There's already an always online conduit with Origin. I'm just mulling over a reasonable evolution of that always online connection that, after ts4 and into the next iteration, EA could successfully strengthen that conduit (that's already required if you want patches and/or updated "free" content for your game) and require a subscription that would give them funds to give us a more stable game with a more steady flow of content.
The game wouldn't need to be a true MMO. And maybe you could still play for free or offline if you were okay to not have access to certain features available to online players.
Although (and I'm just spit balling), in lieu of the Galley, there could be a multiplayer market square or mall for creators to sell have virtual stores selling their fashion designs, house plans, pets, and etc. Maybe EA could create a purchasable expansion just for creators, which could give allow them to have these virtual stores... and these creators could unlock fabric colors, makeup styles, furniture designs, wall paper designs, et al. for sale at their virtual stores.
I think ts4 has been a learning experience for both fans and EA as to what we want and what is acceptable and not acceptable. We've already demonstrated that we're a forgiving fan base. I think that there's an untapped opportunity here for the multi-million dollar corporation and for us.
Ah I see what you mean. Kind of like the way Nintendo did with their Miiverse and whatnot?
I'm not very familiar with Miiverse, but maybe. I'm more familiar with MMOs like ESO, Guild Wars 2, and LOTRO. I was considering the rumored origins of ts4 as The Sims Olympus, ts4's online store circa 2014 that disappeared, and EA's always-online failure with their final SimCity. EA obviously wants to go in that direction and will likely get there eventually. I can see the lucrative potential for them if it is done with the fan base's satisfaction in mind and maybe with some heeded suggestions from us.
@Bagoas77 The thing is they don't a lot more money to give us a stable game. They need to care, to know, to want. Clearly many issues we have are already fixed by modders, so it is expected that the game's own devs could do so as well but nope. Things go by for years. Performance yet again falls on optimization. Why does my game slow in that one household just because my sim knows 65 other sims? Why can't that data be stored elsewhere and only used when interacting with the other sim?
@Bagoas77 The thing is they don't a lot more money to give us a stable game. They need to care, to know, to want. Clearly many issues we have are already fixed by modders, so it is expected that the game's own devs could do so as well but nope. Things go by for years. Performance yet again falls on optimization. Why does my game slow in that one household just because my sim knows 65 other sims? Why can't that data be stored elsewhere and only used when interacting with the other sim?
Ideally, yes. A stable game with consistently enjoyable content should not be as challenging as it seems to be... especially in its 4th iteration.
I'm trying to feel out my own feelings toward EA and the franchise. They currently have the monopoly on the only life simulation game that is anywhere near close to what I would spend money to play. It used to be much, much closer to that which I would gladly spend even more money to play... but in its current shape, I will still occasionally (albeit reluctantly) spend the $15 or so bucks on reduced-price content.
Basically, this is the cost of a Five Guys' burger and fries that I get to enjoy (or not) over and over again practically ad infinitum. EA doesn't get any more money from me for that content. They'll only get more money from me if they provide even more content that they have to develop (with whatever money is left over after they pay their CEOs and, you know, other overhead... and etc.).
Would a constant stream of income from subscribers give us a better (or the best) next iteration of this franchise? I don't know. Throwing even more money at a multi-million dollar corporation may not give us a better gaming experience, but I can (reluctantly) empathize with at least the financial requirements for them to develop content and provide game maintenance.
There's already an always online conduit with Origin. I'm just mulling over a reasonable evolution of that always online connection that, after ts4 and into the next iteration, EA could successfully strengthen that conduit (that's already required if you want patches and/or updated "free" content for your game) and require a subscription that would give them funds to give us a more stable game with a more steady flow of content.
The game wouldn't need to be a true MMO. And maybe you could still play for free or offline if you were okay to not have access to certain features available to online players.
Although (and I'm just spit balling), in lieu of the Galley, there could be a multiplayer market square or mall for creators to sell have virtual stores selling their fashion designs, house plans, pets, and etc. Maybe EA could create a purchasable expansion just for creators, which could give allow them to have these virtual stores... and these creators could unlock fabric colors, makeup styles, furniture designs, wall paper designs, et al. for sale at their virtual stores.
I think ts4 has been a learning experience for both fans and EA as to what we want and what is acceptable and not acceptable. We've already demonstrated that we're a forgiving fan base. I think that there's an untapped opportunity here for the multi-million dollar corporation and for us.
What makes you think a subscription fee would be put toward building a better game or used to strengthen a study flow of content or stabilty? Think on this. They had the money from TS3, the money (over 24 million btw) from the TS3 store and the money (75 millions sold) of TS4 and it hasn't been spent on this game, nor it's performance, nor it's better, deeper gameplay, nor more content. How many more millions do they need because evidentally, none of the millions and millions any of the above I mentioned was spent to better this game, so, I think it's naive to think a subscription would make things any better. It's clear the money from TS3, TS3 store and TS4's base game units being sold didn't wind up fixing these bugs, or adding more game play or a better experience.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
There's already an always online conduit with Origin. I'm just mulling over a reasonable evolution of that always online connection that, after ts4 and into the next iteration, EA could successfully strengthen that conduit (that's already required if you want patches and/or updated "free" content for your game) and require a subscription that would give them funds to give us a more stable game with a more steady flow of content.
