it be cost effective (that's the bottom line) to create open neighborhood for this left over MMO game (loading screens) when the game is already selling strong the way it is. No. So, you probably aren't going to see open neighborhood unless they run out of other ideas before it ends.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
Going to answer your questions in-line: doesn't necessarily mean it "is Olympus." Right?
>Yes, the UI is Olympus. Olympus was never the whole game, it was the UI project that the UI designer showed off on his own website. Because online elements were present in the concept video, people just started associating Olympus with the whole game. In reality, "Icarus" was likely the name of the online elements (this was found on a maxis employee's resume at one point). It's common for corporate environments to section off development teams under different project codenames.
so I'm confused as to what it would have to do with TS4 code and Olympus?
Actually you're spot on, the point is that TSM wasn't in the works back during Olympus. (or maybe it was... but it was a completely separate game either way). The reason it's mentioned is because rumors sprouted up after TSM's launch that "TSM must be Olympus". I'm saying that no, TSM has nothing to do with Olympus.
I was under the impression that large-scale online stuff requires a heck of a lot more than that.
Yes, the stuff in the C++ code are basically scraps of code they didn't bother removing. They aren't hurting anything since they're unused, it's more common than most developers would care to admit. For sake of brevity I didn't go into the Python code in depth because it's fairly common knowledge by now, but if you read my first bullet point you'll see I mention the whole game is designed in a way to support multiplayer (See comment on Protocol Buffers). We have functions like add_client and remove_client, client_manager, etc. These functions are all designed in a way to add multiple players to a single zone. The code has just been adapted for singleplayer, the infrastructure is still very much a multiplayer design. The distributor class is particularly interesting,
Makes sense, but I'm still not clear on this point:
For sake of brevity I didn't go into the Python code in depth because it's fairly common knowledge by now, but if you read my first bullet point you'll see I mention the whole game is designed in a way to support multiplayer (See comment on Protocol Buffers). We have functions like add_client and remove_client, client_manager, etc. These functions are all designed in a way to add multiple players to a single zone. The code has just been adapted for singleplayer, the infrastructure is still very much a multiplayer design. The distributor class is particularly interesting,
Couldn't this also be done in the case of support for co-op? Which, while certainly a kind of online, is not the same as creating a game that is intended to *only* be played online? Cause to me, co-op would make a lot more sense as something they wanted to do, but shelved. It would be something that introduces the series to the concept of playing with others in real-time, without abandoning the single-player structure that the game's dedicated fan base was built on. And it's not as though they've never shelved or put off something that they wanted to include at launch because they didn't have time to finish it; the prevailing theory seems to be that they saw the failure of SimCity on a business level and decided at that point to scrap TS4 from being a completely online game. But we now know that with toddlers, for example, they wanted to get them in pretty much as far back as launch, but were struggling to fit it in.
So I guess what I'm saying is, is this truly case-closed-shut that TS4 couldn't possibly have not been planned as an online-only game? Or just that it was built to support online play? (Big difference there, to me.)
Co-op requires the same infrastructure as any other multiplayer game.
If you mean co-op only in certain aspects of the game, then no because they whole platform is designed as if it was going to be a server instance for each zone. I haven't said it was always-online, only that it was definitely going to be a multiplayer game. But if we look at SimCity's which was in development at the time, the concept videos, the smaller "neighborhood" components of the worlds, and several of the C++ entries implying you would need to get all updates before you could login, it certainly has the hallmarks of an always-online game.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Because it still limits whether we can have an open district/neighborhood let alone full open world. It makes it more difficult and time consuming if at all even possible. Many would like at least an open neighborhood without having to go to a loading screen when the house next door is literally one step away.
pen No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 oneighborhood even now. T
No, its still Olympus they just made it offline.The reason is limited now. Is because its Olympus it has nothing to do with performance issues sims 3. Because this was never meant to be a sequel or an offline game.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Because it still limits whether we can have an open district/neighborhood let alone full open world. It makes it more difficult and time consuming if at all even possible. Many would like at least an open neighborhood without having to go to a loading screen when the house next door is literally one step away.
pen No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 oneighborhood even now. T
No, its still Olympus they just made it offline.The reason is limited now. Is because its Olympus it has nothing to do with performance issues sims 3. Because this was never meant to be a sequel or an offline game.
