Has anyone informed EA that we want more diverse interesting sims on Sims 4 game? What was their answer?
Usually something along the lines of: "It's too difficult and too expensive".
So this means we should give up on Sims 4 and any future Sim games. How come Sims 2 and Sims 3 was not too difficult and too expensive?
Because this version was designed to be something else entirely before it became TS4. The actual core of the game cannot handle what a game like The Sims requires.
I think of it like papier-mâché; you can layer a balloon with a lot of coloured paper but in the end, the inside is still empty.
Because this version was designed to be something else entirely before it became TS4. The actual core of the game cannot handle what a game like The Sims requires.
I think of it like papier-mâché; you can layer a balloon with a lot of coloured paper but in the end, the inside is still empty.
—T
The sad part is that EA won't fess up to this. Instead, out of one side of their mouths, EA reps go on and on about how TS4 has, like, the best, most intuitive, and easiest to work with engine ever! Meanwhile, out of the other side of their mouths, they're having to admit that TS4's engine can't handle something such as snow depth and the features that the other games all had are just too expensive and too hard to do now.
In addition, there's the stuff that EA reps don't talk about: better whims, better personalities, an attraction system, like/dislikes, player-created apartments and festivals which can be used in any world, etc. The stuff that they're mum about is the most concerning.
Hopefully, it means that they may be working on those issues. Yet, TS4 is in its sixth year already. Those issues and features should have been worked out ages ago. Those issues should have been the main focus all along.
There's always the possibility that EA will sue. They've done it before. Win or lose, they have deep enough pockets to drive out competition that way. I'm hoping they don't do that -- healthy competition is a good thing.
Because one company can make a chair, another can't make chairs?
Has anyone informed EA that we want more diverse interesting sims on Sims 4 game? What was their answer?
Usually something along the lines of: "It's too difficult and too expensive".
So this means we should give up on Sims 4 and any future Sim games. How come Sims 2 and Sims 3 was not too difficult and too expensive?
Well, TS4 as mentioned was meant to be something else, but now EA knows people will en masse, buy cheaply made massively overpriced stuff like TS4, they'll keep making it.
TS2 didn't have EA contantly taking the money from them and putting into other things, the Sims 3 had it but to a lesser extent, TS4 seems to be run on a shoestring, just so EA can pocket the rest.
I'm watching Paralives with cautious optimism. The Build Mode footage I've seen looks really great, and the promise of pets, vehicles, weather, and open world at launch has my interest piqued. However, the two big things that are make-or-break with this game for me are the parafolk themselves and what the developer decides to do with magic and supernatural beings...especially werewolves. The Sims, as a franchise, has really shortchanged werewolves both aesthetically and gameplay-wise in the past. (We went from generic Hollywood "wolfmen" in TS2 to low-budget kids' T.V. show "werewolves" in TS3...and perfecting their shapeshifting abilities has never been implemented as part of their gameplay, even though it darn-well should be!!) I'm holding out hope that TS4's werewolves will be worth the wait and well fleshed-out with their perfecting their shapeshifting skills being a big part of their gameplay this time around...but if they still screw it up and just give us generic ugly, harry dog-people with no tails again, the pressure will be on Paralives to deliver what I've been longing for.
EA really does need the shot in the groin that Paralives represents to either poop or get off the pot when it comes to life sims. They've grown complacent with The Sims, because there have been no other real competitors in the genre over the last 20 years, so they've basically had a captive audience for the franchise. They've had a monopoly in the genre for so long, they think they can toss out any old thing and be good to go because their audience has nowhere else to turn to for a similar experience.
Fighting games in the 90's got better because there were so many out there in restaurants, grocery stores, gas stations, arcades, and on store shelves to choose from, so anything new had to stand out or be buried in the mudslide of titles on the market. Street Fighter II gave us globe-trotting tournament play with special moves, an interesting and diverse roster of fighters, and devastating combos. Mortal Kombat came along and gave us blood spurts with every crunchy hit and gorey fatalities. Primal Rage upped the ante by having the roster filled with prehistoric monsters. Virtua Fighter brought the genre into 3D. Bloody Roar made the fighters all shapeshifters. The genre advanced and grew more interesting and exciting because no one company held a monopoly on it, and so many comers came with their own spin on it. No one could get complacent, because you never knew what a rival company or a rival team within your own company might come up with next.
