It really feels like they're blurring the lines between pack types at the moment, Strangerville was a game pack and had 12 lots... I feel like with this pack they blew the budget on animating and making animals and then there wasn't anything left for anything else..
Given the fact that this world is mainly just reused assets (the trees, grass, etc is just what we have in Willow Creek) I feel like they really could've expanded it a bit further though, like is it really that hard to just make the playable area a bit bigger and fit a couple more lots in? They added a whole Willow Creek 2.0 for free, and they're only reusing world assets again like they did with that world so it shouldn't be that hard to make it a bit bigger
I agree that the lines between packs are getting blurred. DHD has extremely little gameplay for a game pack while paranormal stuff feels almost like a game pack. And then there is island living and snowy escape with the world being the main feature. For cottage living it is a bit too early to tell if it has enough for a EP. We only have one trailer so far.
But I don't consider this world to be willow creek 2.0. Willow creek feels very American, not as generic as the base game worlds from previous sims games. Henford looks like a small old town in the country side, not an American suburb. If anything you could say it is similar to the get together countryside neighbourhood (windslar, I believe).
I was talking about Newcrest as Willow Creek 2.0 not this world
I hope cows aren't just an object in build and buy. But after watching the trailer I'm convinced at least chickens are objects. If this is the case with both then 2 of the new animals are already not offering much gameplay.
I hope cows aren't just an object in build and buy. But after watching the trailer I'm convinced at least chickens are objects. If this is the case with both then 2 of the new animals are already not offering much gameplay.
Cows, llamas, and chickens are all objects tied to a stall. 1 llama/cow per stall, up to 8 chickens per stall.
I hope cows aren't just an object in build and buy. But after watching the trailer I'm convinced at least chickens are objects. If this is the case with both then 2 of the new animals are already not offering much gameplay.
The cow and chickens from the Sims 3 store were objects and in my opinion they offered plenty of gameplay. After they were released I had a couple of farms and really enjoyed myself playing with those animals as part of a horse ranch, a crop farm, a dairy, etc. These animals look like they have even more going on with them than did the ones from the Sims 3, since they produce different flavours of milk, different colours of wool, and there is cross-pack compatibility with Nifty Knitting etc. (I am still hoping to find out that there is lots of cross-pack compatibility with Cats and Dogs too because I want my dogs to be able to chase off or fight foxes, and interact with the other animals etc). In this pack it also looks like the ingredients these versions of the animals will produce like milk and eggs will be essential for lots of recipes and even for all cooking in general (with the Simple Living Lot Challenge). As well, toddlers can even interact with chickens (which I don't recall from the Sims 3 chicken coop). Additionally, at least this way, none of the animals will take up one of the precious 8 slots that I want for my family members and their pets. For instance, in this game, I am hoping to run a real dairy, with a herd of about 10 cows, on the biggest 64X64 lot; this would not be possible if the animals weren't objects.
Nothing new as this is how Sims 4 was designed to be, one is dependent on how small or big an neighborhood will be as there are no tools that allow one to create their own.
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
Yeah, I was really disappointed in the size of this one, Del Sol Valley, Discover University, and Eco Living, but I think that is just the way expansions are going to be anymore.
Disappointed but not surprised... I would've wanted a bigger world because all the worlds in my save are completely full and my sims' children never have anywhere to move to.
It does feel small compared to Windenburg, which has 27 lots. But I think they have said that they are doing this for performance reasons, if they would have done Windenburg today they would have made it smaller.
I think it's pretty lame (especially since their system requirements are so low) I guess it's nice that you can play their packs on older computers but it really limits the worlds. I guess this is the price we pay for having the sims4 continuing for "many more years". I know I don't want a sims3 situation where we have to start disabling packs for the game to run well...
Still, that shouldn't affect game performance that much though would it? I mean you can only be in one neighborhood at a time anyway? So the game shouldn't be forced to load a maximum of maybe five lots at a time?
It does feel small compared to Windenburg, which has 27 lots. But I think they have said that they are doing this for performance reasons, if they would have done Windenburg today they would have made it smaller.
I think it's pretty lame (especially since their system requirements are so low) I guess it's nice that you can play their packs on older computers but it really limits the worlds. I guess this is the price we pay for having the sims4 continuing for "many more years". I know I don't want a sims3 situation where we have to start disabling packs for the game to run well...
