Forum Discussion

DaWaterRat's avatar
DaWaterRat
Seasoned Ace
3 years ago

At what cost for Free Babies?

This is all hypothetical, and I'm not trying to upset people or coming down against free babies.

But

When it comes to freeing the babies, I'm sure there are a variety of ideas as to how it would happen, but I sometimes get the impression that several people expect to open their game after the "free babies" patch and just *poof* all the object babies are now sim babies. And while I don't mod, I do understand coding concepts, and I'm not convinced that the code can do that. So what if it can't? What if they can't just poof the baby out of the bassinette?

What "price" are you willing to "pay" for Free babies? Not in terms of money, but in terms of disruption to your saves to get them?

What if they simply add a new life stage between newborn and toddler, and reduce the object baby stage to something like 6 sim hours on Normal life span? Are you willing to accept object babies for half a day (or less) to get 2-3 sim days (normal lifespan) with free babies?

What if freeing the babies breaks saves? Are you willing to start over?

What if freeing the babies just deletes all existing babies in your save?

I personally think the first option is the most likely route for them to go, and I'd be okay with that. (I'd be even more okay if there was an option between aging up to toddler and freeing the baby so those who like object babies can keep them as such.) The only one I'd actually be upset about would be if they're just deleted. I start new saves all the time, so restarting if old saves are broken is no big deal for me. But that's me.

38 Replies

Sort By
Show More
  • VWoodsong's avatar
    VWoodsong
    Seasoned Ace
    3 years ago
    "Dakota88;c-18084411" wrote:
    "VeeDub;c-18084118" wrote:
    "JAL;c-18083972" wrote:
    For me, while I'd love a new life stage, I would be find with babies just being replaced by a new object baby with new interactions where you can move the object (the baby) in more ways. Think of books - a sim can read a book sitting at a table with the book on the table, sitting in a sofa or a chair with the book in their hands, and they can put the book down on any surface in the game. Why would the same not be doable for a baby-object? That wouldn't be replacing one asset with another type of asset but replacing it with a new asset of the same type, that had more interactions tied to it.

    * The baby could be placed in various types of basinets or cribs
    * Or on play mats, baby seats and strollers
    * You could add a changing table with interactions
    * You could carry your baby around, maybe in a baby carrier
    * You could sit down and feed your baby
    * You could bring your baby with you when you leave the house (to visit or on vacation)

    Again, none of this requires a sim-baby - just an object with many more interactions.


    I would assume that it's doable, because all other sims are objects, too. They're just fancier ones. But I would also think the developers must weigh the viability of one thing against so many other things in a game with so many, many complicated and interlocking parts that already exist or are planned to be added later. New packs (especially ones that introduce new game mechanics and interactions) already often introduce new bugs, after all. It's no wonder that even highly requested features should be given a great amount of time and care and thought before even being hinted at for inclusion in some future pack.

    As for me, I personally don't like babies in games at all (not just this game), so I'm neither thrilled at the prospect of improved ones nor will I be disappointed if we won't get them. I only hope that if we do eventually get them, I won't be in any way forced to do all that baby stuff in which I have no interest at all.


    you can always age babies up, I am sure you can still do this when we have them as real sims


    One can always hope. I do age babies up now, and it would seem logical to expect I could do it later as well. But not every new feature in this game is implemented in a logical fashion, so it's really anybody's guess.
  • simkonfetti's avatar
    simkonfetti
    3 years ago
    "VeeDub;c-18084415" wrote:
    "Dakota88;c-18084411" wrote:
    "VeeDub;c-18084118" wrote:
    "JAL;c-18083972" wrote:
    For me, while I'd love a new life stage, I would be find with babies just being replaced by a new object baby with new interactions where you can move the object (the baby) in more ways. Think of books - a sim can read a book sitting at a table with the book on the table, sitting in a sofa or a chair with the book in their hands, and they can put the book down on any surface in the game. Why would the same not be doable for a baby-object? That wouldn't be replacing one asset with another type of asset but replacing it with a new asset of the same type, that had more interactions tied to it.

    * The baby could be placed in various types of basinets or cribs
    * Or on play mats, baby seats and strollers
    * You could add a changing table with interactions
    * You could carry your baby around, maybe in a baby carrier
    * You could sit down and feed your baby
    * You could bring your baby with you when you leave the house (to visit or on vacation)

    Again, none of this requires a sim-baby - just an object with many more interactions.