The game wouldn't need to be a true MMO. And maybe you could still play for free or offline if you were okay to not have access to certain features available to online players.
Although (and I'm just spit balling), in lieu of the Galley, there could be a multiplayer market square or mall for creators to sell have virtual stores selling their fashion designs, house plans, pets, and etc. Maybe EA could create a purchasable expansion just for creators, which could give allow them to have these virtual stores... and these creators could unlock fabric colors, makeup styles, furniture designs, wall paper designs, et al. for sale at their virtual stores.
I think ts4 has been a learning experience for both fans and EA as to what we want and what is acceptable and not acceptable. We've already demonstrated that we're a forgiving fan base. I think that there's an untapped opportunity here for the multi-million dollar corporation and for us.
What makes you think a subscription fee would be put toward building a better game or used to strengthen a study flow of content or stabilty? Think on this. They had the money from TS3, the money (over 24 million btw) from the TS3 store and the money (75 millions sold) of TS4 and it hasn't been spent on this game, nor it's performance, nor it's better, deeper gameplay, nor more content. How many more millions do they need because evidentally, none of the millions and millions any of the above I mentioned was spent to better this game, so, I think it's naive to think a subscription would make things any better. It's clear the money from TS3, TS3 store and TS4's base game units being sold didn't wind up fixing these bugs, or adding more game play or a better experience.
That is all true. I think after the dizzying success of ts3, EA has done an abysmal job with the franchise. But I also think that ts4 was an anomaly. I think that it was the result of The Sims Olympus online multiplayer game being prematurely yanked out of development and hurriedly retrofitted into the next iteration of the sims after the always-online SimCity crashed and burned and they got scared.
However, I don't think that it's naïve to see that the franchise has to make money (lotsa money for EA's appetite) for it to continue... grow and evolve. Those millions made by ts3 are long, long gone. An online version of the franchise (subscription, always-online with micro transactions, or whatever) is something EA has long wanted and will be an inevitable future move for franchise. The fans need to get ahead of this, make our wants for this version of the franchise known, and make sure EA doesn't hurt itself like it did with SimCity 2013.
There's already an always online conduit with Origin. I'm just mulling over a reasonable evolution of that always online connection that, after ts4 and into the next iteration, EA could successfully strengthen that conduit (that's already required if you want patches and/or updated "free" content for your game) and require a subscription that would give them funds to give us a more stable game with a more steady flow of content.
The game wouldn't need to be a true MMO. And maybe you could still play for free or offline if you were okay to not have access to certain features available to online players.
Although (and I'm just spit balling), in lieu of the Galley, there could be a multiplayer market square or mall for creators to sell have virtual stores selling their fashion designs, house plans, pets, and etc. Maybe EA could create a purchasable expansion just for creators, which could give allow them to have these virtual stores... and these creators could unlock fabric colors, makeup styles, furniture designs, wall paper designs, et al. for sale at their virtual stores.
I think ts4 has been a learning experience for both fans and EA as to what we want and what is acceptable and not acceptable. We've already demonstrated that we're a forgiving fan base. I think that there's an untapped opportunity here for the multi-million dollar corporation and for us.
What makes you think a subscription fee would be put toward building a better game or used to strengthen a study flow of content or stabilty? Think on this. They had the money from TS3, the money (over 24 million btw) from the TS3 store and the money (75 millions sold) of TS4 and it hasn't been spent on this game, nor it's performance, nor it's better, deeper gameplay, nor more content. How many more millions do they need because evidentally, none of the millions and millions any of the above I mentioned was spent to better this game, so, I think it's naive to think a subscription would make things any better. It's clear the money from TS3, TS3 store and TS4's base game units being sold didn't wind up fixing these bugs, or adding more game play or a better experience.
That is all true. I think after the dizzying success of ts3, EA has done an abysmal job with the franchise. But I also think that ts4 was an anomaly. I think that it was the result of The Sims Olympus online multiplayer game being prematurely yanked out of development and hurriedly retrofitted into the next iteration of the sims after the always-online SimCity crashed and burned and they got scared.
However, I don't think that it's naïve to see that the franchise has to make money (lotsa money for EA's appetite) for it to continue... grow and evolve. Those millions made by ts3 are long, long gone. An online version of the franchise (subscription, always-online with micro transactions, or whatever) is something EA has long wanted and will be an inevitable future move for franchise. The fans need to get ahead of this, make our wants for this version of the franchise known, and make sure EA doesn't hurt itself like it did with SimCity 2013.
They will inevitably hurt themselves if they do that, what happened with SC2013 was well deserved and hopefully they learned their lesson. I've seen smaller studios with smaller publishers produce much better quality and stability so I don't think EA is starving for money much less the studio. They are just greedy PR studio wrecking machines. TS2 is where love and quality ended, and as much as I loved TS3 it was a total mess not only for the performance and bug issues, but the patterns of shallow gameplay or empty content and disregard for the game's health. If this franchise ends up there, then it better get ready to say hello to SC2013 in the grave it rightfully is. Or perhaps another studio by then will do the game right much like how a certain game (C:S) wiped the floor with SC2013.