Still, that shouldn't affect game performance that much though would it? I mean you can only be in one neighborhood at a time anyway? So the game shouldn't be forced to load a maximum of maybe five lots at a time?
I dunno, I don't know how this game works.
I always feel like the performance issue is just an excuse. If they really wanted this game to run on a potato computer from 1999 then why did they remove support for 32 bit systems?
It does feel small compared to Windenburg, which has 27 lots. But I think they have said that they are doing this for performance reasons, if they would have done Windenburg today they would have made it smaller.
I think it's pretty lame (especially since their system requirements are so low) I guess it's nice that you can play their packs on older computers but it really limits the worlds. I guess this is the price we pay for having the sims4 continuing for "many more years". I know I don't want a sims3 situation where we have to start disabling packs for the game to run well...
Still, that shouldn't affect game performance that much though would it? I mean you can only be in one neighborhood at a time anyway? So the game shouldn't be forced to load a maximum of maybe five lots at a time?
I dunno, I don't know how this game works.
I always feel like the performance issue is just an excuse. If they really wanted this game to run on a potato computer from 1999 then why did they remove support for 32 bit systems?
I dunno, maybe some programmers talked some sense into them, I don't think any programmer would recommend you today to make your programs in 32-bit, it is old and is being phased out. Apple are not supporting it anymore.
Was hoping it would be bigger. They probably made it small for the people that play on toasters. People really need to get a new PC or upgrade them if they want to play PC games. I used to play on a very low-end PC, but I recently bought a high-end one to be able to play without lagging.
Was hoping it would be bigger. They probably made it small for the people that play on toasters. People really need to get a new PC or upgrade them if they want to play PC games. I used to play on a very low-end PC, but I recently bought a high-end one to be able to play without lagging.
Sometimes it’s the cost of computers and it takes time to save. I’m saving up for a new computer.
More power = more Sims! 🥳🎉🎉🎉
It does feel small compared to Windenburg, which has 27 lots. But I think they have said that they are doing this for performance reasons, if they would have done Windenburg today they would have made it smaller.
I think it's pretty lame (especially since their system requirements are so low) I guess it's nice that you can play their packs on older computers but it really limits the worlds. I guess this is the price we pay for having the sims4 continuing for "many more years". I know I don't want a sims3 situation where we have to start disabling packs for the game to run well...
Still, that shouldn't affect game performance that much though would it? I mean you can only be in one neighborhood at a time anyway? So the game shouldn't be forced to load a maximum of maybe five lots at a time?
I dunno, I don't know how this game works.
I always feel like the performance issue is just an excuse. If they really wanted this game to run on a potato computer from 1999 then why did they remove support for 32 bit systems?
I don't buy that excuse either. As others have mentioned, Windenburg doesn't run any worse than any of the new worlds and it's got a whopping seven (!!) neighborhoods. So, I really don't get why we're down to three now. If they're not adding more neighborhoods to prevent bloating, then that's just as good as admitting: "We want to sell the same amount of content (gigabytes), but spread out over two packs instead of one". I mean, sure, that's one way you can keep the game going for many more years, but is that really fair? And if they're so worried about bloating, why won't they add more gameplay focused EP's instead of new worlds? People have been crying for generations. Adding things like 'play tag' for kids is not going to increase the size of the pack significantly, but it would make a lot of players very happy.
Also, to make up for those smaller worlds, I don't think the new packs have offered that many new features compared to Get Together or City Living, either. I still use the clubs feature that came with GT heavily, and Windenburg is still my go-to world because of how spacious it is. Nightclubs, gyms, café's, bars, pools, libraries - Windenburg has it all, along with plenty of space for families to live. Meanwhile, City Living's features have been getting recycled all across new packs. From the festivals to the apartments and even the objects being reskinned. They've basically stripped that pack bare to add content to other packs. Which I would be fine with, if the worlds were decently size.
Except, this new world is going to be about the size of Strangerville. But Strangeville feels super limited. There's a bar, a library and a lab, and that's pretty much it. If you want a decent sized population to live there, you can't add that many more community lots. For Cottage Living, the only new gameplay that we know off are some object-tied animals and a cooking update? The theme has me excited, but looking past that, I worry about the content of this pack and in particular, the size of the world.
