The Sims 3 (In Comparison)

[bdhfsbp2.3]

i dont think it looks that bad i mean the sims is not supposed to look like oblivion or tomb raider so it seems a bit pointless to cmpare and anyway i think what the new game play offers is much more important than how it looks

[Zach-Attack]

Im still probably going to buy the game, but i don't think it will be immediately. While the graphics weren't the improvement that i was hoping for, there are other things that they seemed to have greatly worked on. For one, the square placement method is out of the window, you can place stuff anywhere (finally) and the architectural customization looks amazing.

And where did you hear that the game isn't gonna allow customizable content? Thats still up in the air, i haven't heard from anyone that they for sure not going to allow it. I'm hopeful that EA will realize what a dumb move they would be making if they were to not allow CC. Having no CC would be the only factor that would prevent me from purchasing the game.

[andy_matthews]

I'm probably not going to buy this game...It looks too confusing. The moodlets? I prefer the basic eight. The whole thing with other neighbors getting married, dying, etc, would have my panicking, because I won't control everything. It looks too complicated.

I just hope that when Sims 3 is out, that people continue to make mods and custom content for Sims 2...

[Tomkat]

To clear the air up a bit more about my 1st post:
I didnt intend to say that Oblivion or TR (for that matter) is the best games out there -I just used them as 2 examples of what else is available, in the endless sea of games. They are 2 I have experience in playing (not UNDERWORLD obviously, in general, and especially the CD created ones -since that gives a good idea of what you can expect of the new installment), so I needed some solid ground to place my soapbox on.

Also... TR...yes, I think the environment will be static. No shooting through tree trunks (ala crysis).  Oblivion: the environment is completely interactive. Food on plates, the plates themselves etc can be thrown around (by example.) You have to create buildings & environments to add into the game separately, or download new content if youre not creatively inclined. You cant choose to hang a painting where you want, just buy a set of ready made furnishings. Since Im not a modder I dont know the extent of customization, but ive seen some pretty awesome CC. BUT thats not the point...

What I tried to do is open it up for discussion, using my POV as an example. It might seem like it from the first post, but I wasnt planning to make my own opinion the sole purpose for this thread -and thanks to those who chimed in with their 2-cents worth

I just want people who might want to buy TS3 to have a reference point. And I think if they read all the valid points people in this thread have highlighted, even the ones that contradict my own, that they'll make a better, informed decision, instead of just sheepishly falling into the same old grooves of "I MUST buy this because its sims related..."

But by all means, continue the discussion, maybe even my semi-set-in-stone opinion will become more favourable

[Ninja]

I don't really like the idea of the game continuing when I'm not playing it...
Would that mean that my sims could get married, have kids and die of old age when I'm not even playing it?
And if there's no CC, I'm definitely not buying it, unless they miraculously hire a clothes/furniture designer that actually has a decent fashion sense. And judging from the screenshot, they haven't.

[PageCaek]

I hate to piddle on your parade, but a lot of the people in Oblivion are quite ugly. And every NPC of the same race looks kinda samey. And they all have really huge faces. While a lot of the scenery looks quite pretty, I don't want my Sims looking like Oblivion people.

[Jasumi]

I think you need to take into consideration that the Sims 2 appeals to nearly everyone. The average person does not have a graphics card powerful enough to power Crysis or Mass Effect. If I were an average person who plays only one game on his or her machine, I would not have spent $1,000 on a new computer. Most people will spend their $1,000 on clothing, or shoes, or something else of more importance to them.

In essence, EA has sales in mind. They will sell more games if more computers can run them. Nontraditional gamers usually have mediocre systems not built for extensive gaming. So The Sims 3 has compensated its graphical performance so that every modern computer can run the game. More people will buy it this way.

I think EA should have 2 versions of the game: one with kick-ass graphics and one with okay graphics

[bluefairy286]

TomKat I agree with everything you said, one thing I don't like about the Sims 3 is the silly expressions, I thought Sims 3 was going to be even more realistic.  I know some people like the silly expressions but I hate them.