And you are right, TS4 was an anomaly that had to be quickly reassembled. Hence all the free updates adding pools, ghosts etc., things I never even jumped about since they should have been there since release. They have been trying to redeem themselves and to an extent there are some very good things they've made, such as GPs which I wish would wipe SPs completely but nah.
I am trying to be fair and patient with TS4, especially since terrain tools were added, but I am consistently finding more and more restrictions the further we go along. Though I was happy when terrain tools were added, I have since recognized the restrictions, as compared to previous versions, that came with them. Mostly the fact that terrain on and around lots is flat, making use of the terrain tools building anything taller than a few feet of the surrounding landscape look rather out of place and awkward. On top of that, I have also had routing issues going from one floor to another to the point that I have had to do some of my builds from scratch because my Sims would not go upstairs in an enclosed house. Rebuilding the exact same house on a flat lot did not have routing issues. So, it becomes very frustrating to the point that I must say that I don’t want to go through 3 more years of more frustrations.
I just ran across a bit of news today, that EA has moved Samantha Ryan to Motive and she is no longer over Maxis or Maxis Mobile (since Oct.) do you think this might help or hurt this game or the next. Remember we all had some thoughts when R. left, wonder how this affects the game now? And who took her place at Maxis?
I am trying to be fair and patient with TS4, especially since terrain tools were added, but I am consistently finding more and more restrictions the further we go along. Though I was happy when terrain tools were added, I have since recognized the restrictions, as compared to previous versions, that came with them. Mostly the fact that terrain on and around lots is flat, making use of the terrain tools building anything taller than a few feet of the surrounding landscape look rather out of place and awkward. On top of that, I have also had routing issues going from one floor to another to the point that I have had to do some of my builds from scratch because my Sims would not go upstairs in an enclosed house. Rebuilding the exact same house on a flat lot did not have routing issues. So, it becomes very frustrating to the point that I must say that I don’t want to go through 3 more years of more frustrations.
I just ran across a bit of news today, that EA has moved Samantha Ryan to Motive and she is no longer over Maxis or Maxis Mobile (since Oct.) do you think this might help or hurt this game or the next. Remember we all had some thoughts when R. left, wonder how this affects the game now? And who took her place at Maxis?
a. They probably don't want to publicize - if they have appointed one in her place at all. R. got a lot of sticks and stones, didn't she? Two brilliant women left EA last year Amy Hennig and Jade Raymond from the Starwars project.
b. Maybe EA are re-organizing and haven't finished yet ? We now have a new EA "Manager of Third Party Content and Partnerships" who starts this month. (He's been hinting at his new job since November and I think, starts 22nd Jan so it is possible we haven't got a replacement for SR yet).
Afterthought: Considering how many people who worked on the Sims games have been sacked or left over the years it seems to show up the reluctance of other Games manufacturers to snap them up to help make a Sims type game. Maybe it is too difficult to start up from a large basegame these days and they also would have to copy EA/Maxis way of small base and pack additions and patches. It was easier in Will Wright's time but even Maxis had to hand over to EA.
Regarding the question of whether we need another 3 years of ts4, I did notice that in the later years with ts3 that the content quality and regularity began to noticeably decline. I seem to remember that the same thing happened with ts2. Perhaps this is just a standard handling by EA for their games that are resurrected anew every few years as more time/money/energies are spent on the newer versions.
However, with its unfortunate initial (and many, many subsequent missteps), ts4 has never quite caught up to even the later years' quality level of ts3, in my humble opinion. This does not bode well for the bits of upcoming content for ts4 (which doesn't seem to be aging very well anyway) that we can expect... over the next 3 years or not.
Regarding the question of whether we need another 3 years of ts4, I did notice that in the later years with ts3 that the content quality and regularity began to noticeably decline. I seem to remember that the same thing happened with ts2. Perhaps this is just a standard handling by EA for their games that are resurrected anew every few years as more time/money/energies are spent on the newer versions.
However, with its unfortunate initial (and many, many subsequent missteps), ts4 has never quite caught up to even the later years' quality level of ts3, in my humble opinion. This does not bode well for the bits of upcoming content for ts4 (which doesn't seem to be aging very well anyway) that we can expect... over the next 3 years or not.
I have noticed the same thing happening when they are getting ready to move on to the next iteration. Unfortunately, TS4 has been laden with all sorts of problems from the very beginning.
The only reason I would want TS4 to continue is to fill in the gap to allow them the time to do a great, quality job with TS5. I don't trust them to take the time needed to release a product of the quality this franchise so richly deserves though. I really, really hope they prove me wrong though.
Regarding the question of whether we need another 3 years of ts4, I did notice that in the later years with ts3 that the content quality and regularity began to noticeably decline. I seem to remember that the same thing happened with ts2. Perhaps this is just a standard handling by EA for their games that are resurrected anew every few years as more time/money/energies are spent on the newer versions.
