Lucky Palms vs StrangerVille (World Comparison)

"Naus;c-16997475" wrote:

"alan650111;c-16997408" wrote:
THIS. Sims 3's STUFF packs were 20 dollars AND didn't even include gameplay items. (Except High End Loft Stuff which had an electric guitar and aquarium.) I stand my ground--in every regard--Sims 4's price points and value are beyond superior to me!!

You can stand your ground all you want but it doesn't make you any less wrong. Sims 4 Stuff Packs include gameplay that would've been included in an EP in 3.

That's absolutely true, objects in Stuff Packs are now separated from EPs, so they can charge you extra money, S3 EPs included tons of new gameplay, some didn't included worlds, like Seasons, which added half more gameplay that the sims 4 seasons included.

"Naus;c-16997475" wrote:

"alan650111;c-16997408" wrote:
THIS. Sims 3's STUFF packs were 20 dollars AND didn't even include gameplay items. (Except High End Loft Stuff which had an electric guitar and aquarium.) I stand my ground--in every regard--Sims 4's price points and value are beyond superior to me!!

You can stand your ground all you want but it doesn't make you any less wrong. Sims 4 Stuff Packs include gameplay that would've been included in an EP in 3.

• Luxury Party added a buffet table. It's a base game object in TS2 and 3.
  
• Perfect Patio added hot tubs. It's a base game object in TS2 and it was reintroduced in TS3 Late Night EP.
  
• Cool Kitchen added an ice cream machine. A machine was included with TS3 Seasons.
  
• Spooky Stuff added pumpkin carvin. It was included in TS3 Seasons.
  
• Romantic Garden added a wishing well. It was included in TS2 Seasons. The big fountain is a TS3 BG object.
  
• Backyard Stuff added a slip 'n slide. It was part of TS3 Generations EP.
  
• Vintage Glamour added vanity tables and a butler. Vanity Tables were included in TS2 University, and butlers in TS2 Apartment Life and TS3 Late Night.
  
• Bowling Night added bowling lanes. This object was included in TS2 Nightlife and TS3 University Life.
  
• Laundry Day added laundry equipment. It was included in TS3 Ambitions (except the washtub).
  
• My First Pet added rodents. Rodents were part of TS2 and 3 Pets.
  

You aren't getting anything new for that price, you're getting objects that would've been included in a GP and now they're exclusive to a SP. In TS3, for example, you could get laundry or hot tubs in a variety of packs. If you want them in TS4, you must buy the specific packs that include that gameplay.

What you are getting is really low quality content, tons of deco and non-functional stuff, with a limited amount of swatches (in contrast to the unlimited customization of TS3) and a very low polycount for 2014 standards (TS2 and 3's assets have higher polycounts).

It's okay if you want to believe SPs in 4 are a better deal than in previous games, but I firmly believe you're getting less QUALITY content even if prices are half of what they were.

I won't be responding to any more posts about things that aren't related to the topic at hand: StrangerVille vs Lucky Palms. I don't want my thread to be closed for people who insist on derailing it with factless comparisons.

Everything that was said sparked from the conversation of Lucky Palms versus Strangerville. On your original post you were talking about how much money Store points were in your country. Lucky Palms was in The Sims 3 store. Naturally, the conversation evolved to the price of Sims 4 packs vs Sims 3 packs and value for money. You can't mention the word "factless" when we are talking about "opinions". In my personal opinion, Sims 4 packs have been a better overall value. I like Sims 4's style better. I think the hairs, clothes, build objects, and decorations are of higher quality to most Sims 3 items. The game is more visually appealing to me. I think Lucky Palms was very pretty world but was just outrageously priced versus the actual gameplay I gained. I am not a Sims 3 hater. I love the game and play it sometimes but just find Sims 4's art style and overall game more enjoyable. For the 20 dollar price tag, I feel Strangerville has given me more value than the regret I felt blowing 30 bucks on Lucky Palms at the time. That is my OPINION. You are free to have a differing opinion.