Anyhow, maybe we're wrong, maybe there's a fourth neighborhood with a hidden lot or something. I'm still holding my breath in case there might be fairies.
My empty lots total 103.
SM and EH include apartments.
All of my destination worlds are full.
@simgirl1010 I've only the three basegame worlds, Magnolia Promenade, Windenburg, Brindleton Bay & Britechester. I like my Loves Outdoors/Scientist sims to live in OS, my pet lovers in BB. The Elderberrys live in Britechester since they began there. The Lykkes control Windenburg. My non-Landgraab sims populate Newcrest.
I like smaller, cosy worlds, so I'm glad that this new one isn't too big.
I have a gaming laptop but I do have lag issues with big worlds like Windenburg and San Myshuno. I can play other games without issues but Sims 4 is a problem. I've had to lower the graphics to medium to reduce the lag. I wouldn't call my laptop a toaster or a potato, it was way too expenslve to be called that way. My earlier laptop was a toaster, so I know what it's like to play with one.
I need a laptop, because I have a life outside Sims 4 too and I need to be able to carry a computer with me. I'm not rich and I don't see a reason to buy a desktop just to play Sims 4 when my gaming laptop works well with other games. If keeping worlds decent sizes helps with the game performance, I'm happy about it.
I would have liked a bigger world of course, but I find the ‘just upgrade your computer’ argument very insensitive. I have a gaming computer, but that was not always the case…
This is not Halo or something. This is the sims. The main player base has always been different to other games, which makes it so successful.
Sims always had more female players and younger ones. I, myself played Sims 1 when I was a young kid. Almost all girls did when I grew up and that was so new!! Most of us young girls, actually none had gaming computers and for many sims was the only game they played. Now I am not saying that this is exactly how it is now, but still lots of sims players are still not heavy gamers and sometimes young, meaning a high end gaming computer is not affordable for them!
I think it is great that many people can play! The forum is in no way representative of the main player base.
Anyways, it would still be great if they found different ways to have bigger worlds. Sorry for the long post. 🙃
Was hoping it would be bigger. They probably made it small for the people that play on toasters. People really need to get a new PC or upgrade them if they want to play PC games. I used to play on a very low-end PC, but I recently bought a high-end one to be able to play without lagging.
Sometimes it’s the cost of computers and it takes time to save. I’m saving up for a new computer.
More power = more Sims! 🥳🎉🎉🎉
I hope you get it soon! It really is a huge difference playing on a good PC. My comment was probably a bit too harsh, but I just feel like they could do more if they didn't keep low-end PCs in mind. It just feels like it's holding the game back.
Until the end user has the ability to cut the cord from EA/Maxis and allow us to create our worlds the way we like them, the Neighborhoods EA/Maxis give us will be small and static as what you see is what you get. Some may think this is great and they are entitled to it but me I do not see this as great as I have to create how EA/Maxis wants me to create and I did not have to in older versions. Sooner or later those neighborhoods will take it toll out on the game.
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'm not really surprised by the size of the world. I would have preferred a world in the size of windenburg but I don't think that will be happening again. As long as the neighbourhoods have 4 or 5 lots per neighbourhood, I am OK with it.
I'm more worried about the size of the lots available, myself. @PlanetSixam I love the notion of kits for additional worlds for those of us with gaming rigs, or high end machines. I don't run on 64-bits for nothing. LOL
I would have liked a bigger world of course, but I find the ‘just upgrade your computer’ argument very insensitive. I have a gaming computer, but that was not always the case…
This is not Halo or something. This is the sims. The main player base has always been different to other games, which makes it so successful.
Sims always had more female players and younger ones. I, myself played Sims 1 when I was a young kid. Almost all girls did when I grew up and that was so new!! Most of us young girls, actually none had gaming computers and for many sims was the only game they played. Now I am not saying that this is exactly how it is now, but still lots of sims players are still not heavy gamers and sometimes young, meaning a high end gaming computer is not affordable for them!
I think it is great that many people can play! The forum is in no way representative of the main player base.
Anyways, it would still be great if they found different ways to have bigger worlds. Sorry for the long post. 🙃
Yeah it would be great if they could find a solution for it... I understand that not everyone have the same computers. When I was a student I had a very basic computer which could not run many games.
I'm not sure what could be done though, add a functionality that allows us to choose number of lots for a pack when we install it?