And it still isn't a sequel. It's still Olympus. It's still not an offline game. And we'll never get toddlers. And pools are not possible.
I'm done here. Bye.
Intel i7-6700HQ; nvidia gtx970m 3 gb; 1tb HHD and 256gb SSD; my drivers are always up to date.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Because it still limits whether we can have an open district/neighborhood let alone full open world. It makes it more difficult and time consuming if at all even possible. Many would like at least an open neighborhood without having to go to a loading screen when the house next door is literally one step away.
pen No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 oneighborhood even now. T
No, its still Olympus they just made it offline.The reason is limited now. Is because its Olympus it has nothing to do with performance issues sims 3. Because this was never meant to be a sequel or an offline game.
And it still isn't a sequel. It's still Olympus. It's still not an offline game. And we'll never get toddlers. And pools are not possible.
I'm done here. Bye.
Some things won't happen no matter how much we request them. And no pools and no toddlers were explained because they were never planned from the get go. Most things are planned in advance depending on what type engine *singleplayer/offline or MMO in the very first months of designing the engine. Those things were possible, it's harder to see if they could pull open world (no) and CASt out that hat. You really should read what the modder wrote which will reveal the truth.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Because it still limits whether we can have an open district/neighborhood let alone full open world. It makes it more difficult and time consuming if at all even possible. Many would like at least an open neighborhood without having to go to a loading screen when the house next door is literally one step away.
pen No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 oneighborhood even now. T
No, its still Olympus they just made it offline.The reason is limited now. Is because its Olympus it has nothing to do with performance issues sims 3. Because this was never meant to be a sequel or an offline game.
And it still isn't a sequel. It's still Olympus. It's still not an offline game. And we'll never get toddlers. And pools are not possible.
I'm done here. Bye.
Listen I'm not trying to attack or argue with you. I don' think anyone is denying is still is a sequel by name now. The fact the matter is was originally never meant to be a sequel .How it was plan it was still never meant to be a sequel to the sims. I don't know how having toddlers, and pools now don't make it Olympus. It still is Olympus, projects change overtime. Being offline doesn't make it not Olympus anymore.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Because it still limits whether we can have an open district/neighborhood let alone full open world. It makes it more difficult and time consuming if at all even possible. Many would like at least an open neighborhood without having to go to a loading screen when the house next door is literally one step away.
pen No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 oneighborhood even now. T
No, its still Olympus they just made it offline.The reason is limited now. Is because its Olympus it has nothing to do with performance issues sims 3. Because this was never meant to be a sequel or an offline game.
And it still isn't a sequel. It's still Olympus. It's still not an offline game. And we'll never get toddlers. And pools are not possible.
I'm done here. Bye.
Listen I'm not trying to attack or argue with you. I don' think anyone is denying is still is a sequel by name now. The fact the matter is was originally never meant to be a sequel .How it was plan it was still never meant to be a sequel to the sims. I don't know how having toddlers, and pools now don't make it Olympus. It still is Olympus, projects change overtime. Being offline doesn't make it not Olympus anymore.
At the same time I'm not sure that any of that matters outside of trying to get one up on the opposition in the ongoing faction war. The Sims 4 is exactly what it was yesterday and the day before. If you enjoyed it yesterday, then you'll enjoy it today. If you didn't enjoy it yesterday then you won't today either. Its origin changes nothing.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Because it still limits whether we can have an open district/neighborhood let alone full open world. It makes it more difficult and time consuming if at all even possible. Many would like at least an open neighborhood without having to go to a loading screen when the house next door is literally one step away.
pen No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 oneighborhood even now. T
No, its still Olympus they just made it offline.The reason is limited now. Is because its Olympus it has nothing to do with performance issues sims 3. Because this was never meant to be a sequel or an offline game.
And it still isn't a sequel. It's still Olympus. It's still not an offline game. And we'll never get toddlers. And pools are not possible.
I'm done here. Bye.
Listen I'm not trying to attack or argue with you. I don' think anyone is denying is still is a sequel by name now. The fact the matter is was originally never meant to be a sequel .How it was plan it was still never meant to be a sequel to the sims. I don't know how having toddlers, and pools now don't make it Olympus. It still is Olympus, projects change overtime. Being offline doesn't make it not Olympus anymore.