The life sim genre, in comparison, has had very few entries, and though the Animal Crossing/Harvest Moon-type titles have had concurrently running titles going up against each other over the years, Sims-Likes have not gone head-to-head in any meaningful way. Little Computer People had lived, grown old, and died long before The Sims ever came out. Games like Mabinogi and Second Life have never been direct competition for the franchise because of their MMO nature. The Sims has been basically unchallenged for two decades, and this has led to complacency that has had a real impact on the games, especially TS4. Paralives should get EA scared enough to try harder with future additions to TS4 and with TS5 on the whole. Poop or get off the pot.
I wonder what would happen if the guru's took a look at this thread and saw some of the things that maybe peaked peoples interest. Would they act on it? Let's hope so. I doubt it will be for Sims 4, but maybe Sims 5, if there is one.
The thread doesn't break any rules that I can see. Feedback can be very valuable, especially when things are not going well.
I dont think people are realizing the limits of an indie game especially with one person working on it. It would take years before this game can parallel anything to TS4 right now. Not because it won't be good, but because of a lot of limits on how long it'll take. And there will be a lot of trial and error. Theoretically it sounds great and I hope people still care for it being developed 3, 4, 5, 6 7 or more years down the line. (See the game Kenshi)
The dev can also promise a lot of things, but in reality it will take a long time and be very difficult to implement. The sims franchise was built over many years.
But the idea sounds great and I support anyone making simulation games because i love them
One developer made Stardew Valley and that was released after the Sims 4 was released and it is selling quite well. Depends on the game really how long it takes. If a developer is determined enough they can make a game on their time frame not a triple As time frame full of legal loopholes and marketing and labeling and copyrights. Indie genre has come quite a long way in the past few years and is doing quite well along with corporation markets. Then again I have met quite more people in public who have heard about Stardew Valley over the Sims these days and that makes me so proud for indie developers.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
I wonder what would happen if the guru's took a look at this thread and saw some of the things that maybe peaked peoples interest. Would they act on it? Let's hope so. I doubt it will be for Sims 4, but maybe Sims 5, if there is one.
The thread doesn't break any rules that I can see. Feedback can be very valuable, especially when things are not going well.
The only way they'd act on it, would be:
A ) Shut the thread (using some obscure interpretation of the rules)
B ) get EA to attempt to buy and shut down Paralives.
C ) Make no changes whatsoever to the Sims 4 or 5.
I wonder what would happen if the guru's took a look at this thread and saw some of the things that maybe peaked peoples interest. Would they act on it? Let's hope so. I doubt it will be for Sims 4, but maybe Sims 5, if there is one.
The thread doesn't break any rules that I can see. Feedback can be very valuable, especially when things are not going well.
The only way they'd act on it, would be:
A ) Shut the thread (using some obscure interpretation of the rules)
B ) get EA to attempt to buy and shut down Paralives.
C ) Make no changes whatsoever to the Sims 4 or 5.
Do you truly believe C? Man, I hope not.
An indie developer is outclassing The Sims' typical build/buy mode mechanics, by leagues. It's true that TS4 won't change. However, in the very early days of plotting and planning for TS5, you'd think that EA would want to switch things up a bit in order not to be bested by a lone man in his house.
I wonder what would happen if the guru's took a look at this thread and saw some of the things that maybe peaked peoples interest. Would they act on it? Let's hope so. I doubt it will be for Sims 4, but maybe Sims 5, if there is one.
The thread doesn't break any rules that I can see. Feedback can be very valuable, especially when things are not going well.
The only way they'd act on it, would be:
A ) Shut the thread (using some obscure interpretation of the rules)
B ) get EA to attempt to buy and shut down Paralives.
C ) Make no changes whatsoever to the Sims 4 or 5.
Do you truly believe C? Man, I hope not.
An indie developer is outclassing The Sims' typical build/buy mode mechanics, by leagues. It's true that TS4 won't change. However, in the very early days of plotting and planning for TS5, you'd think that EA would want to switch things up a bit in order not to be bested by a lone man in his house.
I don’t know, it honestly sometimes feels the decision to release The Sims 4 was purely to generate ongoing DLC sales, rather than to innovate.
The lack of innovation in the base game compared to TS3’s base game is just staggering. Even with TS3’s less-than-stellar performance, I get too absorbed for hours playing it still. I then open TS4 to compare a few things, and no exaggeration, I shut it out 3 minutes later. The gameplay is that bad.
