So when are they releasing the Sims 3 ultimate collection? Hopefully they'll price is reasonably.
The Sims 4 Review - More BooHoo Than WooHoo
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
I still play the sims 2 from time to time. Mansions and gardens stuff is the last EA product I've ever bought.Mahorfeus said:
If history is a guide when the sims 5 comes out.PirateRose said:
Pretty much sounds like my experience with vanilla Sims 3 compared to vanilla Sims 2 when it came out back in '08, but much, MUCH worse. Granted, Sims 3 with a few expansions definitely surpasses even Sims 2 with all it's expansions, but I won't be jumping into that bandwagon again, "fool me once" and all that.
I'll be sticking to Sims 2 & 3 EA, thank you very much.
I'll be sticking to Sims 2 & 3 EA, thank you very much.
(Note: This is coming from someone that has a slight addiction problem to the Sims games, having spent almost as much time playing TS3 as other games like Skyrim or an MMO)
Well, I kinda saw that coming. The game is not bad but it's not good either. I knew well enough that the game would feel like it was missing content when compared to the older games and their dlc extravaganza, but it does feel like it EA/Maxis went a bit too far in the cutting back content.
I read somewhere a good explanation of why the Create-a-Style feature from TS3 went away: the fact that you could customize almost every single item and texture in the game means that it has to spend a lot of resources loading every single texture and it tends to hit the game's performance quite a lot (specially on the larger cities or near the end game when you have a big mansion and hundreds of items need to individually load each custom texture). Same for the open world feature, it makes little sense to spend resources having the whole city loaded and other sims walking around if you're going to spend most of your time on your house.
But there's other features that I have no idea why they removed. Sure, toddlers were annoying in TS3 but I don't see a reason why they would remove them from the game (or turn babies into objects), and pools? why on earth would you remove pools?
And as someone else mentioned, the fact that you have to go through loading screens for everything (like visiting the house next door) is annoying as hell.
I'd say it's better to wait for it to either go on sale or for the expansion packs to come out bundled with the game. Otherwise don't bother.
Well, I kinda saw that coming. The game is not bad but it's not good either. I knew well enough that the game would feel like it was missing content when compared to the older games and their dlc extravaganza, but it does feel like it EA/Maxis went a bit too far in the cutting back content.
I read somewhere a good explanation of why the Create-a-Style feature from TS3 went away: the fact that you could customize almost every single item and texture in the game means that it has to spend a lot of resources loading every single texture and it tends to hit the game's performance quite a lot (specially on the larger cities or near the end game when you have a big mansion and hundreds of items need to individually load each custom texture). Same for the open world feature, it makes little sense to spend resources having the whole city loaded and other sims walking around if you're going to spend most of your time on your house.
But there's other features that I have no idea why they removed. Sure, toddlers were annoying in TS3 but I don't see a reason why they would remove them from the game (or turn babies into objects), and pools? why on earth would you remove pools?
And as someone else mentioned, the fact that you have to go through loading screens for everything (like visiting the house next door) is annoying as hell.
I'd say it's better to wait for it to either go on sale or for the expansion packs to come out bundled with the game. Otherwise don't bother.
If the rumors are true (and some people have connected the dots pretty well based on developer statements [http://honeywellsims4news.tumblr.com/post/63437610043/more-corroboration-for-patrick-kelly-the-sims-4]), Sims 4 was originally supposed to be an online game (probably until the whole SimCity debacle). When I was playing it with the online aspect in mind, I could almost sense where online aspects would come into play--especially why each building forced its own load.
I preferred Sims 3 open world and Create-a-Style to Sims 2 (though the former game did have more innovative gameplay). Sims 4 does feel like a shell and as I'm playing I do keep thinking that, even after 2 days, I'm ready for DLC (or for the modding community to bolster the game).
Like so many EA projects of late, the game feels rushed out the door, despite years of development work, and that's probably because of a shift in gears once the game was no longer going to use an online audience.
I preferred Sims 3 open world and Create-a-Style to Sims 2 (though the former game did have more innovative gameplay). Sims 4 does feel like a shell and as I'm playing I do keep thinking that, even after 2 days, I'm ready for DLC (or for the modding community to bolster the game).
Like so many EA projects of late, the game feels rushed out the door, despite years of development work, and that's probably because of a shift in gears once the game was no longer going to use an online audience.
Well, that was a shocker, wasn't it? EA screwing up a well-loved game? Who knew? And still the idiots that blindly follow EA and Maxis like they're gods will buy this shit up, along with the 5 dozen EP's and SP's that are no doubt coming, feeding the beast that is EA's greed.
Meanwhile, I took Sims 2 off of EA's hands when they were giving it all out for free on Origin, and I'm having a blast.
It really is a hell of a condemnation when a reviewer says "Play the last game, it's better", but that's kind of come to be expected with EA, really. Dead Space and Mass Effect are two titles that come to mind.
