Forum Discussion
119 Replies
Sort By
- Lonewolf10447 years agoSeasoned Spectator
"happygurl;c-16357729" wrote:
"Sk8rblaze;c-16357721" wrote:
"fullspiral;c-16357621" wrote:
How did this turn in to a discussion about rabbit holes?
The facts of the mater are this:
In sims 3, I spent a good long while watching my sim drive TO the restaurant so that I could watch them disappear in to it and hear something simulating a restaurant environment.
In sims 4, my sims disappear during the travel TO, but once they are there, I get to be there IN the restaurant with them. I prefer that much more.
In sims 2, my sims on vacation disappeared on a helicopter trip. And I played the chance cards that came up that affected their moods when they finally appeared back on the pavement after the trip.
In sims 4, my sim has a couple of choices to affect his mood as he moves in to a new area, but once he gets there, I am THERE with him. I prefer that much more.
Rabbit holes were way worse in Sims 2 and 3 than they are now in sims 4.
It's a discussion about rabbit holes because a good segment of LGR's review covered the text-based adventures.
In Sims 3, we had rabbitholes because the open world was incredibly resource demanding, not only for EA, but for our computers, too. Sims 3 does have restaurants as store content, but, IMHO, they're not as good as TS1, TS2, or TS4's. Sims 4 spent a $20 dollar game pack aiming to flesh out restaurants, and it did alright, but even with the closed world, the horrible simulation lag TS4 possesses causes restaurants to be an all-day affair. It's gotten so horrible that it's content I don't even use because it consumes a whole day due to lag alone.
I love when people try to defend a 2018 release by bringing up an expansion pack released in 2007 for a 2004 base game. Yes, we had chance cards in the form of tours in TS2: Bon Voyage. However, the expansion pack came with a humongous amount of content with such a wide range of focus, that those tours were just a little fun side feature. Chance cards in Jungle Adventure are part of the core gameplay of a $20 dollar pack which focuses entirely on one destination, doing one thing. Not very exciting, at least to me.
I much prefer to explore the game with my Sim, as well. But I do think there could have been far more depth and design put into the jungle compared to relying on text-based adventures. Even in the temple, I would have far preferred actually solving a puzzle myself through my Sim, rather than sit in my chair, watch them write on a notepad, and then click an interaction after a few seconds. Boring.
I don't have any problems going to restaurants, such as lag and things like that. It's not an all day ordeal for me, I don't really know what you're talking about.
The experience is different for different folks with different systems, I never had an problem myself but I do see where he is coming from. - Lonewolf10447 years agoSeasoned SpectatorI believe LGR does like the Sims but is just not happy with the current version and there are a lot especially some who seen the game evolved into what it is today. Sims 4 will always be the most controversial version until Sims 5 rear its head. I am not totally happy with Sims 4 but tolerate it seeing it has improved but it still lacks certain features and those features may not see the light of day. For me Sims 4 is like a glass that will never run over being the evolution for this game was kind of strange.
- @DeservedCriticism Is the problem with dine out definitely something people are still having an issue with? It's just that I literally played with restaurants today for the first time in forever and both times I went the whole experience was about 2-3 hours. When the pack first came out I'm sure it took half a day and felt too long but today I was surprised with how quickly it went. Maybe they've tweaked it?
- LadyKyn7 years agoSeasoned ScoutTad surprised, since he didn't seem to care much for Sims 3 World Adventure since he wasn't to into it. Though the GP's always seem pretty well rounded when focusing on their actual theme. Pretty fair view on it for what the pack is and brings.
"jaxie086;c-16357860" wrote:
This is what the sims team thrives on; making packs seem so cool and glorious at first, but then for actual extended sims gameplay they all fall so flat. Notice they were very careful what to show us in those live gameplays of the jungle; because once you actually play all the way through the game is just not worth it.
