"LeGardePourpre;c-16495774" wrote:
From the beginning The Sims 4 is a light/shortened version of The Sims 2, I'm surprised people don't understand it yet... 4 years later.
Maxis try to avoid to develop non-essential things/eye-candies and stay focused on the gameplay.
See, I wouldn't have a problem with this, if they actually did focus on the game play.
They're throwing all kinds of objects at us, but systems that bolster the simulation are severely lacking -- most notably, the Sims' AI.
"Loanet;c-16495897" wrote:
Nonono.
I'm sceptical about how much of a budget went into Seasons, but from what I see, even with flat snow, I don't think winter has been 'destroyed'.
I feel like more could have been done to make snow look deep, but I think that it's got more to do with engine - ie your lot is closed therefore snow only affects your lot and this could end up looking really weird at the edges. Sims 4 has a flat world. People would complain either way so the devs took the path of least resistance. They should have done so much more than just this 'standing on white' thing though.
...
I agree with the second half of your post. However, the first part isn't exactly true.
TS2 had closed lots, TS4 has a strange hybrid between TS2 and TS3. In TS4, it's entirely possible for the effects that happen on an active lot to also occur in the neighborhood around it, because that part of the world is interconnected. In other words, there's no loading screen necessary to step off a lot and to have a Sim walk around the neighborhood.
So, if there's deep snow on the lot, there's no reason to have the rest of the neighborhood look any differently.
As I mentioned before, TS2's lots were completely closed. Yet, they managed to have differences in accumulation. That was more than a decade ago. What exactly is the issue with TS4?
Some of us keep asking that question. However, there are never any answers forthcoming except for the old standby: "Well, A got the short shrift so that B could be incredible". The issue with that explanation is that, oftentimes, B never turns out to be so new and amazing that it makes up for A being so basic and lacking. EA's explanation for missing facets doesn't ring true.