I wonder what would happen if the guru's took a look at this thread and saw some of the things that maybe peaked peoples interest. Would they act on it? Let's hope so. I doubt it will be for Sims 4, but maybe Sims 5, if there is one.
The thread doesn't break any rules that I can see. Feedback can be very valuable, especially when things are not going well.
The only way they'd act on it, would be:
A ) Shut the thread (using some obscure interpretation of the rules)
B ) get EA to attempt to buy and shut down Paralives.
C ) Make no changes whatsoever to the Sims 4 or 5.
Do you truly believe C? Man, I hope not.
An indie developer is outclassing The Sims' typical build/buy mode mechanics, by leagues. It's true that TS4 won't change. However, in the very early days of plotting and planning for TS5, you'd think that EA would want to switch things up a bit in order not to be bested by a lone man in his house.
Yes, I truly believe C... As I said earlier, EA took FIFA 2019 (and I am so glad I don't buy that kind of game), stripped some features 'out', added a load of monetizations (you know the usual 'surprise mechanics') and sold it as FIFA 2020.
They even forgot to update the icon, it still said FIFA 2019.
I wonder what would happen if the guru's took a look at this thread and saw some of the things that maybe peaked peoples interest. Would they act on it? Let's hope so. I doubt it will be for Sims 4, but maybe Sims 5, if there is one.
The thread doesn't break any rules that I can see. Feedback can be very valuable, especially when things are not going well.
The only way they'd act on it, would be:
A ) Shut the thread (using some obscure interpretation of the rules)
B ) get EA to attempt to buy and shut down Paralives.
C ) Make no changes whatsoever to the Sims 4 or 5.
Do you truly believe C? Man, I hope not.
An indie developer is outclassing The Sims' typical build/buy mode mechanics, by leagues. It's true that TS4 won't change. However, in the very early days of plotting and planning for TS5, you'd think that EA would want to switch things up a bit in order not to be bested by a lone man in his house.
Yes, I truly believe C... As I said earlier, EA took FIFA 2019 (and I am so glad I don't buy that kind of game), stripped some features 'out', added a load of monetizations (you know the usual 'surprise mechanics') and sold it as FIFA 2020.
They even forgot to update the icon, it still said FIFA 2019.
No, you're mixing up FIFA 20 for NBA2k20 which is under serious fire for being a gambling simulator with basketball minigames and the ESRB and PEGI are under fire for giving it an E rating despite it having slot machines and Pachinko. However, FIFA 20 is also under serious fire for it not only having loot boxes plus other forms of monitization for people who don't like loot boxes as a large part of the game, but the single player campaign (the part which makes players least likely to buy microtransations) was broken at release. Oh, and FIFA 20 for switch actually is FIFA 19 with some surface changes, though if you read the product description, that's mentioned.
I swear video game companies are competing with who can be the sleaziest when it comes to monitization. I miss the days where you could buy a complete game and, well, enjoy it. I don't mind fleshed out DLC. I'm fine with the Sims model. If Fixaris releases another DLC for Civilization 6, I'll buy it, though if it's just a new civ leader, I'll wait for it to be bundled with something else.
I started having issues with video game devs when they started releasing day 1 dlc, tbh. But microtransactions and loot boxes are on a different level. And Sims 3 is guilty of this, though I was able to get the majority of the store watching ads and CYS combined with the daily deals. However, looking back on it, I was easily sucked into that buying model, and it was only my cheapskate tendancies that let me get the store for a few hundred rather than a few thousand dollars. I spent less on the Sims 3, including all packs and the store, than I have on Sims 4, but for a lot of people, it's easily the other way around. And it's a predatory way of marketing, especially when you're marketing to children.
Yes, I truly believe C... As I said earlier, EA took FIFA 2019 (and I am so glad I don't buy that kind of game), stripped some features 'out', added a load of monetizations (you know the usual 'surprise mechanics') and sold it as FIFA 2020.
They even forgot to update the icon, it still said FIFA 2019.