"Writin_Reg;c-16976376" wrote:

"Naus;c-16975904" wrote:

"Ravager619;c-16975885" wrote:
I understand it's an EP vs a GP, and the EP you paid extra for the casino. The EP is set more in the Southwest, while the GP is set more in a place like Arizona/Utah.

Lucky Palms isn't an EP. It's a Store World. It costs +$4.5 than StrangerVille but I think it gives more and better content for its price. The Lucky Simoleon Casino cost an additional $11 and adds 3 new gameplay items, a venue and 8 objects. Both can be bought with SimPoints (which means you don't have to pay money since you can earn SimPoints by watching ads and you're gifted SimPoints when you register some EPs) and are on sale pretty often.

Lucky Palms cost 47 us dollars when it came out and was nothing but a store world and casino. I know I bought it. It had no ep or gp stuff about it.

It was 47 DOLLARS??? Wow! That is more than I remember it. So glad we don't have a store system in 4. I much prefer the price points and DLC methods of 4!

"Naus;c-16977026" wrote:

"Goldmoldar;c-16977025" wrote:
I get what he was saying and it is true Sims 4 will never win in comparison due to its lack of tools. Sorry it has to come down to what is better than another version but everything is coming to an head and is it going to get better? Maybe and maybe not.

Yeap. Ultimately we'll have to agree The Sims 3 is objectively a better game. Is it perfect? Far from it. Is The Sims 4 without redeeming qualities? Not at all. But when it comes down to the tools each game provides, the depth of content, the complexity of AI, etc. The Sims 3 reigns supreme.

You can't force us into ultimately agreeing that The Sims 3 is a better game. You clearly don't understand the concept of subjectivity and personal taste. Maybe things you value in a game are not the same things another person values. It all comes down to opinion and I don't understand why you seem to get so upset when people disagree with you.

"fullspiral;c-16981571" wrote:
@Naus. It's obvious you love the Sims 3. I had little to no performance issues with it. But for me, it just plain plum out of the 4 editions. It was ugly. The sims were ugly. It didn't come NEAR to the play of 2. It doesn't come NEAR to the look and feel of 4.

I don't know what you expect? Some of us just. didn't. like. 3. Just like you don't like 4. Give it a rest.

THIS!

"alan650111;c-16997876" wrote:

"Naus;c-16977026" wrote:

"Goldmoldar;c-16977025" wrote:
I get what he was saying and it is true Sims 4 will never win in comparison due to its lack of tools. Sorry it has to come down to what is better than another version but everything is coming to an head and is it going to get better? Maybe and maybe not.

Yeap. Ultimately we'll have to agree The Sims 3 is objectively a better game. Is it perfect? Far from it. Is The Sims 4 without redeeming qualities? Not at all. But when it comes down to the tools each game provides, the depth of content, the complexity of AI, etc. The Sims 3 reigns supreme.

You can't force us into ultimately agreeing that The Sims 3 is a better game. You clearly don't understand the concept of subjectivity and personal taste. Maybe things you value in a game are not the same things another person values. It all comes down to opinion and I don't understand why you seem to get so upset when people disagree with you.

I agree. I missed that comment. I will NEVER agree that the Sims 3 reigns supreme. Imo, it was the worst of the 4 iterations.

On topic, I never bought Lucky Palms because I looked at what was offered and having been burnt by too many of the offers on the sims 3 store, I decided no. Hidden Springs was a rip off. Roaring Heights was a rip off. Monte Vista was a rip off. I learned my lesson with those 3.

"Naus;c-16996674" wrote:
@LiELF Whereas I present empirical information to support my claims, all you do is user your personal preferences as supporting evidence.

"the graphic textures are frequently mismatched and godawful."