However, with its unfortunate initial (and many, many subsequent missteps), ts4 has never quite caught up to even the later years' quality level of ts3, in my humble opinion. This does not bode well for the bits of upcoming content for ts4 (which doesn't seem to be aging very well anyway) that we can expect... over the next 3 years or not.
They claim the quality issues with Sims 3 were from the disjointed development between the two studios developing expansions packs at the time. I get that to a degree, but quality control with Sims 4 is hardly any better and they are back to developing the game out of one studio.
I don’t think Sims 4 is going to get a lot of packs in the next 3 years. With the last expansion they said they cut the size of the world due to “performance concerns”. That’s a pretty heavy thing to say about this game that was supposedly able to do so much in 2014.
Regarding the question of whether we need another 3 years of ts4, I did notice that in the later years with ts3 that the content quality and regularity began to noticeably decline. I seem to remember that the same thing happened with ts2. Perhaps this is just a standard handling by EA for their games that are resurrected anew every few years as more time/money/energies are spent on the newer versions.
However, with its unfortunate initial (and many, many subsequent missteps), ts4 has never quite caught up to even the later years' quality level of ts3, in my humble opinion. This does not bode well for the bits of upcoming content for ts4 (which doesn't seem to be aging very well anyway) that we can expect... over the next 3 years or not.
I have noticed the same thing happening when they are getting ready to move on to the next iteration. Unfortunately, TS4 has been laden with all sorts of problems from the very beginning.
The only reason I would want TS4 to continue is to fill in the gap to allow them the time to do a great, quality job with TS5. I don't trust them to take the time needed to release a product of the quality this franchise so richly deserves though. I really, really hope they prove me wrong though.
I think that that "holding pattern" for ts4 is what we're currently seeing and very well may be why we're being told that this iteration is going to continue for far longer than it realistically deserves with its obvious limitations... in my humble opinion.
The exuberant fanfare for the content being release for ts4 does seem more and more forced after ts4 life's peak (whenever that occurred... but surely we're past it now) and not commensurate with the amount of gameplay for the content release.
However, I also hope this extra time gives them what they need to create a worthy successor to ts2 and ts3.
Regarding the question of whether we need another 3 years of ts4, I did notice that in the later years with ts3 that the content quality and regularity began to noticeably decline. I seem to remember that the same thing happened with ts2. Perhaps this is just a standard handling by EA for their games that are resurrected anew every few years as more time/money/energies are spent on the newer versions.
However, with its unfortunate initial (and many, many subsequent missteps), ts4 has never quite caught up to even the later years' quality level of ts3, in my humble opinion. This does not bode well for the bits of upcoming content for ts4 (which doesn't seem to be aging very well anyway) that we can expect... over the next 3 years or not.
I have noticed the same thing happening when they are getting ready to move on to the next iteration. Unfortunately, TS4 has been laden with all sorts of problems from the very beginning.
The only reason I would want TS4 to continue is to fill in the gap to allow them the time to do a great, quality job with TS5. I don't trust them to take the time needed to release a product of the quality this franchise so richly deserves though. I really, really hope they prove me wrong though.
I think that that "holding pattern" for ts4 is what we're currently seeing and very well may be why we're being told that this iteration is going to continue for far longer than it realistically deserves with its obvious limitations... in my humble opinion.
The exuberant fanfare for the content being release for ts4 does seem more and more forced after ts4 life's peak (whenever that occurred... but surely we're past it now) and not commensurate with the amount of gameplay for the content release.
However, I also hope this extra time gives them what they need to create a worthy successor to ts2 and ts3.
I have a silly question. If they have three years of stuff, then why have meetings of how to engage new players, and or even current players and how to make more money if it's all in the bag, and they have three more years' of content? Just a question I was musing about. lol (you either have it or you don't)
ETA: I'll just give out a piece of advice to anyone it might apply to, if the fanbase is demanding stuff, then be glad they are, because when they stop, they have left the buiding.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
I'm just imagining a sims game where it is a single player open-world experience where our hardware is no longer the limitation in terms of size of world, number of sims, and complexity of the simulation that is occurring for all of those sims. They could even design it to allow multiplayer where we invite our friends to bring their sims to our customized worlds. I wouldn't want a "multiplayer-only" Sims game, but I could get behind that sort of thing.
THIS!
...and I think if it was stored or played on a server/cloud it wouldn't be so limiting. As long as this game is teen rated we will see restrictions. How many lucky teens/kids are out there owning a nice gaming computer?
Me, I somewhat like Sims4 but heck yeah I look forward to Sims5.
I'm just imagining a sims game where it is a single player open-world experience where our hardware is no longer the limitation in terms of size of world, number of sims, and complexity of the simulation that is occurring for all of those sims. They could even design it to allow multiplayer where we invite our friends to bring their sims to our customized worlds. I wouldn't want a "multiplayer-only" Sims game, but I could get behind that sort of thing.
THIS!