At the same time I'm not sure that any of that matters outside of trying to get one up on the opposition in the ongoing faction war. The Sims 4 is exactly what it was yesterday and the day before. If you enjoyed it yesterday, then you'll enjoy it today. If you didn't enjoy it yesterday then you won't today either. Its origin changes nothing.
Actually, it does change the fact that now we know why it's lacking?
Sims 4 doesn't seem like it is advancing with technology. I would love to see a Sims game that is current with today's technology. I can only dream!
When they announced S4 and simmers had to come to terms with Sims3 ending, I strongly felt that the new game would be more in keeping with technology and that it would try to combine the best of the previous games along with what simmers had requested they wanted if a new game came out. I don't think that even crossed their minds, because I was on S3 forums hot and heavy and I can't remember anything positive about having the Sim game online. They wanted to force it like other games and didn't realize what makes this game different from those you can play online. Some might would like that and in a instance if it was optional, I could see myself playing once in a blue moon, but playing together would always limit what you wanted to do in the game because people don't think, play, or want things the same way.
Personally, I hope Sims4 lasts a while as I've sunk money into it and it feels like almost no content is in it compared to what Sims3 had. I'm not sure I would want to move on to another sims version if open world or great features weren't included. They need to upgrade the requirements. I have an Asus, which I was told was a good gaming computer and it handled a fully fleshed out Sims3 complete with all games and store items. After I took out cc, before Supernatural, I never had any more problems except one time it shut down when I was laying a great deal of black tiles for pavement.
If they do go on to Sims5, I hope they keep the game a individual/private one and that open world returns. I feel like I have nothing to do but finish a list of things to do in S4 and then waiting on screens to change. If the hoods were larger & more like the open worlds of S3 with only screens between each hood, then maybe I could've been a little more satisfied. I knew quiet a long time ago that openness & CASt wouldn't be added, which would've been easier to take if the hoods were open. I've been playing S3 lately and have been running amuck and really controlling the lives of my sims and other sims especially the other sims in my house, literally. I get lost in S3, I don't get lost in playing S4, although there are parts that I really love and consider to be great additions.
Personally, reading all comments above has enlightened me more to what was going on, so I'm glad it was posted.
I would have loved for a multiplayer Sims game. I hope they do this in the future for PC (if there is a future, and not the mobile game which I hope is multiplayer too).
It doesn't change a thing for me in my enjoyment of the game. I just understand better what all the furor was about when it started around this topic. It's not lacking to me as I never wanted those things.. or needed them. I definitely don't want anything that causes lag to be added to the game from the back end.
It might change things for people that are still hoping for those things in this game but frankly I don't think many realistically are. Not for this game anyway. Most have accepted what it is if they were on the fence. It's mostly people that like the game or don't like the game at this point.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Because it still limits whether we can have an open district/neighborhood let alone full open world. It makes it more difficult and time consuming if at all even possible. Many would like at least an open neighborhood without having to go to a loading screen when the house next door is literally one step away.
pen No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 oneighborhood even now. T
No, its still Olympus they just made it offline.The reason is limited now. Is because its Olympus it has nothing to do with performance issues sims 3. Because this was never meant to be a sequel or an offline game.
And it still isn't a sequel. It's still Olympus. It's still not an offline game. And we'll never get toddlers. And pools are not possible.
I'm done here. Bye.
Listen I'm not trying to attack or argue with you. I don' think anyone is denying is still is a sequel by name now. The fact the matter is was originally never meant to be a sequel .How it was plan it was still never meant to be a sequel to the sims. I don't know how having toddlers, and pools now don't make it Olympus. It still is Olympus, projects change overtime. Being offline doesn't make it not Olympus anymore.
At the same time I'm not sure that any of that matters outside of trying to get one up on the opposition in the ongoing faction war. The Sims 4 is exactly what it was yesterday and the day before. If you enjoyed it yesterday, then you'll enjoy it today. If you didn't enjoy it yesterday then you won't today either. Its origin changes nothing.
Actually, it does change the fact that now we know why it's lacking?