Everyone knows this game pack harkens back to the world adventures of sims 3. New games should always be an improvement. So to make jungle adventure a game pack instead of an expansion pack is a horrible business decision; to choose to make this a game pack, when they knew that most people would be comparing this to world adventures, and some to sims 2 bon voyage. This to me is just more proof of how horribly they are doing. You can have all the data on the internet that you want, but the proof is in what they delivery. This is awful. They have such talented people on the team and they could be doing leaps and bounds better than what we see in sims 4.
For me it honestly isn’t that. I understand a GP has only part of the content an EP has and for me it doesn’t have to compete. But I agree with a YouTuber (Rachybop) who concluded the shortcomings in the pack don’t seem to be the pack’s fault, but due to basegame limitations. And that’s Sims 4’s big issue, because that problem won’t go away. I really think the team of this pack did everything within their power to make this a great pack and it shows, my kudos in that respect (in another topic) still stand. But it saddens me the game seems to reach its boundaries so easily."Pegasys;c-16357912" wrote:
"JoAnne65;c-16357593" wrote:
"Felicity;c-16357309" wrote:
LGR got a few packs free; however, it didn't change his tone, and so it didn't last very long. I think the word people are looking for is not objective (his reviews, like everyone else's, are subjective) but he doesn't have the bias that a reviewer who wants to keep getting their rewards has. In fact, LGR being dropped from the free-game program so quickly shows that his brand of honesty is not appreciated.
It's weird because he reviews are never "all negative." He has issues with the game play of Sims 4, but he does try to point out what he likes, what he doesn't like, the stuff from CAS, and he will say what he thinks is good within the limitations of the game engine.
Edit: Huge typo.
Is, in fact: objective. Objective in the meaning (looked that up) “undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena”. That is exactly what he does. Which is why I value his reviews even in those cases he has a different opinion than me, because he always explains why he feels a certain way*. Enabling me to judge whether I share his opinion or not. He is not biased. And indeed, his reviews aren’t overall negative, also not in this case. Still people feel very threatened by him somehow. Maybe because he presents facts before giving his personal view?
(*example, I remember him being very enthousiastic about GT, but it became clear to me that it was for reasons I don’t care for myself so I didn’t buy the pack until much later when it was on sale)
But by definition, nobody can be "objective" for a review. Because they use their own personal bias to make the review. Maybe they aren't influenced by others, which is what I think you mean, but it's not "objective."
Objective would be: "There are 125 new objects in the pack, and 22 new CAS items."
Subjective: (which any real review is): "There are 125 new objects in the pack, and 22 new CAS items. Since the gameplay offered by these objects isn't that fleshed out, I don't think the pack is worth the money".
There is no true objectivity in any of LGR's reviews - because there is no objectivity in ANY review, unless all one did was state the facts, which defeats the purpose of a review.
There’s always a part in his videos where he does exactly that. He shows it (objective), then he tells us how it works (objective) and then he tells us how he feels about it (subjective). That last bit he always motivates, which is why I understood that even when he loved how GT worked, it wasn’t for me (because I’m not the kind of simmer who likes to set up scenes and play them out, that is totally how it NOT works for me). That’s what a good reviewer does, even when he can’t be totally objective.
That being said, this has nothing to do with the point people are trying to make here so I’d like to suggest to leave the semantic bickering about the word ‘objective’ (as so often it seems like people love bringing in strawmen to derail the actual subject) and follow what @Felicity said (because that’s the whole point people are trying to make regarding ‘honesty’): he’s not biased, not corrupted.
ETA: oh, lol, could have saved me the time typing this if I’d scrolled first. Exactly @DeservedCriticism"TheGoodOldGamer;c-16358202" wrote:
"Sk8rblaze;c-16358184" wrote:
"Pegasys;c-16357912" wrote:
"JoAnne65;c-16357593" wrote:
"Felicity;c-16357309" wrote:
LGR got a few packs free; however, it didn't change his tone, and so it didn't last very long. I think the word people are looking for is not objective (his reviews, like everyone else's, are subjective) but he doesn't have the bias that a reviewer who wants to keep getting their rewards has. In fact, LGR being dropped from the free-game program so quickly shows that his brand of honesty is not appreciated.