    I would assume that it's doable, because all other sims are objects, too. They're just fancier ones. But I would also think the developers must weigh the viability of one thing against so many other things in a game with so many, many complicated and interlocking parts that already exist or are planned to be added later. New packs (especially ones that introduce new game mechanics and interactions) already often introduce new bugs, after all. It's no wonder that even highly requested features should be given a great amount of time and care and thought before even being hinted at for inclusion in some future pack.

    As for me, I personally don't like babies in games at all (not just this game), so I'm neither thrilled at the prospect of improved ones nor will I be disappointed if we won't get them. I only hope that if we do eventually get them, I won't be in any way forced to do all that baby stuff in which I have no interest at all.


    you can always age babies up, I am sure you can still do this when we have them as real sims


    One can always hope. I do age babies up now, and it would seem logical to expect I could do it later as well. But not every new feature in this game is implemented in a logical fashion, so it's really anybody's guess.


    Why would you not be able to age them up? You can up age any life stage except for elders, but you can kill them or just stop playing them until they die and move them in a retirement home?
  • ignominiusrex's avatar
    ignominiusrex
    3 years ago
    How hard could it be? In sims3, you can take babies for stroller walks, swing them in baby swings, play with them, but they can't move around on their own until they are toddlers at which point they start off as babies that sit on the floor where you place them, but can learn to crawl. To learn to walk, they have to be taught, otherwise they crawl everywhere. But as babies, yes they have needs you can see and respond to, but like real babies not yet crawling, they can only lie where they are placed, or be in a swing or stroller, or be held in arms, or laid in a baby bed, doesn't really matter whether that's a crib or bassinet as both are just baby holders. In fact everything is just a baby holder, as babies who can't yet sit up or crawl, are like that: you either hold them, or you place them on or in an alternate holder. Of course you can feed them, change or potty them, (in real life; the game didn't recognize infant pottying) sing to them, cuddle them, interact and fill their social needs as well as fun, hygiene, sleep, bladder, and hunger so in that, they were not objects.

    But if your criteria for"free" means not tied to an object? That's not realistic for babies in arms who can't yet move about on their own. They must still be moved from one holder to another.

    Yes, they are more interesting in sims3. I haven't tried them yet in sims2, but in sims 3 they are more interesting but still just placed on something else, so it's all just one baby holder or another, it's not like they can move on their own.
  • VWoodsong's avatar
    VWoodsong
    Seasoned Ace
    3 years ago
    "Dakota88;c-18085046" wrote:
    "VeeDub;c-18084415" wrote:
    "Dakota88;c-18084411" wrote:
    "VeeDub;c-18084118" wrote:
    "JAL;c-18083972" wrote:
    For me, while I'd love a new life stage, I would be find with babies just being replaced by a new object baby with new interactions where you can move the object (the baby) in more ways. Think of books - a sim can read a book sitting at a table with the book on the table, sitting in a sofa or a chair with the book in their hands, and they can put the book down on any surface in the game. Why would the same not be doable for a baby-object? That wouldn't be replacing one asset with another type of asset but replacing it with a new asset of the same type, that had more interactions tied to it.

    * The baby could be placed in various types of basinets or cribs
    * Or on play mats, baby seats and strollers
    * You could add a changing table with interactions
    * You could carry your baby around, maybe in a baby carrier
    * You could sit down and feed your baby
    * You could bring your baby with you when you leave the house (to visit or on vacation)

    Again, none of this requires a sim-baby - just an object with many more interactions.


    I would assume that it's doable, because all other sims are objects, too. They're just fancier ones. But I would also think the developers must weigh the viability of one thing against so many other things in a game with so many, many complicated and interlocking parts that already exist or are planned to be added later. New packs (especially ones that introduce new game mechanics and interactions) already often introduce new bugs, after all. It's no wonder that even highly requested features should be given a great amount of time and care and thought before even being hinted at for inclusion in some future pack.