Does it? Is it lacking? It hasn't changed my mind. Hasn't changed the mind of many, many others. All that it has done is give ammunition on the forums.
Why do people care what the game had started out to be? I, personally, care more about what the game has become and is becoming.
Because you were born a baby, does it mean you're going to stay a baby forever? No.
Same here. Sims 4 is no longer Olympus. Let it go.
Because it still limits whether we can have an open district/neighborhood let alone full open world. It makes it more difficult and time consuming if at all even possible. Many would like at least an open neighborhood without having to go to a loading screen when the house next door is literally one step away.
pen No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 oneighborhood even now. T
No, its still Olympus they just made it offline.The reason is limited now. Is because its Olympus it has nothing to do with performance issues sims 3. Because this was never meant to be a sequel or an offline game.
And it still isn't a sequel. It's still Olympus. It's still not an offline game. And we'll never get toddlers. And pools are not possible.
I'm done here. Bye.
Listen I'm not trying to attack or argue with you. I don' think anyone is denying is still is a sequel by name now. The fact the matter is was originally never meant to be a sequel .How it was plan it was still never meant to be a sequel to the sims. I don't know how having toddlers, and pools now don't make it Olympus. It still is Olympus, projects change overtime. Being offline doesn't make it not Olympus anymore.
At the same time I'm not sure that any of that matters outside of trying to get one up on the opposition in the ongoing faction war. The Sims 4 is exactly what it was yesterday and the day before. If you enjoyed it yesterday, then you'll enjoy it today. If you didn't enjoy it yesterday then you won't today either. Its origin changes nothing.
Actually, it does change the fact that now we know why it's lacking?
Does it? Is it lacking? It hasn't changed my mind. Hasn't changed the mind of many, many others. All that it has done is give ammunition on the forums.
In comparison to other sims games, it's lacking. It doesn't feel like a sequel to the early sim games. If you enjoy it good for you. Glad that people like the game. The game is better now, and getting better. It just sad that s its potential got completely ruin. Because is Olympus, to me hey should have just made a sequel from scratch. Instead of trying to make Olympus into a sequel.I guess the confirmation to me is a form of closer.
The Sims 4 isn't Olympus. Olympus was an online sims game that was being developed by EA Brightlight but EA Brightlight died so it was passed on to the sims studio; they were going to premiere it in 2013 but because of SimsCity awful launch it was canned. The Sims 4 when it was in development was called Icarus not Olympus.
The Sims 4 isn't Olympus. Olympus was an online sims game that was being developed by EA Brightlight but EA Brightlight died so it was passed on to the sims studio; they were going to premiere it in 2013 but because of SimsCity awful launch it was canned. The Sims 4 when it was in development was called Icarus not Olympus.
You should read the article. The person found the online code in the game.
The Sims 4 isn't Olympus. Olympus was an online sims game that was being developed by EA Brightlight but EA Brightlight died so it was passed on to the sims studio; they were going to premiere it in 2013 but because of SimsCity awful launch it was canned. The Sims 4 when it was in development was called Icarus not Olympus. [/qu
The Sims 4 isn't Olympus. Olympus was an online sims game that was being developed by EA Brightlight but EA Brightlight died so it was passed on to the sims studio; they were going to premiere it in 2013 but because of SimsCity awful launch it was canned. The Sims 4 when it was in development was called Icarus not Olympus.
You should read the article they found the Olympus code in the game.
I don't need to read it.. they most likely reused old assets from Olympus which was canned.
The Sims 4 isn't Olympus. Olympus was an online sims game that was being developed by EA Brightlight but EA Brightlight died so it was passed on to the sims studio; they were going to premiere it in 2013 but because of SimsCity awful launch it was canned. The Sims 4 when it was in development was called Icarus not Olympus.
I don't need to read it.. they most likely reused old assets from Olympus which was canned. [/quote]
But they found the code in the game. This is not talking about why Olympus was can. (I was skeptical too)It is instead showing evidence in the game files.
Comments
Going to answer your questions in-line:
doesn't necessarily mean it "is Olympus." Right?