No, you're mixing up FIFA 20 for NBA2k20 which is under serious fire for being a gambling simulator with basketball minigames and the ESRB and PEGI are under fire for giving it an E rating despite it having slot machines and Pachinko. However, FIFA 20 is also under serious fire for it not only having loot boxes plus other forms of monitization for people who don't like loot boxes as a large part of the game, but the single player campaign (the part which makes players least likely to buy microtransations) was broken at release. Oh, and FIFA 20 for switch actually is FIFA 19 with some surface changes, though if you read the product description, that's mentioned.
I swear video game companies are competing with who can be the sleaziest when it comes to monitization. I miss the days where you could buy a complete game and, well, enjoy it. I don't mind fleshed out DLC. I'm fine with the Sims model. If Fixaris releases another DLC for Civilization 6, I'll buy it, though if it's just a new civ leader, I'll wait for it to be bundled with something else.
I started having issues with video game devs when they started releasing day 1 dlc, tbh. But microtransactions and loot boxes are on a different level. And Sims 3 is guilty of this, though I was able to get the majority of the store watching ads and CYS combined with the daily deals. However, looking back on it, I was easily plum into that buying model, and it was only my cheapskate tendancies that let me get the store for a few hundred rather than a few thousand dollars. I spent less on the Sims 3, including all packs and the store, than I have on Sims 4, but for a lot of people, it's easily the other way around. And it's a predatory way of marketing, especially when you're marketing to children.
These two posts are very disheartening. They give credence to what I've believed about the gaming industry for a while now -- it's better to go indie and to forget about the big companies. They're going to suck all of the juice out of the industry until all that's left is a desiccated husk and no one will want to have anything to do with it anymore.
I wonder what would happen if the guru's took a look at this thread and saw some of the things that maybe peaked peoples interest. Would they act on it? Let's hope so. I doubt it will be for Sims 4, but maybe Sims 5, if there is one.
The thread doesn't break any rules that I can see. Feedback can be very valuable, especially when things are not going well.
The only way they'd act on it, would be:
A ) Shut the thread (using some obscure interpretation of the rules)
B ) get EA to attempt to buy and shut down Paralives.
C ) Make no changes whatsoever to the Sims 4 or 5.
Do you truly believe C? Man, I hope not.
An indie developer is outclassing The Sims' typical build/buy mode mechanics, by leagues. It's true that TS4 won't change. However, in the very early days of plotting and planning for TS5, you'd think that EA would want to switch things up a bit in order not to be bested by a lone man in his house.
Yes, I truly believe C... As I said earlier, EA took FIFA 2019 (and I am so glad I don't buy that kind of game), stripped some features 'out', added a load of monetizations (you know the usual 'surprise mechanics') and sold it as FIFA 2020.
They even forgot to update the icon, it still said FIFA 2019.
No, you're mixing up FIFA 20 for NBA2k20 which is under serious fire for being a gambling simulator with basketball minigames and the ESRB and PEGI are under fire for giving it an E rating despite it having slot machines and Pachinko. However, FIFA 20 is also under serious fire for it not only having loot boxes plus other forms of monitization for people who don't like loot boxes as a large part of the game, but the single player campaign (the part which makes players least likely to buy microtransations) was broken at release. Oh, and FIFA 20 for switch actually is FIFA 19 with some surface changes, though if you read the product description, that's mentioned.
Whoops, yes you're quite right... NBA2K20 has the icon issue, but it's FIFA 2020 that had the surprise mechanics that caused kids to inadvertently empty their parents bank accounts.
I swear video game companies are competing with who can be the sleaziest when it comes to monitization. I miss the days where you could buy a complete game and, well, enjoy it. I don't mind fleshed out DLC. I'm fine with the Sims model. If Fixaris releases another DLC for Civilization 6, I'll buy it, though if it's just a new civ leader, I'll wait for it to be bundled with something else.
Yeah, even Bethesda's in on it now.
I'm fine with The Sims 1 & 2 model of DLC, but not TS3 or TS4, both of them stripped content and released it later as TS3:store or TS4:GPs/SPs.
I started having issues with video game devs when they started releasing day 1 dlc, tbh. But microtransactions and loot boxes are on a different level. And Sims 3 is guilty of this, though I was able to get the majority of the store watching ads and CYS combined with the daily deals. However, looking back on it, I was easily plum into that buying model, and it was only my cheapskate tendancies that let me get the store for a few hundred rather than a few thousand dollars. I spent less on the Sims 3, including all packs and the store, than I have on Sims 4, but for a lot of people, it's easily the other way around. And it's a predatory way of marketing, especially when you're marketing to children.