It's weird because he reviews are never "all negative." He has issues with the game play of Sims 4, but he does try to point out what he likes, what he doesn't like, the stuff from CAS, and he will say what he thinks is good within the limitations of the game engine.
Edit: Huge typo.
Is, in fact: objective. Objective in the meaning (looked that up) “undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena”. That is exactly what he does. Which is why I value his reviews even in those cases he has a different opinion than me, because he always explains why he feels a certain way*. Enabling me to judge whether I share his opinion or not. He is not biased. And indeed, his reviews aren’t overall negative, also not in this case. Still people feel very threatened by him somehow. Maybe because he presents facts before giving his personal view?
(*example, I remember him being very enthousiastic about GT, but it became clear to me that it was for reasons I don’t care for myself so I didn’t buy the pack until much later when it was on sale)
But by definition, nobody can be "objective" for a review. Because they use their own personal bias to make the review. Maybe they aren't influenced by others, which is what I think you mean, but it's not "objective."
Objective would be: "There are 125 new objects in the pack, and 22 new CAS items."
Subjective: (which any real review is): "There are 125 new objects in the pack, and 22 new CAS items. Since the gameplay offered by these objects isn't that fleshed out, I don't think the pack is worth the money".
There is no true objectivity in any of LGR's reviews - because there is no objectivity in ANY review, unless all one did was state the facts, which defeats the purpose of a review.
I think the both of you are correct, however, I believe @JoAnne65 and the others are essentially saying LGR tends to be the least biased in his reviews; more objective in the sense he usually presents things as they are, without the EA fanboy sugarcoat.
When you have a partnership with EA, and they’re flying you around the world to see their games, catering you, etc. there is more likely to be a bias towards EA there. Not always, but I’ve seen it myself in a variety of reviews.
I see it in Game Changer reviews. In the ones I’ve seen about Jungle Adventure, they were disappointed, but didn’t harp too much on their disappointments. They’ll explore the temple, say something like, “wow I wasn’t expecting it to be so.. barren” or “umm.. I’m already kind of bored with this” and then they’ll move on and try to counter it with good things about the pack. A review is not supposed to be a video of someone trying to make the pack look good by countering a con with a pro.
Just say what’s bad and what’s good, go into detail of those things, and leave it there. Some of these “game changers” (which is a ridiculous name, because every fan is and should be a game changer) try their best to appear unbiased, but don’t do a great job at it. I don’t think it’s always intentional. When someone gives you something for free, you tend to feel in debt to them, and this could very well be a side effect of that.
How are the bold not the same thing? "Well it didn't take very long to complete this tomb. The layout is nice though." Is this not both 'countering a con with a pro' and saying 'what's bad and what's good'? lol
Also, just a quick sidenote, just because LGR isn't influenced by EA, doesn't mean he isn't influenced. He has an audience. He has his analytics. He has a patreon. And he knows how to cater to that. Just because it's not EA's wallet doesn't mean it isn't somebody's.
Because people like that he's negative about the game, he works that angle. If the large majority of his audience didn't like that, you can bet he wouldn't stick to his guns and keep making videos that get fewer views n all that. He'd adjust his reviews in a more positive light, where he'd still share the negative stuff, but it'd be on the backside of it.
That said, I don't mind his reviews. This last one, like I said earlier, had a weird vibe to it, but don't be blinded into thinking he (or anyone else that makes money off of videos or blogs or whatever) is truly altruistic or something.
His audience concerning Sims videos are mainly simmers so I have no idea what you mean. He’s been highly positive about the franchise in the past, he has been very critical about Sims 3 (and in many cases rightly so). What strikes me by the way is how simmers keep insisting he’s negative, while he isn’t completely negative at all. Seems to me many simmers are the ones being very biased where his reviews are concerned (I even see people commenting in LGR topics saying they are not going to watch it, then have an opinion about it).