That's factually incorrect. The Sims 3 has a consistent standard of mask size (250 pixels per square grid). What means is that a pattern (which can be 256 or 512 pixels) will be repeated 1 time per square grid. The Sims 3 doesn't really have textures. Objects have presets (pre-selected styles) but you can change them into whatever you want. I don't even know what you're talking about when you claim textures are mismatched. Textures are created dynamically in-game and it's up to you to select the patterns and colors you want. It cannot be mismatched unless you mismatch textures on purpose.

"As far as costs, I have presented what prices are showing for me."

And I have presented what prices are showing for me. They're equally as valid. Lucky Palms SE is cheaper than StrangerVille for me. The Gold Edition is only $4.5 US dollars more expensive. I already own Lucky Palms and I'm very satisfied with my purchase. It's one of the worlds I use the most, I love the way it looks, I love the amount of space I have to add community lots from other EPs, and I love the new gameplay added with the Gold Edition. The Casino has infinitely more value (in my opinion, of course) than StrangerVille's 2-hour linear storyline, 3 gameplay objects and a career (that has always been part of the base game, BTW) with 5 new interactions.

"Both Sims 2 and Sims 3 offered a bunch of superficial items and objects for $20."

No. Both Sims 2 and 3 offered a bunch of HIGH QUALITY items for $20. I could start breaking down the number of FUNCTIONAL items you get in each pack, which is less subjective than saying I prefer one or the other, but I let an image speak for itself. This is what you get in BB mode in the first Stuff Pack for each game:

Spoiler

https://i.redd.it/n1m5txxz0o321.png

It's not just about the quantity of items. You're also getting more functional objects, like beds; which, if you know anything about rigging and animations, you must know how difficult is to animate bed sheets. And both games, TS2 and 3, gives you more options when it comes to customizing furniture. Beddings in TS2, for example, all share the same textures, so you don't have to struggle to find the bed sheets you want unlike TS4, which has swatches combining both bed frames and bedding.

"one of the things that Sims 4 did right was change what we get for our $20 and reduce the cost of Stuff Packs to half the price"

You're paying what you're getting: lower price, for lower quality items. Do I have to keep bringing up the poor quality of meshes in The Sims 4? The fact that TS2's meshes have a higher polycount. A game released ten years before has higher quality meshes; let that sink in for a second.

"Game Packs, however, are a huge improvement for the customer. I don't see how that can be argued or denied, I really don't. We get a whole lot more now - we get a variety of things ranging from gameplay, CAS, build/buy, new ventures, worlds... and yes, we get experimental developments like StrangerVille. Game packs are meant to be optional, like Stuff Packs."

Except that they include content that had previously been part of expansions but you have to pay EXTRA money now.
- Spa day and dine out include features from The Sims 2 Open for Business and Bon Voyage. Meditation was a base game skill. Owning a restaurant is better in The Sims 2 OFB. You can even work as a chef, which Dine Out doesn't give you the option to do.
- Outdoor Retreat added a single destination to vacation, whereas Bon Voyage added three for $30 USD ($40 taking inflation into account).
- Jungle Adventures added a single location with a single adventure (only thing that changes is layout) for $20. World Adventures added THREE locations with dozens of quests and almost 40 tombs as well as the option to create your own through powerful triggers.
- Parenthood adds a tiny bit amount of gameplay compared to Generations for half the price (besides, Generation also adds an insane amount of gameplay objects like spiral stairs, bunk beds, sleeping bags, playground equipment, tree houses, etc, etc, etc).
- And I won't even talk about StrangerVille. I think everyone already knows what I think about that pack.
- Vampires is probably the only Game Pack that actually EXPANDED a feature from previous games and I think it was justified as its own separate pack. So out of 7 Game Packs, only one feels like it was worth to be released as a separate pack.

Stuff Packs, as I said many times, they mostly include gameplay items that would've been included in EPs in the past like buffet tables (base game), bowling alleys (Nightlife, UL), butlers (Superstar, Apartment Life, Late Night), slip 'n' slide (Generations), laundry (Ambitions), etc. And they barely add any new gameplay to justify these features being their own pack.

"You pick and choose what you want or will use in your game. Isn't that partly what the Sims is about?"

