The Sims 4 Won't Have Pools, Toddlers

[Pr0]

Want to play good RPGs? Buy from Bethesda or Obsidian.
.

if you're referring to Bioware I should point out how they do "RPG's" is very different to how Bethesda does them.....and I HATE how bethesda do them

Obsidian would be ideal if they had access to those kinds of budgets...and a glitch fairy

Yes because BioWare's done so well [http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/d8/d884b8c8bac556a84605642b778d4cbcf7f640dae27a0044fc58a3e6cd05515a.jpg] with the RPG's they have [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/images/11/march/da/da0.jpg] and all that. [https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5820377600/h0065F753/]

 

[lacktheknack]

Whether or not it's possible to "include every feature", you can bet your ass it's possible to include the freaking basics of a Sims game.

Sheesh.

 

[Vault101]

Yes because BioWare's done so well [http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/d8/d884b8c8bac556a84605642b778d4cbcf7f640dae27a0044fc58a3e6cd05515a.jpg] with the RPG's they have [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/images/11/march/da/da0.jpg] and all that. [https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5820377600/h0065F753/]

weather or not you like Bioware RPG's (and you know I'm not about to rush out and buy the next thing they produce meyself) or weather or not its reasonable to expect people not to buy games is beside my point

my point being that Bethesda and Bioware games are not interchangeable because they take VASTLY different approaches...

which ok might be a bit nit picky but...yeah

 

[lacktheknack]

1. No Create a Style - For me this already a massive deal breaker, how the hell can you remove what is easily the best feature about Sims 3? Being able to give every single thing a unique texture or style to match your vision of a home or town is one of the most powerful customization systems ever put into a game period, and you take it away????

2. No open world - So now we have to go through more loading screens just to go to the store or visit sims that live across town...fantastic /s. there will also be fewer lots per world, I believe the number was 25 according to the forums.

3. No color wheel in Create a Sim or Lot building - pretty self explanatory, you will be limited in what colors you choose for clothes, hair and building.

4. No Pools - DLC bait no doubt about it.

5. No Toddlers - I can actually live with this because really there wasn't much game play for them if you didn't have generations but I do love the toddler stage and hate to see it go.

Dear Christ, I hadn't heard half of this. D:

They took out everything they ADVERTISED for Sims 3! They've officially lost a purchase unless they put all this stuff back in via DLC and they release a "mega-bundle".

 

[masticina]

What so I can't forcibly drown sims anymore?

And this reeks of bovine excrement. Reality is there will be a pool DLC pack. Indeed they rather cut out the old content so they can sell it to you later.

Joy..

So Sims 4 + 25 DLC packs.. $500?

 

[Mr Fixit]

Of course EA had to say something stupid, couldn't let Ubisoft keep that spotlight for too long.

I'll just stick with the Sims 2 & the insane amount of stuff modders have done for it.

 

[SteveTR]

"It's not possible for us to include every single feature and piece of content we added to The Sims 3 over the last five years"? Are you serious, EA? I would understand if they meant things they added in the numerous expansion packs for The Sims 3, but pools and toddlers? Toddlers are a core element of the gameplay. You can't take out a core element from the series and expect to get away with it. Yeah, I don't think they're gonna add it in a patch. It's probably going to part of an expansion pack or simply a separate piece of DLC.

And the pool thing? That's just silly, I see no reason for why they can't put them in.

 

[prowll]

You know what is even more insane about how much of the content they plan to leave out and cash grab with DLC again? If you go to the Sims forums, you'd be surprised how many people there defend the "leave stuff out" approach. Saying, you can't have it all at once, its too much, you want to look forward to new things via DLC. As if they couldn't come up with more ideas. I am not sure if this is because the hardcore fans are hugely brainwashed by EA or if EA just posts in threads a lot.
Either way, I found it amusing.

Actually, I kinda agree with that. Ever play sims with magic, college, seasons, pets, ect all on at the same time? Your computer explodes.

At the same time, I was about to come on here and compare this to Asscreed's 'we won't have women characters in multiplayer' debacle. I mean, playing as a woman shouldn't fundamentally change the game, but you're taking out THE MAIN REASON TO PLAY THE SIMS! HOW is my assassination house supposed to work without a pool? But then I see the internets is already calling the president on this debacle, and so all is right with the world....

 

[lacktheknack]

Will this spark another #miiquality-like shitstorm because it means homosexual sims can't adopt babies? Could it be blamed on Putin? Maybe EA can be forced to revoke their decisions over the claim of being homophobe...

Wat? You do know that the Sims has a "baby" stage, right? They'll just progress directly from "baby" to "child".

Besides, you could previously adopt a baby, a toddler, a child, or even a teen. You chose literally the worst attempt at shaming them.

 

[mitchell271]

Ah, and here I though EA had learn their lesson about "cash grabs", silly, silly me. No pools, please. Maybe one decade, EA will finally shut down and someone new can get hold of Sims and make it worth playing again. Then again, maybe one day the sun will appear to raise in the West.

Guess which one is more likely.

I think the Earth's rotation changing is far more likely than EA becoming reasonable publishers.
Did I get it right? Did I win?

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

I'm pretty sure what he meant to say was that they'll be excluding pools and toddlers until the DLC packs.

 

[Vivi22]

Ah, and here I though EA had learn their lesson about "cash grabs", silly, silly me.

Why include features people had included 14 years ago when you can just sell them in 20 or so expansions and add-on packs?

Fuck EA.

 

[james.sponge]

So what I've learned these past few weeks is that women and pools are expensive game assets to make.

Of course they are, boob physics alone cost billions in R&D expenses.

 

[superguin200]

It's "not possible" to include those features because EA doesn't get the fact that sequels are supposed to be better than the previous installments, and because an ancient curse forces them to take out every once-standard feature of the game and make it 40$ DLC.
Although on reflection, it's probably just because they're greedy bastards.

 

[Nimcha]

Slightly less cynical, but maybe they are running out of time and they made a business decision that they'd rather exclude these features than delay the game.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

*sniff sniff*
Does anyone smell that? It smells like bullshit.

Also does anyone else remember the days when game sequels had more stuff in them than their predecessors? I miss those days.

 

[Vault101]

Disregard over-hyped guff, acquire Witcher games.

now see THAT is a much better example and comparison

[quote/]To be fair Obsidian, Bioware and Bethesda have all dropped their share of bollocks over the past few years. I don't like the Bethesda 'style' of RPG that much to be honest but i also thought Dragon Age 2 was like some kind of joke release so what are you gonna to do?[/quote]
I only tolerate Fallout 3 because...Fallout. Oblivion/Skyrim I REALLY tried but I just couldn't do it...

I'm not defending Biowares mistakes or talking about the quality of the games...I just meant that comparing Bioware games to Bethesda games is apples and Oranges...had the OP made the comparison of Bioware games to the witcher then I wouldn't have bothered calling him out on it

[sub/]but to "go there" say what you want about Bioware but not many games give you that those kinds of options of who to play, amidst all this discussion of representation telling people to take a pass on one of the few games that lets them be represented could be...difficult[/sub]