...and I think if it was stored or played on a server/cloud it wouldn't be so limiting. As long as this game is teen rated we will see restrictions. How many lucky teens/kids are out there owning a nice gaming computer?
Me, I somewhat like Sims4 but heck yeah I look forward to Sims5.
I would never want a single player game stored on a server/cloud.
One day, the servers will turn off, with the game no longer being profitable. And there goes your game.
I wouldn’t be opposed to save data having the option of being stored on Origin cloud servers. As in, I could play my game on my PC, and then transition to my laptop with everything just as I left it. Many games offer that option nowadays. But the suggestion of storing the game itself on a live server is quite possibly the worst thing that could happen to this franchise.
@Sk8rblaze chiming in to agree with you. I'd ditch the franchise and never look back if I lost the ability to control my game saves and ability to play when and how I want.
I also wouldn't want to play multiplayer Sims...if I did I'd be on the mobile games or second life or something. I like talking to you all here on the forums but I just want my Sims games to be mine. If it's optional that's fine but...ehh.
And the second the game moves completely online it becomes something with microtransactions and fees and pay walls and I'm so not doing that.
I'm just imagining a sims game where it is a single player open-world experience where our hardware is no longer the limitation in terms of size of world, number of sims, and complexity of the simulation that is occurring for all of those sims. They could even design it to allow multiplayer where we invite our friends to bring their sims to our customized worlds. I wouldn't want a "multiplayer-only" Sims game, but I could get behind that sort of thing.
THIS!
...and I think if it was stored or played on a server/cloud it wouldn't be so limiting. As long as this game is teen rated we will see restrictions. How many lucky teens/kids are out there owning a nice gaming computer?
Me, I somewhat like Sims4 but heck yeah I look forward to Sims5.
I would never want a single player game stored on a server/cloud.
One day, the servers will turn off, with the game no longer being profitable. And there goes your game.
I wouldn’t be opposed to save data having the option of being stored on Origin cloud servers. As in, I could play my game on my PC, and then transition to my laptop with everything just as I left it. Many games offer that option nowadays. But the suggestion of storing the game itself on a live server is quite possibly the worst thing that could happen to this franchise.
I agree, even if they say they will release any installers if such an scenerio pops up I do not believe it.
Omen by HP Intel®️ Core™️ i9- 12900K W/ RGB Liquid Cooler 32GB Nvidia RTX 3080 10Gb ASUS Ultra-Wide 34" Curved Monitor. Omen By HP Intel® Core™ i7-12800HX 32 GB Nvidia 3070 Ti 8 GB 17.3 Screen
I still play Sims3 more than Sims4. It's a more "complete" game. Hopefully EA will pull their heads out (doubt it) and listen to the players for a change (also doubt it) when they finally get around to Sims5..
I still play Sims3 more than Sims4. It's a more "complete" game. Hopefully EA will pull their heads out (doubt it) and listen to the players for a change (also doubt it) when they finally get around to Sims5..
I've been playing TS3 lately as well. Having a lot more fun with it.
> @Stormsview said: > One complaint I do not have is building in sims 4, Sims 4 building is easy, we can build anything, We do need some features but even pre-teens can build on the sims 4. So I think they made it easier but they just did not add all the features, we still get by just takes a bit of creativity.
It's funny you said this, cause that's actually my main complaint about TS4 lol I was under 10 when I started playing Sims 1 and I learned how to use the tools from that game just fine, and had loads of fun learning as well as feeling totally accomplished for being able to do it! I know not everyone feels the same, and I'm glad that others who did have trouble building in earlier games can feel the sweet satisfaction of accomplishing a build, cause it's a nice feeling lol, but I do wish the devs hadn't completely reworked the entire system of building. Maybe created a way that simmers could toggle between the two types of build mode via settings, which would probably require restarting the game to see the changes, but hey I think that'd be a fair compromise versus alienating the rest of us long-time builders in an attempt to "make the game easier".
On topic though, I feel like TS4 has reached it's peak, and unfortunately that's not saying much... They started off saying it was lacking so much because they wanted the game to be able to play on all systems, okay fair enough. But now it's been 4 years, the "normal" amount of time for Sims games to reach the end of their lineage, and as OP very well stated, this game is literally nowhere near it's predecessors in terms of items, interactions, traits/aspirations, etc etc. Even Sims 1 had more to offer with each individual pack!! I recently watched one of those videos of all Sims trailers over the years, and it really hit me how much they put into the earlier games' expansions, most of them had over 100 or more new items each! That's just incredible, and maybe that's why TS4 feels so empty. Really I don't know, just a thought I had.
Yes. We do need 3 more years of sims 4 . Because there is so much potential for this game. I know it might seem like everyone is soooo unhappy and that they should abandon ship sometimes, but a large amount of players are enjoying the current game and looking forward to future releases. There is so much more that can be done , to make sims 4 really shine. I prefer it over the previous games by far.
If it's a diamond in the rough, how many more years do they need to rub on that old piece of coal to get it to shine? They have been applying a lot of elbow grease but it's not quite as shiny as the others were by this point.