:roll:

[Sim2Kid405]

I for one reserved it, haha I love the sims1, sims2, simcity games and the only reason I will buy Sims3 is cause of the new open area of the neighborhood, but really, I do wish they would of made this an Update Pack, not an expansion Pack, what I was thinking if they made the sims3 an new game with an option as an update pack if  you have sims2 installed, this way, with all the stuff packs and expansion packs thats in the game will still be available for the sims3, yes when updating it to the new neighborhood style of the sims3 it will reset your game to the beginning, all your sims  you made will be in the sims bin, im sure if they did this it be an option to upgrade or single install, this way they can make new expansion packs and not repeat sims2 expansion packs, and this way we all can enjoy the game a bit better, I just hope they did this but they won't, still going to buy it not cause i have to, it cause I want to buy it.

[JacobM]

I do agree that the sims look cartoony, and that they could be much more realistic if realism is what they're going for. And I don't like the eyes so much, but it almost seems like this is intentional because they don't want the sims to look 'too' real. I mean yeah, we all have seen many games where the realism in the facial features and how the people are is intense. Better than the sims. But I don't think appearance is what they're going for so much in this game. Another thing though, I hate how they advertise. Like all companies they boast, and with EA they're acting like they're creating something revolutionary to the world. I really don't think they should be so happy with themselves if most of their TS2 fans aren't happy with the way the sims are looking. They don't listen to the community as much as they say they do, obviously.
But still, they might be focusing less on appearance and more on the actual gameplay because they're /trying/ to make it genuinely different from tS2.
uniqueness from other games is what got people playing the sims. And as you've heard people say, the jump from TS1 to TS2 was pretty extreme.
But with them adding the same stuff to TS3 as they've added to TS2,
Not so extreme.
The graphics don't look quite as good as they could. It being a 2009 game.
You'd think them being who they are, would be able to come up with something better.
Because they sold what, 1 million copies of the TS2?
Amazing, wow. They must be the most special people on earth.
But yeah, I get where they're coming from. They want the game to sell. But it won't if they're too stuck up to stick only to THEIR ideas and not listen so much to the community.
The Sims Community, they should worship. Because they are the ones that buy the games, and feed them their money.
I don't think many people should get TS3 because, they need to realize what they're doing when they finally see a drop in the budget. They can't make anything if it doesn't sell; there would be no point.
They would have no choice but to listen to the community.
I'd say I'm kind of 50/50 on this whole thing, though.
I mean, I think they're adding (most?) of the same things in the game because they don't want to drift too far away from what the sims is, if they didn't leave in anything that was the same, it would be an entirely different games. Like all the other ones. I like how the sims is the only game in it's kind, and it's uniqueness basically.

BUT, making a thousand expansion packs and then a few years later another sequel..
Financially, they're geniuses.
Logically, they're morons.
I was watching a video (the walkthrough) for the TS3 from a link i got from snootysims
And I was reading the comments.
Someone said 'this game really knows how to bone their fanbase'
And I completely agree in some ways.
I haven't heard it said better, lol.
But I like the game overall, I love them for that.
I don't know how I feel. I can argue both sides.

TS2 is still appealing to me though, despite all of the 'OMG [the] revolutionary TS3 is coming out!!!11111111' bullshit.

[vanessa]

LOL,Tomcat,you have a great sense of humor,lol.
Will I buy it?Oh,yes!
And remember,anti PR is very good PR.

[astroth]

Some question and answer with executive producer Ben Bill and a video

http://pc.ign.com/articles/937/937310p1.html

[JacobM]

As for the silly expressions, I don't mind them so much. I like going into the game in the Sims 2 and it making me laugh a little. That's part of what makes a game enjoyable.

Also, I still preordered the game (collectors edition actually ) because I want to see how it is for myself,
then judge the game. Because I can make legitimate arguments about it once I've played.
But I don't know, it might be really good. No idea.

[freoninferno]

original poster is spot correct. if those TS3 photos are retouched in anyway, then he is more correct. besides... two things:

-i don't like the new game play
-securom is illegal spyware that breaks pc's. i make a living fixing pc's botched by EA.

they are not going to change the proposed gameplay.
and they are not getting rid of rootkits that hijack your pc.

one of those reasons alone is enough to avoid it as well as spore or any other monstrosity they shrink wrap and set on a shelf.