>Yes, the UI is Olympus. Olympus was never the whole game, it was the UI project that the UI designer showed off on his own website. Because online elements were present in the concept video, people just started associating Olympus with the whole game. In reality, "Icarus" was likely the name of the online elements (this was found on a maxis employee's resume at one point). It's common for corporate environments to section off development teams under different project codenames.
so I'm confused as to what it would have to do with TS4 code and Olympus?
Actually you're spot on, the point is that TSM wasn't in the works back during Olympus. (or maybe it was... but it was a completely separate game either way). The reason it's mentioned is because rumors sprouted up after TSM's launch that "TSM must be Olympus". I'm saying that no, TSM has nothing to do with Olympus.
I was under the impression that large-scale online stuff requires a heck of a lot more than that.
Yes, the stuff in the C++ code are basically scraps of code they didn't bother removing. They aren't hurting anything since they're unused, it's more common than most developers would care to admit. For sake of brevity I didn't go into the Python code in depth because it's fairly common knowledge by now, but if you read my first bullet point you'll see I mention the whole game is designed in a way to support multiplayer (See comment on Protocol Buffers). We have functions like add_client and remove_client, client_manager, etc. These functions are all designed in a way to add multiple players to a single zone. The code has just been adapted for singleplayer, the infrastructure is still very much a multiplayer design. The distributor class is particularly interesting,
Olympus wasn't the engine, it was/is the UI component. The point of this article wasn't to be hostile about the development decisions but to just give some closure on this long drawn out speculation.
Also while things can be tweaked, it offers insight into how the base of the game came to be. Core functionality can not be easily changed after an entire game has been built off of it.
Or to fit your analogy, If you're born a human, does it mean you're going to be a human forever? Probably.
No it does not. The decision to close worlds was made to avoid all the horrible lagging that Sims 3 had. If they wanted to, they could make sims 4 open neighborhood even now. The only thing is that they won't do it, because of a few reasons.
1. Performance impact. The impact on performance would be worse than in sims 3 because Sims 4 doesn't use rabbit holes. The minimum and recommended spec requirements would have to be raised. Some of the players that already own and play the game would be enraged because they would no longer be able to play the game that they payed money for.
2. Price/profit.
Opening neighborhoods would be time consuming and therefore pricy (EA needs to pay their workers for their time, you know). It may not be profitable to them. EA is a pro-profit company. Their first goal is to make money. They would not want to spend on something if it's not going to pay off.
3. It's already too late. Many players actually like close worlds. EA would not want to change something so fundamental this far in the development.
I know that the point of this thread wasn't to instill hostility. I was replying to people that were blaming Olympus for Sims 4 failures and saying that Sims 4 can't succeed because it was meant to be an online game.
Couldn't this also be done in the case of support for co-op? Which, while certainly a kind of online, is not the same as creating a game that is intended to *only* be played online? Cause to me, co-op would make a lot more sense as something they wanted to do, but shelved. It would be something that introduces the series to the concept of playing with others in real-time, without abandoning the single-player structure that the game's dedicated fan base was built on. And it's not as though they've never shelved or put off something that they wanted to include at launch because they didn't have time to finish it; the prevailing theory seems to be that they saw the failure of SimCity on a business level and decided at that point to scrap TS4 from being a completely online game. But we now know that with toddlers, for example, they wanted to get them in pretty much as far back as launch, but were struggling to fit it in.
So I guess what I'm saying is, is this truly case-closed-shut that TS4 couldn't possibly have not been planned as an online-only game? Or just that it was built to support online play? (Big difference there, to me.)
S.....I.....g.....h......If you read the whole article TwistedMexican wrote for SimsVIP explaining all these things you can understand why TS4 is limited and if you use common sense, considering TS4 is in it's third year, and these games usually go for about four years or 4.5 it stands to reason something may be plausible (but not feasible) or vice versa. Because TS4 was an online MMO it would be a heck of a lot harder to do certain things for this game....never said it wasn't possible just harder.....and the point companies make when deciding is the fact is it feasible....as in money, time, development time, assets, people resources etc. Think on it. Would it be cost effective (that's the bottom line) to create open neighborhood for this left over MMO game (loading screens) when the game is already selling strong the way it is. No. So, you probably aren't going to see open neighborhood unless they run out of other ideas before it ends.
You can change a Sims clothes but as in this case, you cannot change a game's code.
Co-op requires the same infrastructure as any other multiplayer game.