I’m curious, in what way did you disagree with his review? Can you give arguments as to why what he says is not true/too biased/too negative? Because all I see is people saying he does, but not actually why exactly. At what points exactly does he give false or biased information about the pack?"KatyJay88;c-16358290" wrote:
Simple fact is, if you aren't a fan of this iteration, you most likely will enjoy LGR content because he echos what you are thinking. If you get a lot of play and enjoyment out of this version, then you likely won't agree or necessarily like what LGR has to say. Nothing wrong with either.
I'm learning more and more that people will generally surround themselves with like minded individuals, and see others who disagree as "opposition" or to put it bluntly, the enemy. Comes from the pack mentality that animals have.
I don't really have a strong opinion either way. I enjoy the way he puts together his content, but I don't always agree with what he says. It's just funny that his name alone generations a lot of discussion. He is pretty polarizing.
I love Sims 3 but I’ve always disliked the squeaking YouTubers, they’ve always sounded fake and over the top to me. And I even didn’t know they were actually paid for what they did back then."KatyJay88;c-16358290" wrote:
Simple fact is, if you aren't a fan of this iteration, you most likely will enjoy LGR content because he echos what you are thinking. If you get a lot of play and enjoyment out of this version, then you likely won't agree or necessarily like what LGR has to say. Nothing wrong with either.
I'm learning more and more that people will generally surround themselves with like minded individuals, and see others who disagree as "opposition" or to put it bluntly, the enemy. Comes from the pack mentality that animals have.
You must be young to have such a black or white view of humanity, nothing wrong with that, but human beings aren't this one-dimensional, in fact someone who simply doesn't like The Sims 4 doesn't spend their time on a forum about The Sims 4 or making so many videos about The Sims 4.
I'll give an example, Paradox is a game studio which has many passionate fans since they are basically the only ones making large scale grand-strategy games, like The Sims they essentially have no competitors. One of their recent games released a highly controversial 2.0 patch which changed the entire game, a lot of people complained when it was announced, a lot, the forums were 99% people complaining about the game, but they released it anyway without listening to any feedback whatsoever and guess what, people didn't keep posting on the forum, they just changed their Steam reviews to negative and just left for good, the only ones that still care about the game are the people who still like the game despite the shortcomings, threads are just suggestions about small things that could adjusted here and there now but there's no sense complaining about something that will never change anymore.
The people who straight out hate The Sims 4 already left, they are playing previous versions, the people here are the ones who still think The Sims 4 has something to offer despite its flaws, if we complain it's because we want the game to get better."samlyt22;c-16358548" wrote:
@DeservedCriticism Is the problem with dine out definitely something people are still having an issue with? It's just that I literally played with restaurants today for the first time in forever and both times I went the whole experience was about 2-3 hours. When the pack first came out I'm sure it took half a day and felt too long but today I was surprised with how quickly it went. Maybe they've tweaked it?
Your post got me curious cause you have a point; they did patch to try and fix some of the simulation lag. I loaded up my game to visit a restaurant and see how it went, and I clocked in at 4 hours. This is absolutely an improvement from before, though still could use improvement. As I said, the main issue is definitely that the Sims spend ages oooh'ing and aaah'ing at the food. Some might view 4 hours as acceptable, but the thing to consider is that if you have an event like the food being dropped, it can easily turn into 5-6.
So yeah, it's nice to see it has been improved, though I feel this is mostly a happy consequence of the patch to simulation lag rather than direct tweaks to how the restaurant itself runs. I would expect the same bugs encountered when running a restaurant to still be there, for example, because those have less to do with simulation lag and more to do with the retail system it was built upon.
About The Sims 4 General Discussion
Join lively discussions, share tips, and exchange experiences on Sims 4 Expansion Packs, Game Packs, Stuff Packs & Kits.33,264 PostsLatest Activity: 9 years ago
Related Posts
Recent Discussions
- 20 minutes ago
- 55 minutes ago