Except I didn't have to pick and choose in the past. Buying EPs would give me all the gameplay Stuff Packs and Game Packs have now. The only exceptions, as I said, are Vampires and Kids Room. The first actually expands a feature enough to be worth being its own pack; the second one has new gameplay (never featured in the series) and it actually has a good amount of replayability.

"You don't like Sims 4 because you prefer the things that Sims 3 offered."

I prefer the way Expansion Packs actually expanded the game in Sims 1, Sims 2 and Sims 3. EPs feel like they barely add anything new now. Why? Because a lot of content is being sold as separate packs.


@Pegasys
"the lots in StrangerVille were specifically designed to go with the story."

Oh, yeah... right. That's the excuse they're using now. Not even James Turner, aka The SimSupply, believed that excuse if you watch his reaction to the empty houses with SimGuruRomeo. I guess next time a game-breaking bug occurs they can use the old meme: "it's not a bug; it's a feature."

"As far as the number of faces in the objects, the Sims team is purposely keeping them lower to cut down on lag."

The same way they got rid of open world, create-a-style or a color wheel, story progression, complex simology like in 2, limit the amount of lots, etc. all to cut down lag???? What kind of game needs to do so many sacrifices to cut down? We're talking about a FACT and it's that objects in TS2 and 3, games released 10 and 5 years before TS4, have a higher polycount and their 2014 sequel.

So...this conversation is going in circles and I'm just getting bored now at your desperation to "win". But a few final things...

First... polycounts. Who cares? Do you really think most players give a hoot how many polys, faces or pixels make up an object? Most people look at the game and decide if it's aesthetically pleasing or not. Do they prefer style A or style B? That's it. Subjective. Simmers can look at a low poly style and like it better than the high poly one and it's perfectly valid. So that's a useless argument.

Second... This weak argument about breaking up expansion packs and selling them "piecemeal". This is a closed perspective resulting from game bias. In order to determine that an EP has been "broken up", we have to have concrete evidence that there is a specific way to create and sell that pack to begin with. Which would mean that there is only one way to develop a pack theme, which, of course is completely false. Say, for example, you are a developer who wants to do a theme in the city. You then have to decide what you want the central basis of that theme to be so that the things you put in it are cohesive. Do you want it to focus on swinging single life and dating? Do you want it to be day to day life and personal encounters? Do you want it to be what night life in the city is like? And what kind of city are you basing it from? Etc, etc. You see, players have been exposed to previous packs and sometimes feel that those packs have to be created the exact same way, with the exact same themes and items included. This is what makes people upset when the next iteration releases something and it doesn't match item for item. But if you limit your thinking to only what has existed before, you are always going to be dissatisfied because you are really only looking for an exact replica of the past. But that's not how it works, and frankly, that would be boring. Themes are updated to match the present day, and new things are tried to keep things fresh and different and interesting. What's the point of making the same exact thing over again the exact same way you did it before? It makes the series stale and predictable. Now, with all of that said, I do think that many of the earlier EPs of Sims 4 fell very flat and should have had more to them. But what they needed were not necessarily the things that were in Stuff Packs. The Stuff Packs should have been in addition to complete and satisfying EPs, even if those EPS were done differently than previous games, which would be acceptable. Also, things like Vampires would never have been expanded on the way they were if they were part of an EP. They would have been, like in the past, just another same-'ol life state with barely a new twist to matter.

So, because I'm probably going to start phasing out of this discussion since you are unable to concede that your opinion is just that - an opinion, and using all the "facts" and skewed perspective you can dream up isn't going to change that ultimate truth - I'm going to wrap this post up with a final word.