    As for me, I personally don't like babies in games at all (not just this game), so I'm neither thrilled at the prospect of improved ones nor will I be disappointed if we won't get them. I only hope that if we do eventually get them, I won't be in any way forced to do all that baby stuff in which I have no interest at all.


    you can always age babies up, I am sure you can still do this when we have them as real sims


    One can always hope. I do age babies up now, and it would seem logical to expect I could do it later as well. But not every new feature in this game is implemented in a logical fashion, so it's really anybody's guess.


    Why would you not be able to age them up? You can up age any life stage except for elders, but you can kill them or just stop playing them until they die and move them in a retirement home?


    I have no idea why, and I didn't say that we'd be unable to do that. But going by past experiences of new things implemented in odd and seemingly illogical ways (some of which were improved later), I wouldn't actually be surprised if the push to please players who want them as realistic as possible could cause some issues. I do hope not for everyone's sake, not only for my own. :)
  • Moonlydelusion's avatar
    Moonlydelusion
    3 years ago
    I don't know why would they have to limit the time of the newborn when adding a baby life stage , or why would that be a problem. They could simply keep the three-day newborn "stage", adding a 3-5 day stage for babies, and then aging to toddler. I don't understand why that would be a problem. It's actually what I would expect them to do. Besides, many people simply age up the newborns immediately because they aren't fun at all, but those who doesn't, and still want to keep "babies" for storytelling, often pause time, because their stage time is already very brief, so there's always the option of pausing time, or age up immediately if that's what you want.

    I don't know if this was even a discussion when they added toddlers, which was exactly the same in terms of the game functioning, since it was a new life stage between babies and kids. So they did it once, it was done great, toddlers are beautiful portrayed and they're really fun to play, and they didn't broke the baby-objects because they aren't really tie to it, so I don't think there are reasons to think they can't do it again without breaking the saves.

    Also, what about the other part of the community, what about the people who are waiting for them to actually add this feature to the game to play with their sim families again; those who are holding back pregnancies or simply waiting for this feature to finally have fun when starting their families?
  • irisrosal2's avatar
    irisrosal2
    3 years ago
    Sincerely? I already expect that any update that is really significant will break my game, because I can only play with a lot of mods and CC and I won't give them up. To avoid any frustration, I always save my lots and my favorite sims to the gallery, so even if I lose progress, I don't have to create it all over again. Break a save is a relatively low price to pay when you consider how much the game has improved since its release. And like most people here in this post, I always age my newborn babies 1 or 2 days after birth, because they are extremely annoying. Not to mention it's bizarre to imagine that Sims change their dirty diaper in the "air" and don't even bathe their babies. This interaction would be worthy of a game that has real graphics or code limitations, not for The Sims 4.
    Everyone chooses the way they want to play, that's the true meaning of playing The Sims. If bathing, walking the baby in the stroller, change clothes or changing diapers isn't an especially interesting interaction for some players, then skip this step. But give some juicy content to players who really want to enjoy these interactions.
  • Cinebar's avatar
    Cinebar
    3 years ago
    I don't think Maxis expects anyone to still be playing a save from 2014. Or we wouldn't see Neighborhood Stories and or Life Styles and other stuff that makes the player have to start a new game with a new character to keep the game 'fresh'. So, I would vote go ahead and free babies since it's something they should have done several years ago when toddlers was also fresh on their minds.
  • SheriSim's avatar
    SheriSim
    Seasoned Ace
    3 years ago
    "Cinebar;c-18098858" wrote:
    I don't think Maxis expects anyone to still be playing a save from 2014. Or we wouldn't see Neighborhood Stories and or Life Styles and other stuff that makes the player have to start a new game with a new character to keep the game 'fresh'. So, I would vote go ahead and free babies since it's something they should have done several years ago when toddlers was also fresh on their minds.


    I still play a game from 2014, i do re-save it and have several save as for it. In fact this game is my main save and I have many rotational families in it. Sometimes when a new pack comes out I will add a family to it. I keep aging off most of the time, I still want real babies though even if I have to have my sims rebirth their current babies, or I don’t mind if they call them newborns and them I age them up to babies, either way is fine, as I don’t know what the babies are going to look like when they age up anyway. But, I do not want my current game broken. I can just delete the babies and have them reborn, but I don’t want a broken save.

About The Sims 4 General Discussion

Join lively discussions, share tips, and exchange experiences on Sims 4 Expansion Packs, Game Packs, Stuff Packs & Kits.33,529 PostsLatest Activity: 12 minutes ago