Maybe they could have done cottage living in two versions, one with 12 lots (low) and one with 20 lots or more (high).
Yeah, I don‘t understand why the worlds are so ridiculously small neither. It‘s not like the entire map gets loaded at once. There is a loading screen everywhere we go. Big-ish Windenburg doesn’t perform any worse than small Del Sol Valley.
While someone shared the video with the reasoning above, they shared it as a twitter post of a 30 minute video.
Here's the exact video, forwarded to the point where they say why:
Watch that from :8:16 to 11:00
(YouTube's embed system is messing with me, and seems to insist on playing that back at a random incorrect point in time, if it does that for you - forward to EXACTLY 8:16 and watch until 11:00)
It's a performance trade off made for some specific reasons:
1. The game is one of the few modern games that will run on some rather old hardware, and they still value keeping those customers.
2. Even if they wanted to say, toss every customer who didn't have a 20xx nVidea CPU and AMD 2xxx or 3xxx CPU... They recall Sims 3 at this point in it's lifecycle where even on the top end machines they had to tell customers to pick and choose which packs to have enabled in any play session because the game had become 'too heavy'. A lot of the 'limits' of Sims 4 were made to allow the game to age well.
My thought. At 5 years in, Sims 3 was no longer a game capable of stability on even that year's newest hardware if one ran the whole game. It was rapidly spinning out of control with excessive load on a machine's hardware. Yet Sims 4 is now 6 or 7 years old, and still rock stable on even less than current PCs.
This is almost certainly due to the lack of an open world, the small size of the worlds, and all the loading screens - which is where you would push things into and out of memory.
Much as I want a pack with 537 new lots... I understand why I'm not getting it, and they made the right call.
I'd rather have a game I can play at all, than a game that checks every dream item on my wishlist but can't even run.
I don't use Discord because it doesn't support multiple accounts and I don't need folks at work wondering what I'm doing even on my own time. Until Discord catches up with every single other voice / video conferencing system, I limit where I use it:
Yeah, I don‘t understand why the worlds are so ridiculously small neither. It‘s not like the entire map gets loaded at once. There is a loading screen everywhere we go. Big-ish Windenburg doesn’t perform any worse than small Del Sol Valley.
While someone shared the video with the reasoning above, they shared it as a twitter post of a 30 minute video.
Here's the exact video, forwarded to the point where they say why:
Watch that from :8:16 to 11:00
(YouTube's embed system is messing with me, and seems to insist on playing that back at a random incorrect point in time, if it does that for you - forward to EXACTLY 8:16 and watch until 11:00)
It's a performance trade off made for some specific reasons:
1. The game is one of the few modern games that will run on some rather old hardware, and they still value keeping those customers.
2. Even if they wanted to say, toss every customer who didn't have a 20xx nVidea CPU and AMD 2xxx or 3xxx CPU... They recall Sims 3 at this point in it's lifecycle where even on the top end machines they had to tell customers to pick and choose which packs to have enabled in any play session because the game had become 'too heavy'. A lot of the 'limits' of Sims 4 were made to allow the game to age well.
My thought. At 5 years in, Sims 3 was no longer a game capable of stability on even that year's newest hardware if one ran the whole game. It was rapidly spinning out of control with excessive load on a machine's hardware. Yet Sims 4 is now 6 or 7 years old, and still rock stable on even less than current PCs.
This is almost certainly due to the lack of an open world, the small size of the worlds, and all the loading screens - which is where you would push things into and out of memory.
Much as I want a pack with 537 new lots... I understand why I'm not getting it, and they made the right call.
I'd rather have a game I can play at all, than a game that checks every dream item on my wishlist but can't even run.
I wonder if there is a limit on how many more packs and worlds the sims4 can handle.
Yeah, I don‘t understand why the worlds are so ridiculously small neither. It‘s not like the entire map gets loaded at once. There is a loading screen everywhere we go. Big-ish Windenburg doesn’t perform any worse than small Del Sol Valley.
While someone shared the video with the reasoning above, they shared it as a twitter post of a 30 minute video.