ETA: I'll just ask this question, are you sure at the end of three years people won't still be saying, 'It has so much potential, we need another ten for all that we want that is missing'...I would bet good money they will be saying the same as they are today and will still feel it's not 'complete'.
Im having fun with the game NOW!!!! Why do some have hard time accepting that not everyone is bored/dislikes sims 4? Its becoming a bit strange. By potential, that means theres still a lot of fresh new gameplay that hasnt been added yet . Sims 3 was a lump of coal to me, because the sims in that game weren't likable @Cinebar
"Let Our Hearts And Hands Be Streched Out In Compassion Toward Others."
Regarding the question of whether we need another 3 years of ts4, I did notice that in the later years with ts3 that the content quality and regularity began to noticeably decline. I seem to remember that the same thing happened with ts2. Perhaps this is just a standard handling by EA for their games that are resurrected anew every few years as more time/money/energies are spent on the newer versions.
However, with its unfortunate initial (and many, many subsequent missteps), ts4 has never quite caught up to even the later years' quality level of ts3, in my humble opinion. This does not bode well for the bits of upcoming content for ts4 (which doesn't seem to be aging very well anyway) that we can expect... over the next 3 years or not.
I have noticed the same thing happening when they are getting ready to move on to the next iteration. Unfortunately, TS4 has been laden with all sorts of problems from the very beginning.
The only reason I would want TS4 to continue is to fill in the gap to allow them the time to do a great, quality job with TS5. I don't trust them to take the time needed to release a product of the quality this franchise so richly deserves though. I really, really hope they prove me wrong though.
I think that that "holding pattern" for ts4 is what we're currently seeing and very well may be why we're being told that this iteration is going to continue for far longer than it realistically deserves with its obvious limitations... in my humble opinion.
The exuberant fanfare for the content being release for ts4 does seem more and more forced after ts4 life's peak (whenever that occurred... but surely we're past it now) and not commensurate with the amount of gameplay for the content release.
However, I also hope this extra time gives them what they need to create a worthy successor to ts2 and ts3.
I have a silly question. If they have three years of stuff, then why have meetings of how to engage new players, and or even current players and how to make more money if it's all in the bag, and they have three more years' of content? Just a question I was musing about. lol (you either have it or you don't)
ETA: I'll just give out a piece of advice to anyone it might apply to, if the fanbase is demanding stuff, then be glad they are, because when they stop, they have left the buiding.
I'm gonna guess based on how studios have different ways of approaching timelines and future content that they do not have everything laid out. They have *plans* for 3 years worth of more content, what that content entails is what the meetings must be about. Like hey we have enough ideas for at least 3 years, but the studio has to of course consolidate, formulate and execute those projects.
But yeah, definitely agreed on the last bit. People demanding more stuff, or even criticizing the game is a good sign. When people don't even criticize a game, you know that the boat has long sunk.
Personnally, I'm down for 2-3 more years of sims 4. After that, I'm not sure I'll be readdy to start all over again with the sims 5. May be, may be not. For the moment I enjoy the game and wish for some new stuff and bugs repairs.
Yes. We do need 3 more years of sims 4 . Because there is so much potential for this game. I know it might seem like everyone is soooo unhappy and that they should abandon ship sometimes, but a large amount of players are enjoying the current game and looking forward to future releases. There is so much more that can be done , to make sims 4 really shine. I prefer it over the previous games by far.
If it's a diamond in the rough, how many more years do they need to rub on that old piece of coal to get it to shine? They have been applying a lot of elbow grease but it's not quite as shiny as the others were by this point.
ETA: I'll just ask this question, are you sure at the end of three years people won't still be saying, 'It has so much potential, we need another ten for all that we want that is missing'...I would bet good money they will be saying the same as they are today and will still feel it's not 'complete'.
Im having fun with the game NOW!!!! Why do some have hard time accepting that not everyone is bored/dislikes sims 4? Its becoming a bit strange. By potential, that means theres still a lot of fresh new gameplay that hasnt been added yet . Sims 3 was a lump of coal to me, because the sims in that game weren't likable @Cinebar
And just how you can't understand why people cannot accept that not everyone dislikes or is bored with the sims 4, the same can be said about your feelings toward the sims 3. You basically just answered your own question. 🤷
ETA: In all due respect, there's also no reason to be upset about people questioning the potential of the sims 4. You are free to love whatever game and have a distaste for whatever game you want. I personally have a soft spot for the sims 3 and you find it on be like a lump of coal. However, I understand that we all have our likes and dislikes of each Iteration. It's not strange. It's normal.
"Bada su the gorn bada su the brawn bada bady oda aba donk donk donk gerbits gerbits vo gerbits".
Comments
I'm not very familiar with Miiverse, but maybe. I'm more familiar with MMOs like ESO, Guild Wars 2, and LOTRO. I was considering the rumored origins of ts4 as The Sims Olympus, ts4's online store circa 2014 that disappeared, and EA's always-online failure with their final SimCity. EA obviously wants to go in that direction and will likely get there eventually. I can see the lucrative potential for them if it is done with the fan base's satisfaction in mind and maybe with some heeded suggestions from us.