Games are increasingly turning into online casinos with a playable interlude.
EA will never do that because they don't have to. They know no matter what they do, the Sims series will sell. They have Sims players wrapped around their finger and they know it.
EA will never do that because they don't have to. They know no matter what they do, the Sims series will sell. They have Sims players wrapped around their finger and they know it.
Sadly true... It's a shame that after nearly 20 years, the only real innovation we see is coming from an entirely different game.
As long as The Sims continues to be the only series that allows this manner of customization and open-ended life simulation gameplay, EA will never strive for new innovations to keep the game fresh. ESPECIALLY if those innovations cost any sort of development time or money they don't wish to spend. Everything for sims 4 has felt rushed, including the base game release.
They rush half-finished gameplay out the door because they can get money while they roll out "bug fixes" the month following that should have been tested and eliminated during QA before release.
Almost all of the free updates are chocked full of content that really should have been part of the base game at launch.
As long as The Sims continues to be the only series that allows this manner of customization and open-ended life simulation gameplay, EA will never strive for new innovations to keep the game fresh. ESPECIALLY if those innovations cost any sort of development time or money they don't wish to spend. Everything for sims 4 has felt rushed, including the base game release.
They rush half-finished gameplay out the door because they can get money while they roll out "bug fixes" the month following that should have been tested and eliminated during QA before release.
Almost all of the free updates are chocked full of content that really should have been part of the base game at launch.
Absolutely NOT - most free content has been cultural and not something we ever get in base game. How did you get that. Back in Sims 2 days we paid for stuff we now get free - seeing free was rare in Sims 2. We even had to pay for Holiday stuff in Sims 2. For free Sims 4 has been amazing.
"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.....
As long as The Sims continues to be the only series that allows this manner of customization and open-ended life simulation gameplay, EA will never strive for new innovations to keep the game fresh. ESPECIALLY if those innovations cost any sort of development time or money they don't wish to spend. Everything for sims 4 has felt rushed, including the base game release.
They rush half-finished gameplay out the door because they can get money while they roll out "bug fixes" the month following that should have been tested and eliminated during QA before release.
Almost all of the free updates are chocked full of content that really should have been part of the base game at launch.
Absolutely NOT - most free content has been cultural and not something we ever get in base game. How did you get that. Back in Sims 2 days we paid for stuff we now get free - seeing free was rare in Sims 2. We even had to pay for Holiday stuff in Sims 2. For free Sims 4 has been amazing.
I think they are referring to content like swimming pools and toddlers and terrain tools.
As long as The Sims continues to be the only series that allows this manner of customization and open-ended life simulation gameplay, EA will never strive for new innovations to keep the game fresh. ESPECIALLY if those innovations cost any sort of development time or money they don't wish to spend. Everything for sims 4 has felt rushed, including the base game release.
They rush half-finished gameplay out the door because they can get money while they roll out "bug fixes" the month following that should have been tested and eliminated during QA before release.
Almost all of the free updates are chocked full of content that really should have been part of the base game at launch.
Absolutely NOT - most free content has been cultural and not something we ever get in base game. How did you get that. Back in Sims 2 days we paid for stuff we now get free - seeing free was rare in Sims 2. We even had to pay for Holiday stuff in Sims 2. For free Sims 4 has been amazing.
I mean, I think we did pay for toddlers, ghosts, and pools. Those are all features that should have been in the base game. Some were in the last two, others in EVERY other base game. And a guru who infamously tweets more than he should even confirmed that this base game of TS4 would have toddlers upon launch before backtracking with the statement, "things change." So, while I really appreciate the fact that EA finally gave us those features after waiting months, and in some cases, YEARS for things we should have received after paying for the game immediately, I am not going to go out of my way to really praise them for it.
I have no qualms with spending money on The Sims, and I still love this franchise. I will gladly pay for any and all packs they release, if they are worth it. My problem with TS4 is that I paid for packs, and found myself bored out of my mind the next day, or even the same day in some instances, because the vast majority of TS4's DLC are not designed with longevity or innovation in mind. You can indeed take a concept we received in TS1, TS2, AND TS3, and release it for TS4 if it offers significantly upgraded gameplay.
Really, the shortcomings of TS4 were exacerbated by poor quality packs. If the packs actually significantly impacted the game and offered loads of replayability, a lot of people wouldn't be voicing criticism in the feedback section, IMHO.