No matter how many paragraphs or spread sheets or charts or poly counts or presentations you make to try to prove that one game is "objectively" better than another, you will always fail. Because there is no such thing. That is the real fallacy. I can trash talk Sims 3 until the cows come home and nitpick and make an example with gathered evidence for every single bad choice that was made, but it won't make someone who loves it see my way. The same principle applies here. I don't even know why you are on such a desperate crusade to prove your opinion to be "the right one", or why you have such a difficult time accepting that players just prefer different things. In the end, all feedback matters to the company. So you can present a post with 17 paragraphs of why you believe StrangerVille is so "inferior", and the next Simmer could write one sentence saying they enjoyed the story and the town and the items that came with it, and you know what? Both posts are equally valid. Your use of manipulative debate tactics to try to out-argue people into a corner to get them to back down just to prove yourself "right" are transparent, a little bullyish, and totally unnecessary. It might benefit you to learn how to agree to disagree and accept that there are people who just like things that you don't. It's just a game. If people are entertained by it, that's all the argument they need.

"LiELF;c-16998019" wrote:

"Naus;c-16996674" wrote:
@LiELF Whereas I present empirical information to support my claims, all you do is user your personal preferences as supporting evidence.

"the graphic textures are frequently mismatched and godawful."

That's factually incorrect. The Sims 3 has a consistent standard of mask size (250 pixels per square grid). What means is that a pattern (which can be 256 or 512 pixels) will be repeated 1 time per square grid. The Sims 3 doesn't really have textures. Objects have presets (pre-selected styles) but you can change them into whatever you want. I don't even know what you're talking about when you claim textures are mismatched. Textures are created dynamically in-game and it's up to you to select the patterns and colors you want. It cannot be mismatched unless you mismatch textures on purpose.

"As far as costs, I have presented what prices are showing for me."

And I have presented what prices are showing for me. They're equally as valid. Lucky Palms SE is cheaper than StrangerVille for me. The Gold Edition is only $4.5 US dollars more expensive. I already own Lucky Palms and I'm very satisfied with my purchase. It's one of the worlds I use the most, I love the way it looks, I love the amount of space I have to add community lots from other EPs, and I love the new gameplay added with the Gold Edition. The Casino has infinitely more value (in my opinion, of course) than StrangerVille's 2-hour linear storyline, 3 gameplay objects and a career (that has always been part of the base game, BTW) with 5 new interactions.

"Both Sims 2 and Sims 3 offered a bunch of superficial items and objects for $20."

No. Both Sims 2 and 3 offered a bunch of HIGH QUALITY items for $20. I could start breaking down the number of FUNCTIONAL items you get in each pack, which is less subjective than saying I prefer one or the other, but I let an image speak for itself. This is what you get in BB mode in the first Stuff Pack for each game:

Spoiler

https://i.redd.it/n1m5txxz0o321.png

It's not just about the quantity of items. You're also getting more functional objects, like beds; which, if you know anything about rigging and animations, you must know how difficult is to animate bed sheets. And both games, TS2 and 3, gives you more options when it comes to customizing furniture. Beddings in TS2, for example, all share the same textures, so you don't have to struggle to find the bed sheets you want unlike TS4, which has swatches combining both bed frames and bedding.

"one of the things that Sims 4 did right was change what we get for our $20 and reduce the cost of Stuff Packs to half the price"

You're paying what you're getting: lower price, for lower quality items. Do I have to keep bringing up the poor quality of meshes in The Sims 4? The fact that TS2's meshes have a higher polycount. A game released ten years before has higher quality meshes; let that sink in for a second.

"Game Packs, however, are a huge improvement for the customer. I don't see how that can be argued or denied, I really don't. We get a whole lot more now - we get a variety of things ranging from gameplay, CAS, build/buy, new ventures, worlds... and yes, we get experimental developments like StrangerVille. Game packs are meant to be optional, like Stuff Packs."

