January 15 - Is everyone ready for the Friday Highlights? Check them out here.
Welcome to all new Simmers joining us over the holiday season! 🎉 Have fun on the forum and please make sure you check out the forum rules and
the rules about necroposting.
December 22 - It's the time of year again: Join the 12 Days of Simsmas! 🎄

Del Sol Valley was small on purpose

Comments

  • ReksohReksoh Posts: 303 Member
    Right on! I can't help but wonder what the game would be like if it was done by folks from anywhere but California.

    What do you mean by this?
  • Charlotta11Charlotta11 Posts: 341 Member
    Hmmh so they made that world smaller because otherwise computers may not handle it and all the future expansions. So we have to buy them at full price just to get less. 3 years to come and does that just mean that they will make less in every pack. I mean they are already lacking. If that was just excuse from simgurus then it was really bad excuse but if that was real thing than im worried about sims 4 future. Im not paying more just to get less so peoples computers can handle it better. That is ridiculous!
    I was so exited about that world just to get disappointed, That world just look so empty and i cant really build much in that world. That's a shame. I really did not expect that world to be that small. Idk i was happy when they said that sims 4 will continue at least 3 more years but i think i change my mind now.
    11.3.2019_1.06.18.png
  • InfraGreenInfraGreen Posts: 6,454 Member
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    Clearly open world was the issue.

    No 32 bit was the issue in Sims 3 - it was starved for ram. The number 1 error in that game is Error 12 which one gets when the pc runs out of ram. But Sims 4 is a 64 bit game -not 32 bit like Sims 3. It has all and can utilize all the ram your pc can give it. My pc can have up to 32 gigs of ram. I run 16 right now but I could easily update to 32 gig if I wanted to. It is no point as this game does not even come close to using 16 gigs.

    And if there is a performance issue in a 64 bit game - they really have to find another culprit in this closed world then lots and sims as it is definitely not that. Sims 2 could have up to 4600 sims and tons of lots on a 32 bit game ran on pcs people have not used in years. Who are they kidding?

    Man I am so tired of the "open world killed TS3 and nothing else" canard. In fact everything will bog down bad programming and a 32 bit structure. And the one thing TS4 has going for it right now is smooth running for almost everyone aside from extreme outliers. They clearly haven't used their limit and I can't see how they'd even approach it in the next three years.
    A thousand bared teeth, a thousand bowed heads

    outrun / blog / tunglr
  • Pamtastic72Pamtastic72 Posts: 3,086 Member
    Me as soon as I saw the map:
    giphy.gif

    Thank's for making me laugh even when I'm angry as hell. :smiley:

    I pre-ordered. I feel completely duped. Because has I not been so stupid I would have waited for it to go on sale. They hit it so far out of the park with seasons I stupidly assumed this would live up to that. I will never pre-order again.
  • PinkPaws66PinkPaws66 Posts: 695 Member
    There are some completely unnecessary comments in this thread.
  • Sk8rblazeSk8rblaze Posts: 7,431 Member
    Me as soon as I saw the map:
    giphy.gif

    Thank's for making me laugh even when I'm angry as hell. :smiley:

    I pre-ordered. I feel completely duped. Because has I not been so stupid I would have waited for it to go on sale. They hit it so far out of the park with seasons I stupidly assumed this would live up to that. I will never pre-order again.

    You can likely contact an EA rep to cancel your preorder. AFAIK, they aren't a locked in deal.
  • xamira99xamira99 Posts: 3,204 Member
    NoTalent wrote: »
    My annoyances comes purely for expectations. When there was no world for Seasons, I was like, ‘Okay, the next world for the next Expansion Pack will be huge!’ I’m not too sure what I expected, but the map that was showcased was not it. I expected a sprawling map with cheaper houses, medium houses, and a hillside area with mansions that were, well, more than three! Three mansions in a pack about being a celebrity! Are you seriously having a laugh right now? Bridgeport was the perfect map and that was what I was expecting in return, perhaps a little less massive, but still good.

    Half the map is so pointless. I mean, pat yourselves on the back for beautiful art – not being sarcastic. The world is beautiful – but that took away from the rest of the world. Sure, it adds a small sense of realism when you’re at home and can see other houses tightly packed together, but where are the lots? Seriously. How am I meant to have an immersive experience when there’s three mansions?

    I don’t want all these little parks, hidden spots, and other bits that I will never visit because I will never be on the map because it’s so hilariously small. What an absolute joke. I want to see houses, real houses, everywhere, sprawling manors in the hills, lots on a slope (like the house from Bridgeport – I forgot the family name – and things like that. Not a bunch of wasted decorative space.