As long as The Sims continues to be the only series that allows this manner of customization and open-ended life simulation gameplay, EA will never strive for new innovations to keep the game fresh. ESPECIALLY if those innovations cost any sort of development time or money they don't wish to spend. Everything for sims 4 has felt rushed, including the base game release.
They rush half-finished gameplay out the door because they can get money while they roll out "bug fixes" the month following that should have been tested and eliminated during QA before release.
Almost all of the free updates are chocked full of content that really should have been part of the base game at launch.
Absolutely NOT - most free content has been cultural and not something we ever get in base game. How did you get that. Back in Sims 2 days we paid for stuff we now get free - seeing free was rare in Sims 2. We even had to pay for Holiday stuff in Sims 2. For free Sims 4 has been amazing.
I mean, I think we did pay for toddlers, ghosts, and pools. Those are all features that should have been in the base game. Some were in the last two, others in EVERY other base game. And a guru who infamously tweets more than he should even confirmed that this base game of TS4 would have toddlers upon launch before backtracking with the statement, "things change." So, while I really appreciate the fact that EA finally gave us those features after waiting months, and in some cases, YEARS for things we should have received after paying for the game immediately, I am not going to go out of my way to really praise them for it.
I have no qualms with spending money on The Sims, and I still love this franchise. I will gladly pay for any and all packs they release, if they are worth it. My problem with TS4 is that I paid for packs, and found myself bored out of my mind the next day, or even the same day in some instances, because the vast majority of TS4's DLC are not designed with longevity or innovation in mind. You can indeed take a concept we received in TS1, TS2, AND TS3, and release it for TS4 if it offers significantly upgraded gameplay.
Really, the shortcomings of TS4 were exacerbated by poor quality packs. If the packs actually significantly impacted the game and offered loads of replayability, a lot of people wouldn't be voicing criticism in the feedback section, IMHO.
that is your opinion and not mine. So be it. I also see a lot of people that voice the same as me - so to each their own. I am glad I have Sims 4 and enjoy it daily.
"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.....
As long as The Sims continues to be the only series that allows this manner of customization and open-ended life simulation gameplay, EA will never strive for new innovations to keep the game fresh. ESPECIALLY if those innovations cost any sort of development time or money they don't wish to spend. Everything for sims 4 has felt rushed, including the base game release.
They rush half-finished gameplay out the door because they can get money while they roll out "bug fixes" the month following that should have been tested and eliminated during QA before release.
Almost all of the free updates are chocked full of content that really should have been part of the base game at launch.
Absolutely NOT - most free content has been cultural and not something we ever get in base game. How did you get that. Back in Sims 2 days we paid for stuff we now get free - seeing free was rare in Sims 2. We even had to pay for Holiday stuff in Sims 2. For free Sims 4 has been amazing.
I mean, I think we did pay for toddlers, ghosts, and pools. Those are all features that should have been in the base game. Some were in the last two, others in EVERY other base game. And a guru who infamously tweets more than he should even confirmed that this base game of TS4 would have toddlers upon launch before backtracking with the statement, "things change." So, while I really appreciate the fact that EA finally gave us those features after waiting months, and in some cases, YEARS for things we should have received after paying for the game immediately, I am not going to go out of my way to really praise them for it.
I have no qualms with spending money on The Sims, and I still love this franchise. I will gladly pay for any and all packs they release, if they are worth it. My problem with TS4 is that I paid for packs, and found myself bored out of my mind the next day, or even the same day in some instances, because the vast majority of TS4's DLC are not designed with longevity or innovation in mind. You can indeed take a concept we received in TS1, TS2, AND TS3, and release it for TS4 if it offers significantly upgraded gameplay.
Really, the shortcomings of TS4 were exacerbated by poor quality packs. If the packs actually significantly impacted the game and offered loads of replayability, a lot of people wouldn't be voicing criticism in the feedback section, IMHO.
that is your opinion and not mine. So be it. I also see a lot of people that voice the same as me - so to each their own. I am glad I have Sims 4 and enjoy it daily.
And there are a ton of people that share the same opinions as me, too. I'm glad I still have the past base games, and I am no longer supporting a product that doesn't match its price tag. I'll gladly support it again once it does.
Comments
So this means we should give up on Sims 4 and any future Sim games. How come Sims 2 and Sims 3 was not too difficult and too expensive?