Actually I find this comparsion to a waste of space.  The reason being is until the game is released any and all comparsion's between it and any current game is a joke as we don't know for sure how the game will look and what the developers actaully have in mind.

Also I have more faith in a video clip showing the game then a still photo, as almost every still shot is enhanced to get you think thats the actual quality of the game.

I'm not blaming Tomkat for making this topic as the questions actually raised could be valid just as easy as they might not be, but a comparsion between two unreleased games at the time of Tomkat opening post and one that is released don't do anything to impress me either way.

Now I'm still not sure if I'll get it or not but still have somewhere between 6 months to a year to make a informed choice though I'll most likely get it.

Again read reports, watch videos and know what your system is able to do and what would be needed to get the most fun of whatever version of The Sims you plan on playing but figure over time the custom content for the older versions will become less and less

[GreyIOutcast]

From what I saw, I mainly skimmed over your initial post, it seems to be that you are mainly focusing on the graphics. There are several issues with this:

1) Oblivion's graphics looked good, yes, although the AI rarely encountered heavy use and most of the stuff only had to be focused on rendering since there were few processor-eaters.
2) Oblivion's "shading" was also mostly just a basic bloom effect. It's even obvious in some of the pictures. Outside of that, it was basic ideas for shadows, perspective of sunlight, blah blah blah.
3) That picture of Tomb Raider is obviously a render inside the modeling software. Although technology has advanced at rapid speed, if you tried running things with that low compression rate, just constantly re-drawing the frame would kill the FPS to about 15 fps, which is the opposite of what they'd want for an action game, of which are generally FPS-intensive games.
4) The Sims 3 is featuring a new system to have the entire neighborhood have actions encountered. Obviously, to avoid a situation with Crysis, where most machines are unable to run it at even some of the lowest specs, this feature will be dumbed down a whole lot, but with the current rate of technology, as well as the inefficiency that persists in computers today.

I say, it's too early to write this game off, but it's too early to praise it as a god among games. Otherwise, we'll get another form of the Crysis situation, in which it looks amazing, but may play like shit.

EDIT:

Seems like I'm still not done, because I know there's more to say on this subject.

So, I touched up on the idea that graphics aren't everything. As a metaphor, most guys would love to be with that supermodel in life, but would probably end up hating it because she's probably a dumb stick.

Also, Tomb Raider will probably be released on consoles. If it's on PC, and here's the shocker, they'll have to kill the quality of their work to get it to play. Why?

X360: The only process running on this thing is the game. That's pretty easy, you don't even need to worry about prioritizing anything.
PS3: Is simply oozing power. Pure, amazing, awesome power. The PS3's cell processor is the strongest processor out there, the graphics are quite worthy of mention, but only if you have a 1080p HDTV. The sound obviously relies on the power of your sound system. And it's the same case with the X360, there is nothing but the game to be running, and maybe a basic background process for friends and stuff like that.
Wii: Of course the graphics on it will be small, if it is even ported to the Wii. The Wii follows Nintendo's trend as it lately has, portability and innovation.
PC: It has the ability to be powerful, but it's efficiency is that of a dead fat man. It's only upside is that you don't have to restart anything or take out any CD's to start a new game, and you can do multiple things at once. Although the beauty of DirectX 10 is as I described it, beautiful, computers have a long way to go still before they take advantage of the power they're capable of. Especially with Windows latest creation, Vista, which kills all efficiency and tried to go for user-compatibility. It may work for some, but most people are eager for Windows 7.

The new gameplay, from what I understand, branches out on the idea of personalities (furthering AI), and creates a system where time is constant for everything.

freoninferno, you blame securom for breaking PC's. Although EA's idiocy makes me want to puke sometimes, claiming it's spyware seems uninformed. They would run into huge legal issues if otherwise. All securom is is a process run at the start to check if it is a genuine copy. Probably through something to do with the registry.

The day The Sims looks real is the day that people start confusing what reality is. I'm fine with the way it looks, and those obsessed with graphics only should not classify themselves as "gamers", but instead as "art enthusiasts".