Here's the exact video, forwarded to the point where they say why:
Watch that from :8:16 to 11:00
(YouTube's embed system is messing with me, and seems to insist on playing that back at a random incorrect point in time, if it does that for you - forward to EXACTLY 8:16 and watch until 11:00)
It's a performance trade off made for some specific reasons:
1. The game is one of the few modern games that will run on some rather old hardware, and they still value keeping those customers.
2. Even if they wanted to say, toss every customer who didn't have a 20xx nVidea CPU and AMD 2xxx or 3xxx CPU... They recall Sims 3 at this point in it's lifecycle where even on the top end machines they had to tell customers to pick and choose which packs to have enabled in any play session because the game had become 'too heavy'. A lot of the 'limits' of Sims 4 were made to allow the game to age well.
My thought. At 5 years in, Sims 3 was no longer a game capable of stability on even that year's newest hardware if one ran the whole game. It was rapidly spinning out of control with excessive load on a machine's hardware. Yet Sims 4 is now 6 or 7 years old, and still rock stable on even less than current PCs.
This is almost certainly due to the lack of an open world, the small size of the worlds, and all the loading screens - which is where you would push things into and out of memory.
Much as I want a pack with 537 new lots... I understand why I'm not getting it, and they made the right call.
I'd rather have a game I can play at all, than a game that checks every dream item on my wishlist but can't even run.
I wonder if there is a limit on how many more packs and worlds the sims4 can handle.
I’ve lost count of how many worlds there are currently.
At the moment I have eight playable ones. Several disabled and some I don’t own.
It does make me wonder how many worlds are being planned.
I think each world could have 15 lots with some empty. I would’ve liked Forgotten Hollow to have 2 more lots to add community venues etc
With Sims 3 I found it runs better the fewer packs you have so I rotate them occasionally.
My thought. At 5 years in, Sims 3 was no longer a game capable of stability on even that year's newest hardware if one ran the whole game. It was rapidly spinning out of control with excessive load on a machine's hardware. Yet Sims 4 is now 6 or 7 years old, and still rock stable on even less than current PCs.
@Jyotai The Sims 3 came out in 2009 so even the fact that it had an open-world was very ambitious but from 2009 to 2014 to 2021 technology has evolved sooooo much, there is not way EA can't make bigger worlds, while keeping the game stable. It's just the bad engine they use in my opinion.
Also the Sims 4 ain't so "rock stable". It causes problems with newer hardware cause it's so obsolete, not well-optimized and it suffering under a very big, yet still ignored, case of "spaghetti code". I mean the game is so full of bugs and oversights at this point that no matter how easy it is on the PC, it's still doesn't matter when you have simulation lag etc.
Finally, yes it's a good thing that players with older systems can play. But, even in 2014 when the game came out it could be played on a potato. Imo they kind of overdid it with the "holding back so it runs on older systems". I mean if your system is from 2010-2012 I'm sorry but I don't think any company should be obligated to make games for you. EA proudly says the Sims 4 is one of the only games that runs on older systems but that's a negative thing, the reason why the Sims 4 is the only one is cause all other gaming companies are willing to take a step further and make games for the future.
It's like telling a company that develops phone apps to make it so the app runs on a Nokia phone with buttons. That means the quality of the product will drop in order to increase the "audience".
The game will never evolve if they keep making it so it runs on decade old systems. But only the Sims 4 is willing to sacrifice evolution to have a broader audience. All other companies put the product in the forefront and find a good middle way to handle this.
Comments
I was talking about Newcrest as Willow Creek 2.0 not this world
Cows, llamas, and chickens are all objects tied to a stall. 1 llama/cow per stall, up to 8 chickens per stall.
The cow and chickens from the Sims 3 store were objects and in my opinion they offered plenty of gameplay. After they were released I had a couple of farms and really enjoyed myself playing with those animals as part of a horse ranch, a crop farm, a dairy, etc. These animals look like they have even more going on with them than did the ones from the Sims 3, since they produce different flavours of milk, different colours of wool, and there is cross-pack compatibility with Nifty Knitting etc. (I am still hoping to find out that there is lots of cross-pack compatibility with Cats and Dogs too because I want my dogs to be able to chase off or fight foxes, and interact with the other animals etc). In this pack it also looks like the ingredients these versions of the animals will produce like milk and eggs will be essential for lots of recipes and even for all cooking in general (with the Simple Living Lot Challenge). As well, toddlers can even interact with chickens (which I don't recall from the Sims 3 chicken coop). Additionally, at least this way, none of the animals will take up one of the precious 8 slots that I want for my family members and their pets. For instance, in this game, I am hoping to run a real dairy, with a herd of about 10 cows, on the biggest 64X64 lot; this would not be possible if the animals weren't objects.