Because this version was designed to be something else entirely before it became TS4. The actual core of the game cannot handle what a game like The Sims requires.
I think of it like papier-mâché; you can layer a balloon with a lot of coloured paper but in the end, the inside is still empty.
—T
^^^^This!
The sad part is that EA won't fess up to this. Instead, out of one side of their mouths, EA reps go on and on about how TS4 has, like, the best, most intuitive, and easiest to work with engine ever! Meanwhile, out of the other side of their mouths, they're having to admit that TS4's engine can't handle something such as snow depth and the features that the other games all had are just too expensive and too hard to do now.
In addition, there's the stuff that EA reps don't talk about: better whims, better personalities, an attraction system, like/dislikes, player-created apartments and festivals which can be used in any world, etc. The stuff that they're mum about is the most concerning.
Hopefully, it means that they may be working on those issues. Yet, TS4 is in its sixth year already. Those issues and features should have been worked out ages ago. Those issues should have been the main focus all along.
Because one company can make a chair, another can't make chairs?
Well, TS4 as mentioned was meant to be something else, but now EA knows people will en masse, buy cheaply made massively overpriced stuff like TS4, they'll keep making it.
TS2 didn't have EA contantly taking the money from them and putting into other things, the Sims 3 had it but to a lesser extent, TS4 seems to be run on a shoestring, just so EA can pocket the rest.
EA really does need the shot in the groin that Paralives represents to either poop or get off the pot when it comes to life sims. They've grown complacent with The Sims, because there have been no other real competitors in the genre over the last 20 years, so they've basically had a captive audience for the franchise. They've had a monopoly in the genre for so long, they think they can toss out any old thing and be good to go because their audience has nowhere else to turn to for a similar experience.
Fighting games in the 90's got better because there were so many out there in restaurants, grocery stores, gas stations, arcades, and on store shelves to choose from, so anything new had to stand out or be buried in the mudslide of titles on the market. Street Fighter II gave us globe-trotting tournament play with special moves, an interesting and diverse roster of fighters, and devastating combos. Mortal Kombat came along and gave us blood spurts with every crunchy hit and gorey fatalities. Primal Rage upped the ante by having the roster filled with prehistoric monsters. Virtua Fighter brought the genre into 3D. Bloody Roar made the fighters all shapeshifters. The genre advanced and grew more interesting and exciting because no one company held a monopoly on it, and so many comers came with their own spin on it. No one could get complacent, because you never knew what a rival company or a rival team within your own company might come up with next.
The life sim genre, in comparison, has had very few entries, and though the Animal Crossing/Harvest Moon-type titles have had concurrently running titles going up against each other over the years, Sims-Likes have not gone head-to-head in any meaningful way. Little Computer People had lived, grown old, and died long before The Sims ever came out. Games like Mabinogi and Second Life have never been direct competition for the franchise because of their MMO nature. The Sims has been basically unchallenged for two decades, and this has led to complacency that has had a real impact on the games, especially TS4. Paralives should get EA scared enough to try harder with future additions to TS4 and with TS5 on the whole. Poop or get off the pot.
The thread doesn't break any rules that I can see. Feedback can be very valuable, especially when things are not going well.
The only way they'd act on it, would be:
A ) Shut the thread (using some obscure interpretation of the rules)
B ) get EA to attempt to buy and shut down Paralives.
C ) Make no changes whatsoever to the Sims 4 or 5.
Do you truly believe C? Man, I hope not.
An indie developer is outclassing The Sims' typical build/buy mode mechanics, by leagues. It's true that TS4 won't change. However, in the very early days of plotting and planning for TS5, you'd think that EA would want to switch things up a bit in order not to be bested by a lone man in his house.
I don’t know, it honestly sometimes feels the decision to release The Sims 4 was purely to generate ongoing DLC sales, rather than to innovate.
The lack of innovation in the base game compared to TS3’s base game is just staggering. Even with TS3’s less-than-stellar performance, I get too absorbed for hours playing it still. I then open TS4 to compare a few things, and no exaggeration, I shut it out 3 minutes later. The gameplay is that bad.
Every EA employer ever
Yes, I truly believe C... As I said earlier, EA took FIFA 2019 (and I am so glad I don't buy that kind of game), stripped some features 'out', added a load of monetizations (you know the usual 'surprise mechanics') and sold it as FIFA 2020.