    And then I see a tweet about technical limitations. Okay, okay, okay. That’s a joke as other worlds should not be loaded unless you are there. That was the point of load screens, to cut down on the number of things rendered. What’s the next EP going to have? One house lot, one gym? Laughable. That tweet just showed me how unoptimised the game is if that’s your go-to excuse.

    So lucky the gameplay looks perfect or I'd be setting things on fire.

    This. Couldn't agree more.
    And now here is my secret, a very simple secret...
    giphy.gif
    Shhhhhh... I play vanilla
    OID:xamira99
  • Sid1701D9Sid1701D9 Posts: 4,718 Member
    edited October 2018
    Lets see its most likely Windingburg, but with a bunch of shell houses, because heaven forbit the computers can't handle this game. I am sorry this game looks like a child draw the neighborhoods.
    Sid1701d-"I love my life, live my life and live to play, laugh and have fun."

    "Love will Fight, Love will Win and Love will Survive."
  • Writin_RegWritin_Reg Posts: 28,907 Member
    InfraGreen wrote: »
    Writin_Reg wrote: »
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    Clearly open world was the issue.

    No 32 bit was the issue in Sims 3 - it was starved for ram. The number 1 error in that game is Error 12 which one gets when the pc runs out of ram. But Sims 4 is a 64 bit game -not 32 bit like Sims 3. It has all and can utilize all the ram your pc can give it. My pc can have up to 32 gigs of ram. I run 16 right now but I could easily update to 32 gig if I wanted to. It is no point as this game does not even come close to using 16 gigs.

    And if there is a performance issue in a 64 bit game - they really have to find another culprit in this closed world then lots and sims as it is definitely not that. Sims 2 could have up to 4600 sims and tons of lots on a 32 bit game ran on pcs people have not used in years. Who are they kidding?

    Man I am so tired of the "open world killed TS3 and nothing else" canard. In fact everything will bog down bad programming and a 32 bit structure. And the one thing TS4 has going for it right now is smooth running for almost everyone aside from extreme outliers. They clearly haven't used their limit and I can't see how they'd even approach it in the next three years.

    EXACTLY!

    "Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.

    In dreams - I LIVE!
    In REALITY, I simply exist.....

  • ThalmorThalmor Posts: 52 Member
    From the beginning of TS4 they've sacrificed much in terms of gameplay for "better performance." I think it's overkill, I understand that they want to appeal to the lower end PC users, but it's frustrating that in order to do so they have to take steps backwards from the previous sims games. I just hope that (if) Sims 5 is released they tailor it less to low-end PCs, and instead give us full and complete content.
  • JC1979JC1979 Posts: 484 Member
    edited October 2018
    Tiarella wrote: »
    @Sid1701D9: I assume they have hard data on what their customers' computers can do, unlike you or me.

    I don't buy their excuse; I believe that $$$ is what is driving their decision. ('Want more lots? Buy more packs.')

    But I'd be careful about talking about how most people have i5 computers or higher, because that's likely to be pretty irritating to all the simmers reading this who do not. Assumptions related to how much money people have (directly ties into what kind of computing power you have) are awkward at best. :)

    I think the same, they needed something before the holidays to drive sales. In another post it was stating that it was a supposed “leak” with Get Famous, seems more like a ploy to gain revenue. Because a leak wouldnt come with full page article from Newsweek on the same day of acknowledgement. That’s probably also why it looks so lackingly put together.
  • slydog857slydog857 Posts: 68 Member
    There's a lot of people here making the assumptions that 'Smaller Worlds to reduce FPS drops, and improve performance is an invalid excuse' and I agree, but not entirely. Yes, it would help performance, we all have to admit it would improve performance, however, the fact that this game had performance issues IN THE FIRST PLACE is the problem, the fact stated above is true but what's also true is that this game performances well under average, and the people who said they are catering for lower-end hardware are 100% on the ball. A lower-end machine will statically preform better in this game to a certain degree. I have an i7-7700K, GTX 1080, 16GB and I still get performance issues in some worlds. There is one big problem and one simple answer/explanation to this:

    It's 2014, and the sims team thought the best idea moving forward for CPU optimisation in this brand new game is to LIMIT the game to 2 CPU Cores, which was absurd for any game after 2011, to be honest. This was the worst development choice the company could have made, and for people who think the game has multi-core support, yes it does, but it still only uses 2 physical cores. Name 10 people who still use Dual-Core processors.

    This then creates my problem, only 50% of my CPU is being utilised, I get performance issues, because the game doesn't use the entirety of a system! Too late to fix this now as it was part of the base code.