I think it's pretty lame (especially since their system requirements are so low) I guess it's nice that you can play their packs on older computers but it really limits the worlds. I guess this is the price we pay for having the sims4 continuing for "many more years". I know I don't want a sims3 situation where we have to start disabling packs for the game to run well...
Still, that shouldn't affect game performance that much though would it? I mean you can only be in one neighborhood at a time anyway? So the game shouldn't be forced to load a maximum of maybe five lots at a time?
I dunno, I don't know how this game works.
I always feel like the performance issue is just an excuse. If they really wanted this game to run on a potato computer from 1999 then why did they remove support for 32 bit systems?
I dunno, maybe some programmers talked some sense into them, I don't think any programmer would recommend you today to make your programs in 32-bit, it is old and is being phased out. Apple are not supporting it anymore.
More power = more Sims! 🥳🎉🎉🎉
I don't buy that excuse either. As others have mentioned, Windenburg doesn't run any worse than any of the new worlds and it's got a whopping seven (!!) neighborhoods. So, I really don't get why we're down to three now. If they're not adding more neighborhoods to prevent bloating, then that's just as good as admitting: "We want to sell the same amount of content (gigabytes), but spread out over two packs instead of one". I mean, sure, that's one way you can keep the game going for many more years, but is that really fair? And if they're so worried about bloating, why won't they add more gameplay focused EP's instead of new worlds? People have been crying for generations. Adding things like 'play tag' for kids is not going to increase the size of the pack significantly, but it would make a lot of players very happy.
Also, to make up for those smaller worlds, I don't think the new packs have offered that many new features compared to Get Together or City Living, either. I still use the clubs feature that came with GT heavily, and Windenburg is still my go-to world because of how spacious it is. Nightclubs, gyms, café's, bars, pools, libraries - Windenburg has it all, along with plenty of space for families to live. Meanwhile, City Living's features have been getting recycled all across new packs. From the festivals to the apartments and even the objects being reskinned. They've basically stripped that pack bare to add content to other packs. Which I would be fine with, if the worlds were decently size.
Except, this new world is going to be about the size of Strangerville. But Strangeville feels super limited. There's a bar, a library and a lab, and that's pretty much it. If you want a decent sized population to live there, you can't add that many more community lots. For Cottage Living, the only new gameplay that we know off are some object-tied animals and a cooking update? The theme has me excited, but looking past that, I worry about the content of this pack and in particular, the size of the world.
Anyhow, maybe we're wrong, maybe there's a fourth neighborhood with a hidden lot or something. I'm still holding my breath in case there might be fairies.
@simgirl1010 I've only the three basegame worlds, Magnolia Promenade, Windenburg, Brindleton Bay & Britechester. I like my Loves Outdoors/Scientist sims to live in OS, my pet lovers in BB. The Elderberrys live in Britechester since they began there. The Lykkes control Windenburg. My non-Landgraab sims populate Newcrest.
I have a gaming laptop but I do have lag issues with big worlds like Windenburg and San Myshuno. I can play other games without issues but Sims 4 is a problem. I've had to lower the graphics to medium to reduce the lag. I wouldn't call my laptop a toaster or a potato, it was way too expenslve to be called that way. My earlier laptop was a toaster, so I know what it's like to play with one.
I need a laptop, because I have a life outside Sims 4 too and I need to be able to carry a computer with me. I'm not rich and I don't see a reason to buy a desktop just to play Sims 4 when my gaming laptop works well with other games. If keeping worlds decent sizes helps with the game performance, I'm happy about it.
This is not Halo or something. This is the sims. The main player base has always been different to other games, which makes it so successful.
Sims always had more female players and younger ones. I, myself played Sims 1 when I was a young kid. Almost all girls did when I grew up and that was so new!! Most of us young girls, actually none had gaming computers and for many sims was the only game they played. Now I am not saying that this is exactly how it is now, but still lots of sims players are still not heavy gamers and sometimes young, meaning a high end gaming computer is not affordable for them!
I think it is great that many people can play! The forum is in no way representative of the main player base.