They even forgot to update the icon, it still said FIFA 2019.
No, you're mixing up FIFA 20 for NBA2k20 which is under serious fire for being a gambling simulator with basketball minigames and the ESRB and PEGI are under fire for giving it an E rating despite it having slot machines and Pachinko. However, FIFA 20 is also under serious fire for it not only having loot boxes plus other forms of monitization for people who don't like loot boxes as a large part of the game, but the single player campaign (the part which makes players least likely to buy microtransations) was broken at release. Oh, and FIFA 20 for switch actually is FIFA 19 with some surface changes, though if you read the product description, that's mentioned.
I swear video game companies are competing with who can be the sleaziest when it comes to monitization. I miss the days where you could buy a complete game and, well, enjoy it. I don't mind fleshed out DLC. I'm fine with the Sims model. If Fixaris releases another DLC for Civilization 6, I'll buy it, though if it's just a new civ leader, I'll wait for it to be bundled with something else.
I started having issues with video game devs when they started releasing day 1 dlc, tbh. But microtransactions and loot boxes are on a different level. And Sims 3 is guilty of this, though I was able to get the majority of the store watching ads and CYS combined with the daily deals. However, looking back on it, I was easily sucked into that buying model, and it was only my cheapskate tendancies that let me get the store for a few hundred rather than a few thousand dollars. I spent less on the Sims 3, including all packs and the store, than I have on Sims 4, but for a lot of people, it's easily the other way around. And it's a predatory way of marketing, especially when you're marketing to children.
These two posts are very disheartening. They give credence to what I've believed about the gaming industry for a while now -- it's better to go indie and to forget about the big companies. They're going to suck all of the juice out of the industry until all that's left is a desiccated husk and no one will want to have anything to do with it anymore.
Whoops, yes you're quite right... NBA2K20 has the icon issue, but it's FIFA 2020 that had the surprise mechanics that caused kids to inadvertently empty their parents bank accounts.
It's getting hard to keep track of these clones.
Yeah, even Bethesda's in on it now.
I'm fine with The Sims 1 & 2 model of DLC, but not TS3 or TS4, both of them stripped content and released it later as TS3:store or TS4:GPs/SPs.
Games are increasingly turning into online casinos with a playable interlude.
Sadly true... It's a shame that after nearly 20 years, the only real innovation we see is coming from an entirely different game.
They rush half-finished gameplay out the door because they can get money while they roll out "bug fixes" the month following that should have been tested and eliminated during QA before release.
Almost all of the free updates are chocked full of content that really should have been part of the base game at launch.
Absolutely NOT - most free content has been cultural and not something we ever get in base game. How did you get that. Back in Sims 2 days we paid for stuff we now get free - seeing free was rare in Sims 2. We even had to pay for Holiday stuff in Sims 2. For free Sims 4 has been amazing.
"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.....
I mean, I think we did pay for toddlers, ghosts, and pools. Those are all features that should have been in the base game. Some were in the last two, others in EVERY other base game. And a guru who infamously tweets more than he should even confirmed that this base game of TS4 would have toddlers upon launch before backtracking with the statement, "things change." So, while I really appreciate the fact that EA finally gave us those features after waiting months, and in some cases, YEARS for things we should have received after paying for the game immediately, I am not going to go out of my way to really praise them for it.
I have no qualms with spending money on The Sims, and I still love this franchise. I will gladly pay for any and all packs they release, if they are worth it. My problem with TS4 is that I paid for packs, and found myself bored out of my mind the next day, or even the same day in some instances, because the vast majority of TS4's DLC are not designed with longevity or innovation in mind. You can indeed take a concept we received in TS1, TS2, AND TS3, and release it for TS4 if it offers significantly upgraded gameplay.
Really, the shortcomings of TS4 were exacerbated by poor quality packs. If the packs actually significantly impacted the game and offered loads of replayability, a lot of people wouldn't be voicing criticism in the feedback section, IMHO.
that is your opinion and not mine. So be it. I also see a lot of people that voice the same as me - so to each their own. I am glad I have Sims 4 and enjoy it daily.
"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.....
And there are a ton of people that share the same opinions as me, too. I'm glad I still have the past base games, and I am no longer supporting a product that doesn't match its price tag. I'll gladly support it again once it does.