If you mean co-op only in certain aspects of the game, then no because they whole platform is designed as if it was going to be a server instance for each zone. I haven't said it was always-online, only that it was definitely going to be a multiplayer game. But if we look at SimCity's which was in development at the time, the concept videos, the smaller "neighborhood" components of the worlds, and several of the C++ entries implying you would need to get all updates before you could login, it certainly has the hallmarks of an always-online game.
No, its still Olympus they just made it offline.The reason is limited now. Is because its Olympus it has nothing to do with performance issues sims 3. Because this was never meant to be a sequel or an offline game.
I mean you can, but no game company is going to spend time restructuring core features when they have a roadmap for DLC to work on instead
And it still isn't a sequel. It's still Olympus. It's still not an offline game. And we'll never get toddlers. And pools are not possible.
I'm done here. Bye.
Some things won't happen no matter how much we request them. And no pools and no toddlers were explained because they were never planned from the get go. Most things are planned in advance depending on what type engine *singleplayer/offline or MMO in the very first months of designing the engine. Those things were possible, it's harder to see if they could pull open world (no) and CASt out that hat. You really should read what the modder wrote which will reveal the truth.
At the same time I'm not sure that any of that matters outside of trying to get one up on the opposition in the ongoing faction war. The Sims 4 is exactly what it was yesterday and the day before. If you enjoyed it yesterday, then you'll enjoy it today. If you didn't enjoy it yesterday then you won't today either. Its origin changes nothing.
Actually, it does change the fact that now we know why it's lacking?
When they announced S4 and simmers had to come to terms with Sims3 ending, I strongly felt that the new game would be more in keeping with technology and that it would try to combine the best of the previous games along with what simmers had requested they wanted if a new game came out. I don't think that even crossed their minds, because I was on S3 forums hot and heavy and I can't remember anything positive about having the Sim game online. They wanted to force it like other games and didn't realize what makes this game different from those you can play online. Some might would like that and in a instance if it was optional, I could see myself playing once in a blue moon, but playing together would always limit what you wanted to do in the game because people don't think, play, or want things the same way.
Personally, I hope Sims4 lasts a while as I've sunk money into it and it feels like almost no content is in it compared to what Sims3 had. I'm not sure I would want to move on to another sims version if open world or great features weren't included. They need to upgrade the requirements. I have an Asus, which I was told was a good gaming computer and it handled a fully fleshed out Sims3 complete with all games and store items. After I took out cc, before Supernatural, I never had any more problems except one time it shut down when I was laying a great deal of black tiles for pavement.
If they do go on to Sims5, I hope they keep the game a individual/private one and that open world returns. I feel like I have nothing to do but finish a list of things to do in S4 and then waiting on screens to change. If the hoods were larger & more like the open worlds of S3 with only screens between each hood, then maybe I could've been a little more satisfied. I knew quiet a long time ago that openness & CASt wouldn't be added, which would've been easier to take if the hoods were open. I've been playing S3 lately and have been running amuck and really controlling the lives of my sims and other sims especially the other sims in my house, literally. I get lost in S3, I don't get lost in playing S4, although there are parts that I really love and consider to be great additions.
Personally, reading all comments above has enlightened me more to what was going on, so I'm glad it was posted.
It might change things for people that are still hoping for those things in this game but frankly I don't think many realistically are. Not for this game anyway. Most have accepted what it is if they were on the fence. It's mostly people that like the game or don't like the game at this point.
Does it? Is it lacking? It hasn't changed my mind. Hasn't changed the mind of many, many others. All that it has done is give ammunition on the forums.
In comparison to other sims games, it's lacking. It doesn't feel like a sequel to the early sim games. If you enjoy it good for you. Glad that people like the game. The game is better now, and getting better. It just sad that s its potential got completely ruin. Because is Olympus, to me hey should have just made a sequel from scratch. Instead of trying to make Olympus into a sequel.I guess the confirmation to me is a form of closer.
.
You should read the article. The person found the online code in the game.
Knew someone would say this
I don't need to read it.. they most likely reused old assets from Olympus which was canned. [/quote]
But they found the code in the game. This is not talking about why Olympus was can. (I was skeptical too)It is instead showing evidence in the game files.