Ideally, yes. A stable game with consistently enjoyable content should not be as challenging as it seems to be... especially in its 4th iteration.
I'm trying to feel out my own feelings toward EA and the franchise. They currently have the monopoly on the only life simulation game that is anywhere near close to what I would spend money to play. It used to be much, much closer to that which I would gladly spend even more money to play... but in its current shape, I will still occasionally (albeit reluctantly) spend the $15 or so bucks on reduced-price content.
Basically, this is the cost of a Five Guys' burger and fries that I get to enjoy (or not) over and over again practically ad infinitum. EA doesn't get any more money from me for that content. They'll only get more money from me if they provide even more content that they have to develop (with whatever money is left over after they pay their CEOs and, you know, other overhead... and etc.).
Would a constant stream of income from subscribers give us a better (or the best) next iteration of this franchise? I don't know. Throwing even more money at a multi-million dollar corporation may not give us a better gaming experience, but I can (reluctantly) empathize with at least the financial requirements for them to develop content and provide game maintenance.
What makes you think a subscription fee would be put toward building a better game or used to strengthen a study flow of content or stabilty? Think on this. They had the money from TS3, the money (over 24 million btw) from the TS3 store and the money (75 millions sold) of TS4 and it hasn't been spent on this game, nor it's performance, nor it's better, deeper gameplay, nor more content. How many more millions do they need because evidentally, none of the millions and millions any of the above I mentioned was spent to better this game, so, I think it's naive to think a subscription would make things any better. It's clear the money from TS3, TS3 store and TS4's base game units being sold didn't wind up fixing these bugs, or adding more game play or a better experience.
That is all true. I think after the dizzying success of ts3, EA has done an abysmal job with the franchise. But I also think that ts4 was an anomaly. I think that it was the result of The Sims Olympus online multiplayer game being prematurely yanked out of development and hurriedly retrofitted into the next iteration of the sims after the always-online SimCity crashed and burned and they got scared.
However, I don't think that it's naïve to see that the franchise has to make money (lotsa money for EA's appetite) for it to continue... grow and evolve. Those millions made by ts3 are long, long gone. An online version of the franchise (subscription, always-online with micro transactions, or whatever) is something EA has long wanted and will be an inevitable future move for franchise. The fans need to get ahead of this, make our wants for this version of the franchise known, and make sure EA doesn't hurt itself like it did with SimCity 2013.
They will inevitably hurt themselves if they do that, what happened with SC2013 was well deserved and hopefully they learned their lesson. I've seen smaller studios with smaller publishers produce much better quality and stability so I don't think EA is starving for money much less the studio. They are just greedy PR studio wrecking machines. TS2 is where love and quality ended, and as much as I loved TS3 it was a total mess not only for the performance and bug issues, but the patterns of shallow gameplay or empty content and disregard for the game's health. If this franchise ends up there, then it better get ready to say hello to SC2013 in the grave it rightfully is. Or perhaps another studio by then will do the game right much like how a certain game (C:S) wiped the floor with SC2013.
And you are right, TS4 was an anomaly that had to be quickly reassembled. Hence all the free updates adding pools, ghosts etc., things I never even jumped about since they should have been there since release. They have been trying to redeem themselves and to an extent there are some very good things they've made, such as GPs which I wish would wipe SPs completely but nah.
I just ran across a bit of news today, that EA has moved Samantha Ryan to Motive and she is no longer over Maxis or Maxis Mobile (since Oct.) do you think this might help or hurt this game or the next. Remember we all had some thoughts when R. left, wonder how this affects the game now? And who took her place at Maxis?
https://kotaku.com/ea-cancels-open-world-star-wars-game-1831786371?IR=T
a. They probably don't want to publicize - if they have appointed one in her place at all. R. got a lot of sticks and stones, didn't she? Two brilliant women left EA last year Amy Hennig and Jade Raymond from the Starwars project.
b. Maybe EA are re-organizing and haven't finished yet ? We now have a new EA "Manager of Third Party Content and Partnerships" who starts this month. (He's been hinting at his new job since November and I think, starts 22nd Jan so it is possible we haven't got a replacement for SR yet).
Afterthought: Considering how many people who worked on the Sims games have been sacked or left over the years it seems to show up the reluctance of other Games manufacturers to snap them up to help make a Sims type game. Maybe it is too difficult to start up from a large basegame these days and they also would have to copy EA/Maxis way of small base and pack additions and patches. It was easier in Will Wright's time but even Maxis had to hand over to EA.
However, with its unfortunate initial (and many, many subsequent missteps), ts4 has never quite caught up to even the later years' quality level of ts3, in my humble opinion. This does not bode well for the bits of upcoming content for ts4 (which doesn't seem to be aging very well anyway) that we can expect... over the next 3 years or not.
I have noticed the same thing happening when they are getting ready to move on to the next iteration. Unfortunately, TS4 has been laden with all sorts of problems from the very beginning.
The only reason I would want TS4 to continue is to fill in the gap to allow them the time to do a great, quality job with TS5. I don't trust them to take the time needed to release a product of the quality this franchise so richly deserves though. I really, really hope they prove me wrong though.