    So, I appreciate smaller worlds to combat this, but they created the problem in the first place is what I'm saying.
    Want to fix fps drops in City Living? We should build a wall around a lot to stop visuals behind it ruining our FPS!
    Specs:
    i7-7700K @ 4.2GHz
    Gigabyte G1 Gaming Edition: GTX 1080 8GB
    16GB RAM
    2 x 1TB HDD - Toshiba @ 7200 Rpm

    maxresdefault.jpg
  • Jordan061102Jordan061102 Posts: 3,651 Member
    They just keep coming up with excuses for ripping off fans... when Sims 4 was announced, didn't they specifically say the game's engine was designed to work better on older computers? lol Now suddenly performance is becoming an issue? When will the lies stop!?

    Honestly, I wish they would just admit that 'Get Famous' was originally created to be a game pack, but EA decided to make it an expansion pack because it would be more profitable. That honestly sounds A LOT more believable than the excuses they're telling us.

    Amazing. I'm sure the real reason is this!
    Lu4ERme.gif
  • Sigzy05Sigzy05 Posts: 19,032 Member
    edited October 2018
    Sigzy05 wrote: »
    Clearly open world was the issue.

    No 32 bit was the issue in Sims 3 - it was starved for ram. The number 1 error in that game is Error 12 which one gets when the pc runs out of ram. But Sims 4 is a 64 bit game -not 32 bit like Sims 3. It has all and can utilize all the ram your pc can give it. My pc can have up to 32 gigs of ram. I run 16 right now but I could easily update to 32 gig if I wanted to. It is no point as this game does not even come close to using 16 gigs.

    And if there is a performance issue in a 64 bit game - they really have to find another culprit in this closed world then lots and sims as it is definitely not that. Sims 2 could have up to 4600 sims and tons of lots on a 32 bit game ran on pcs people have not used in years. Who are they kidding?

    You know, I was being sarcastic ahaha

    I completely agree with you.
    vvT0gUf.jpg?1
  • Writin_RegWritin_Reg Posts: 28,907 Member
    edited October 2018
    slydog857 wrote: »
    There's a lot of people here making the assumptions that 'Smaller Worlds to reduce FPS drops, and improve performance is an invalid excuse' and I agree, but not entirely. Yes, it would help performance, we all have to admit it would improve performance, however, the fact that this game had performance issues IN THE FIRST PLACE is the problem, the fact stated above is true but what's also true is that this game performances well under average, and the people who said they are catering for lower-end hardware are 100% on the ball. A lower-end machine will statically preform better in this game to a certain degree. I have an i7-7700K, GTX 1080, 16GB and I still get performance issues in some worlds. There is one big problem and one simple answer/explanation to this:

    It's 2014, and the sims team thought the best idea moving forward for CPU optimisation in this brand new game is to LIMIT the game to 2 CPU Cores, which was absurd for any game after 2011, to be honest. This was the worst development choice the company could have made, and for people who think the game has multi-core support, yes it does, but it still only uses 2 physical cores. Name 10 people who still use Dual-Core processors.

    This then creates my problem, only 50% of my CPU is being utilised, I get performance issues, because the game doesn't use the entirety of a system! Too late to fix this now as it was part of the base code.

    So, I appreciate smaller worlds to combat this, but they created the problem in the first place is what I'm saying.

    Disagree with the overall statement in the fact the game was 32 bit when it came out and they overhauled it to 64 bit before Cats and Dogs came out - so any performance issues should by all rights have gone bye-bye.

    Tell that to people who do not know how gaming, pcs and programming works - they will believe you, but don't say that to people who do know better. That is bogus assumption in a 64 bit game on the scale of the Sims.

    "Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.

    In dreams - I LIVE!
    In REALITY, I simply exist.....

  • MidnightAuraMidnightAura Posts: 5,712 Member
    Me as soon as I saw the map:
    giphy.gif

    Thank's for making me laugh even when I'm angry as hell. :smiley:

    I pre-ordered. I feel completely duped. Because has I not been so stupid I would have waited for it to go on sale. They hit it so far out of the park with seasons I stupidly assumed this would live up to that. I will never pre-order again.

    Contact customer service and you can cancel.
  • micheleimichelei Posts: 422 Member
    I am just going to say it. I am angry! I am disgusted! I am so disappointed! I wanted this pack. I love the cas items. I thought the acting career looked intriguing and different. The fame system looks fun and seems to add long-term gameplay that I would have loved to have in my game. If this was a game pack I would be thrilled right now.

    Once again I am saying that this EP is not worth the full EP price. The world ... I just can't. I do not even know what to say that I think will be listened to and heard.