Anyways, it would still be great if they found different ways to have bigger worlds. Sorry for the long post. 🙃
I hope you get it soon! It really is a huge difference playing on a good PC. My comment was probably a bit too harsh, but I just feel like they could do more if they didn't keep low-end PCs in mind. It just feels like it's holding the game back.
Not at all. I never run out of space either, 12 is good to me.
I'm more worried about the size of the lots available, myself.
@PlanetSixam I love the notion of kits for additional worlds for those of us with gaming rigs, or high end machines. I don't run on 64-bits for nothing. LOL
http://www.getfreeebooks.com/star-trek-original-series-fan-fiction-trilogy/
Yeah it would be great if they could find a solution for it... I understand that not everyone have the same computers. When I was a student I had a very basic computer which could not run many games.
I'm not sure what could be done though, add a functionality that allows us to choose number of lots for a pack when we install it?
Maybe they could have done cottage living in two versions, one with 12 lots (low) and one with 20 lots or more (high).
While someone shared the video with the reasoning above, they shared it as a twitter post of a 30 minute video.
Here's the exact video, forwarded to the point where they say why:
Watch that from :8:16 to 11:00
(YouTube's embed system is messing with me, and seems to insist on playing that back at a random incorrect point in time, if it does that for you - forward to EXACTLY 8:16 and watch until 11:00)
It's a performance trade off made for some specific reasons:
1. The game is one of the few modern games that will run on some rather old hardware, and they still value keeping those customers.
2. Even if they wanted to say, toss every customer who didn't have a 20xx nVidea CPU and AMD 2xxx or 3xxx CPU... They recall Sims 3 at this point in it's lifecycle where even on the top end machines they had to tell customers to pick and choose which packs to have enabled in any play session because the game had become 'too heavy'. A lot of the 'limits' of Sims 4 were made to allow the game to age well.
My thought. At 5 years in, Sims 3 was no longer a game capable of stability on even that year's newest hardware if one ran the whole game. It was rapidly spinning out of control with excessive load on a machine's hardware. Yet Sims 4 is now 6 or 7 years old, and still rock stable on even less than current PCs.
This is almost certainly due to the lack of an open world, the small size of the worlds, and all the loading screens - which is where you would push things into and out of memory.
Much as I want a pack with 537 new lots... I understand why I'm not getting it, and they made the right call.
I'd rather have a game I can play at all, than a game that checks every dream item on my wishlist but can't even run.
I wonder if there is a limit on how many more packs and worlds the sims4 can handle.
I’ve lost count of how many worlds there are currently.
At the moment I have eight playable ones. Several disabled and some I don’t own.
It does make me wonder how many worlds are being planned.
I think each world could have 15 lots with some empty. I would’ve liked Forgotten Hollow to have 2 more lots to add community venues etc
With Sims 3 I found it runs better the fewer packs you have so I rotate them occasionally.
@Jyotai The Sims 3 came out in 2009 so even the fact that it had an open-world was very ambitious but from 2009 to 2014 to 2021 technology has evolved sooooo much, there is not way EA can't make bigger worlds, while keeping the game stable. It's just the bad engine they use in my opinion.
Also the Sims 4 ain't so "rock stable". It causes problems with newer hardware cause it's so obsolete, not well-optimized and it suffering under a very big, yet still ignored, case of "spaghetti code". I mean the game is so full of bugs and oversights at this point that no matter how easy it is on the PC, it's still doesn't matter when you have simulation lag etc.
Finally, yes it's a good thing that players with older systems can play. But, even in 2014 when the game came out it could be played on a potato. Imo they kind of overdid it with the "holding back so it runs on older systems". I mean if your system is from 2010-2012 I'm sorry but I don't think any company should be obligated to make games for you. EA proudly says the Sims 4 is one of the only games that runs on older systems but that's a negative thing, the reason why the Sims 4 is the only one is cause all other gaming companies are willing to take a step further and make games for the future.
It's like telling a company that develops phone apps to make it so the app runs on a Nokia phone with buttons. That means the quality of the product will drop in order to increase the "audience".
The game will never evolve if they keep making it so it runs on decade old systems. But only the Sims 4 is willing to sacrifice evolution to have a broader audience. All other companies put the product in the forefront and find a good middle way to handle this.