They claim the quality issues with Sims 3 were from the disjointed development between the two studios developing expansions packs at the time. I get that to a degree, but quality control with Sims 4 is hardly any better and they are back to developing the game out of one studio.
I don’t think Sims 4 is going to get a lot of packs in the next 3 years. With the last expansion they said they cut the size of the world due to “performance concerns”. That’s a pretty heavy thing to say about this game that was supposedly able to do so much in 2014.
I think that that "holding pattern" for ts4 is what we're currently seeing and very well may be why we're being told that this iteration is going to continue for far longer than it realistically deserves with its obvious limitations... in my humble opinion.
The exuberant fanfare for the content being release for ts4 does seem more and more forced after ts4 life's peak (whenever that occurred... but surely we're past it now) and not commensurate with the amount of gameplay for the content release.
However, I also hope this extra time gives them what they need to create a worthy successor to ts2 and ts3.
I have a silly question. If they have three years of stuff, then why have meetings of how to engage new players, and or even current players and how to make more money if it's all in the bag, and they have three more years' of content? Just a question I was musing about. lol (you either have it or you don't)
ETA: I'll just give out a piece of advice to anyone it might apply to, if the fanbase is demanding stuff, then be glad they are, because when they stop, they have left the buiding.
THIS!
...and I think if it was stored or played on a server/cloud it wouldn't be so limiting. As long as this game is teen rated we will see restrictions. How many lucky teens/kids are out there owning a nice gaming computer?
Me, I somewhat like Sims4 but heck yeah I look forward to Sims5.
I would never want a single player game stored on a server/cloud.
One day, the servers will turn off, with the game no longer being profitable. And there goes your game.
I wouldn’t be opposed to save data having the option of being stored on Origin cloud servers. As in, I could play my game on my PC, and then transition to my laptop with everything just as I left it. Many games offer that option nowadays. But the suggestion of storing the game itself on a live server is quite possibly the worst thing that could happen to this franchise.
I also wouldn't want to play multiplayer Sims...if I did I'd be on the mobile games or second life or something. I like talking to you all here on the forums but I just want my Sims games to be mine. If it's optional that's fine but...ehh.
And the second the game moves completely online it becomes something with microtransactions and fees and pay walls and I'm so not doing that.
I agree, even if they say they will release any installers if such an scenerio pops up I do not believe it.
I've been playing TS3 lately as well. Having a lot more fun with it.
> One complaint I do not have is building in sims 4, Sims 4 building is easy, we can build anything, We do need some features but even pre-teens can build on the sims 4. So I think they made it easier but they just did not add all the features, we still get by just takes a bit of creativity.
It's funny you said this, cause that's actually my main complaint about TS4 lol I was under 10 when I started playing Sims 1 and I learned how to use the tools from that game just fine, and had loads of fun learning as well as feeling totally accomplished for being able to do it! I know not everyone feels the same, and I'm glad that others who did have trouble building in earlier games can feel the sweet satisfaction of accomplishing a build, cause it's a nice feeling lol, but I do wish the devs hadn't completely reworked the entire system of building. Maybe created a way that simmers could toggle between the two types of build mode via settings, which would probably require restarting the game to see the changes, but hey I think that'd be a fair compromise versus alienating the rest of us long-time builders in an attempt to "make the game easier".
On topic though, I feel like TS4 has reached it's peak, and unfortunately that's not saying much... They started off saying it was lacking so much because they wanted the game to be able to play on all systems, okay fair enough. But now it's been 4 years, the "normal" amount of time for Sims games to reach the end of their lineage, and as OP very well stated, this game is literally nowhere near it's predecessors in terms of items, interactions, traits/aspirations, etc etc. Even Sims 1 had more to offer with each individual pack!! I recently watched one of those videos of all Sims trailers over the years, and it really hit me how much they put into the earlier games' expansions, most of them had over 100 or more new items each! That's just incredible, and maybe that's why TS4 feels so empty. Really I don't know, just a thought I had.
Im having fun with the game NOW!!!! Why do some have hard time accepting that not everyone is bored/dislikes sims 4?
I'm gonna guess based on how studios have different ways of approaching timelines and future content that they do not have everything laid out. They have *plans* for 3 years worth of more content, what that content entails is what the meetings must be about. Like hey we have enough ideas for at least 3 years, but the studio has to of course consolidate, formulate and execute those projects.
But yeah, definitely agreed on the last bit. People demanding more stuff, or even criticizing the game is a good sign. When people don't even criticize a game, you know that the boat has long sunk.
And just how you can't understand why people cannot accept that not everyone dislikes or is bored with the sims 4, the same can be said about your feelings toward the sims 3. You basically just answered your own question. 🤷
ETA: In all due respect, there's also no reason to be upset about people questioning the potential of the sims 4. You are free to love whatever game and have a distaste for whatever game you want. I personally have a soft spot for the sims 3 and you find it on be like a lump of coal. However, I understand that we all have our likes and dislikes of each Iteration. It's not strange. It's normal.