    I do not play in Brindleton Bay because it is too small. It is way too small. What was the excuse they told us then? They wanted the focus to be on the pets. Oh, wait sorry. They wanted the focus to be on the cats and dogs. The cats and dogs are so time consuming and expensive to make because of all those new animations. Now the excuse is performance issues.

    Just come out and say we have a tiny budget and someone somewhere decided to spend much of that precious budget on expensive fake backgrounds. Someone somewhere decided that these fake houses were more important than actual usable space to actually play the game.



  • KiaraSims4ModsKiaraSims4Mods Posts: 2,752 Member
    The world is so small it's sad. Like those homes on the beach, should have been actual homes. I am so sick of paying 40.00 for games that are worth 20.00!
    View all My Sims 4 Creations here https://kiarasimsfourmods.home.blog/

    Join my discord https://discord.gg/Th8z7YK
  • slydog857slydog857 Posts: 68 Member
    The world is so small it's sad. Like those homes on the beach, should have been actual homes. I am so sick of paying 40.00 for games that are worth 20.00!

    Yeah but you could argue, and there will be some people who will argue this, you don't HAVE to buy them. If you don't feel they are worth $40, wait for a sale. Seasons came down in the Halloween sale (which has already ended... despite Halloween not even having been yet) for $30 approx. and that's 3 months. So if you are prepared to wait, do that. If not and you get it day one, then you can't say you are sick of spending $40, because YOU did.
    Want to fix fps drops in City Living? We should build a wall around a lot to stop visuals behind it ruining our FPS!
    Specs:
    i7-7700K @ 4.2GHz
    Gigabyte G1 Gaming Edition: GTX 1080 8GB
    16GB RAM
    2 x 1TB HDD - Toshiba @ 7200 Rpm

    maxresdefault.jpg
  • WulfsimmerWulfsimmer Posts: 4,381 Member
    slydog857 wrote: »
    The world is so small it's sad. Like those homes on the beach, should have been actual homes. I am so sick of paying 40.00 for games that are worth 20.00!

    Yeah but you could argue, and there will be some people who will argue this, you don't HAVE to buy them. If you don't feel they are worth $40, wait for a sale. Seasons came down in the Halloween sale (which has already ended... despite Halloween not even having been yet) for $30 approx. and that's 3 months. So if you are prepared to wait, do that. If not and you get it day one, then you can't say you are sick of spending $40, because YOU did.

    But we shouldn't have to wait. Expansion packs need to be of better quality
    Random-gifs-random-18723411-368-312.gif

    WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY?
  • Sanriel85Sanriel85 Posts: 361 Member
    Size doesn't matter ;)
    tumblr_nsyn5eQjPh1uzuvlbo1_500.gif
  • AmiutzaAmiutza Posts: 1,796 Member
    slydog857 wrote: »
    There's a lot of people here making the assumptions that 'Smaller Worlds to reduce FPS drops, and improve performance is an invalid excuse' and I agree, but not entirely. Yes, it would help performance, we all have to admit it would improve performance, however, the fact that this game had performance issues IN THE FIRST PLACE is the problem, the fact stated above is true but what's also true is that this game performances well under average, and the people who said they are catering for lower-end hardware are 100% on the ball. A lower-end machine will statically preform better in this game to a certain degree. I have an i7-7700K, GTX 1080, 16GB and I still get performance issues in some worlds. There is one big problem and one simple answer/explanation to this:

    It's 2014, and the sims team thought the best idea moving forward for CPU optimisation in this brand new game is to LIMIT the game to 2 CPU Cores, which was absurd for any game after 2011, to be honest. This was the worst development choice the company could have made, and for people who think the game has multi-core support, yes it does, but it still only uses 2 physical cores. Name 10 people who still use Dual-Core processors.

    This then creates my problem, only 50% of my CPU is being utilised, I get performance issues, because the game doesn't use the entirety of a system! Too late to fix this now as it was part of the base code.

    So, I appreciate smaller worlds to combat this, but they created the problem in the first place is what I'm saying.
    Add to this that the game runs on DirectX 9 as well. I’m no pc expert, but I don’t think your 1080 or my 1070 are necessarily getting much use either. As far as I understand, if they’d at least give an option to run it on 11/12 (i think they’re up to 12) we should get an overall increase in fps which might help with the random drops? Limiting people with good pcs really makes me sad. Also what is up with the sad excuse of antialiasing they have?

    Off topic aside, still ok with the world size because im more of aesthetics >space in this particular case. And i plan to make a couple celebrities only neighborhoods in the fancy area of oasis springs, maybe the WB island too.
    hhHD2XB.png
    My tumblr - A world of clutter and color
Sign In or Register to comment.
Return to top