Meanwhile, I took Sims 2 off of EA's hands when they were giving it all out for free on Origin, and I'm having a blast.
It really is a hell of a condemnation when a reviewer says "Play the last game, it's better", but that's kind of come to be expected with EA, really. Dead Space and Mass Effect are two titles that come to mind.
Well I used to enjoy The Sims a lot back in the day, upon reading this I thought, "hey let's just check out Sims 3 they've got to have a edition out with all the dlc and stuff in it right?"
*Opens origin, searches Sims*
Haha, WRONG!
I... what the... 160$ for a bunch of simpoints? Everything there at the price as a a full game?
Yeah......not happening.
I knew it was bad, but not THIS bad. Don't even dare to think about what they have planned for this one.
This is insane actually, considering I just grabbed Civ 5 with everything for about 19$ off steam. Something is very wrong here.
*Opens origin, searches Sims*
Haha, WRONG!
I... what the... 160$ for a bunch of simpoints? Everything there at the price as a a full game?
Yeah......not happening.
I knew it was bad, but not THIS bad. Don't even dare to think about what they have planned for this one.
This is insane actually, considering I just grabbed Civ 5 with everything for about 19$ off steam. Something is very wrong here.
Truth be told, while I do enjoy what I have played of the franchise, The Sims is not something I have ever been particularly keen on spending my money on. I cannot really argue that The Sims 3 is not better, but I suppose my point is more that The Sims 2 in its current state is a decidedly superior product compared to The Sims 4. And yet, it did not cost anyone who grabbed it recently a dime.JarinArenos said:
The Sims, as a franchise, makes far more sense to me as an online game than SimCity. That way, your family of Sims would be just one aspect of a much bigger world. Of course, no one would have hated SimCity the way they did if an offline mode existed at launch. Really, Diablo hit the perfect model for this sort of game over a decade ago: give people a single-player mode, get them to go online by the online being even more fun to play with other people.Attercap said:
(And then Diablo III happened...)
I like ya, Mr. Sterling, but do you realize it's no longer "unrealistic" after they've successfully done this in the Sims 2 and The Sims 3, right? It's certainly, "Chintzy," but not, "Unrealistic."
My favorite was when one whipped out their phone and browsed the web while peeing.
Games should not be boring. The Sims series in general, however... well, it's always been sort of Zen in its focus on everyday monotony.
The weird thing with that is while yes, Sims 3 games took awhile to load, once everything was loaded.... everything was loaded. So gameplay went pretty smoothly, even on a lower end game. Five years of technology and graphics engine development later, they should have been able to figure out how to streamline existing gameplay rather than go back to the 2005 way the Sims worked.nameless023 said:
That probably explains a lot of the issue with the Sims 4. But IIRC The Sims Online did really poorly and even though online games have improved in scope and possibility, I can't see an online version of the Sims doing much better now. Thank god they didn't stick with the plan--but they should have known better to start with. Of course we're talking about EA, it's foolish to expect them to learn from the past.Attercap said:
The PATENTED EA Guide to Making Money
Take a Game Franchise you own!
Make the plainest possible template you possibly can - the more stuff you can cut out to add to DLC, the better! Bonus points if it's something that you can "claim" is optional but in reality every single hardcore fan of said franchise will leap to buy it (Protheans, full Vehicular Warfare, Toddlers, etc.).
Dish out DLC at regular intervals, advertise how much it adds to the gaming experience.
Swim in the resulting money pool.
Reset every year. Close companies that do not give enough money and bury the franchises in the dirt.
You have now made money (and possibly sold your soul to the Devil).
Take a Game Franchise you own!
Make the plainest possible template you possibly can - the more stuff you can cut out to add to DLC, the better! Bonus points if it's something that you can "claim" is optional but in reality every single hardcore fan of said franchise will leap to buy it (Protheans, full Vehicular Warfare, Toddlers, etc.).
Dish out DLC at regular intervals, advertise how much it adds to the gaming experience.
Swim in the resulting money pool.
Reset every year. Close companies that do not give enough money and bury the franchises in the dirt.
You have now made money (and possibly sold your soul to the Devil).
I got the game. I'm playing it right now. Made the Evil Family, consistent of just one bloke with a large chin and defined jaw. Started the secret agent route, and married a foxy redhead, who was just rotten and evil to the core. Put her to work in the criminal career, since it seemed to be her style. My secret agent went the evil path and became a Super Villain, with his wife being a Mob Boss. We have an adorable home filled with Evil career rewards with a dungeon where we trap people to level up our mischief and evil ways.
We both reached the top. I don't know where to go from here. I'll probably play it again in a year when the obvious 300 expansions are on sale, but I think I got my money's worth.
We both reached the top. I don't know where to go from here. I'll probably play it again in a year when the obvious 300 expansions are on sale, but I think I got my money's worth.
So, it sounds like a Sims game. The game will be "fine" after a few years of DLC content. ALL of the Sims games are pretty meh without their expansion packs.