Except that they include content that had previously been part of expansions but you have to pay EXTRA money now.
- Spa day and dine out include features from The Sims 2 Open for Business and Bon Voyage. Meditation was a base game skill. Owning a restaurant is better in The Sims 2 OFB. You can even work as a chef, which Dine Out doesn't give you the option to do.
- Outdoor Retreat added a single destination to vacation, whereas Bon Voyage added three for $30 USD ($40 taking inflation into account).
- Jungle Adventures added a single location with a single adventure (only thing that changes is layout) for $20. World Adventures added THREE locations with dozens of quests and almost 40 tombs as well as the option to create your own through powerful triggers.
- Parenthood adds a tiny bit amount of gameplay compared to Generations for half the price (besides, Generation also adds an insane amount of gameplay objects like spiral stairs, bunk beds, sleeping bags, playground equipment, tree houses, etc, etc, etc).
- And I won't even talk about StrangerVille. I think everyone already knows what I think about that pack.
- Vampires is probably the only Game Pack that actually EXPANDED a feature from previous games and I think it was justified as its own separate pack. So out of 7 Game Packs, only one feels like it was worth to be released as a separate pack.

Stuff Packs, as I said many times, they mostly include gameplay items that would've been included in EPs in the past like buffet tables (base game), bowling alleys (Nightlife, UL), butlers (Superstar, Apartment Life, Late Night), slip 'n' slide (Generations), laundry (Ambitions), etc. And they barely add any new gameplay to justify these features being their own pack.

"You pick and choose what you want or will use in your game. Isn't that partly what the Sims is about?"

Except I didn't have to pick and choose in the past. Buying EPs would give me all the gameplay Stuff Packs and Game Packs have now. The only exceptions, as I said, are Vampires and Kids Room. The first actually expands a feature enough to be worth being its own pack; the second one has new gameplay (never featured in the series) and it actually has a good amount of replayability.

"You don't like Sims 4 because you prefer the things that Sims 3 offered."

I prefer the way Expansion Packs actually expanded the game in Sims 1, Sims 2 and Sims 3. EPs feel like they barely add anything new now. Why? Because a lot of content is being sold as separate packs.


@Pegasys
"the lots in StrangerVille were specifically designed to go with the story."

Oh, yeah... right. That's the excuse they're using now. Not even James Turner, aka The SimSupply, believed that excuse if you watch his reaction to the empty houses with SimGuruRomeo. I guess next time a game-breaking bug occurs they can use the old meme: "it's not a bug; it's a feature."

"As far as the number of faces in the objects, the Sims team is purposely keeping them lower to cut down on lag."

The same way they got rid of open world, create-a-style or a color wheel, story progression, complex simology like in 2, limit the amount of lots, etc. all to cut down lag???? What kind of game needs to do so many sacrifices to cut down? We're talking about a FACT and it's that objects in TS2 and 3, games released 10 and 5 years before TS4, have a higher polycount and their 2014 sequel.

So...this conversation is going in circles and I'm just getting bored now at your desperation to "win". But a few final things...

First... polycounts. Who cares? Do you really think most players give a hoot how many polys, faces or pixels make up an object? Most people look at the game and decide if it's aesthetically pleasing or not. Do they prefer style A or style B? That's it. Subjective. Simmers can look at a low poly style and like it better than the high poly one and it's perfectly valid. So that's a useless argument.

Second... This weak argument about breaking up expansion packs and selling them "piecemeal". This is a closed perspective resulting from game bias. In order to determine that an EP has been "broken up", we have to have concrete evidence that there is a specific way to create and sell that pack to begin with. Which would mean that there is only one way to develop a pack theme, which, of course is completely false. Say, for example, you are a developer who wants to do a theme in the city. You then have to decide what you want the central basis of that theme to be so that the things you put in it are cohesive. Do you want it to focus on swinging single life and dating? Do you want it to be day to day life and personal encounters? Do you want it to be what night life in the city is like? And what kind of city are you basing it from? Etc, etc. You see, players have been exposed to previous packs and sometimes feel that those packs have to be created the exact same way, with the exact same themes and items included. This is what makes people upset when the next iteration releases something and it doesn't match item for item. But if you limit your thinking to only what has existed before, you are always going to be dissatisfied because you are really only looking for an exact replica of the past. But that's not how it works, and frankly, that would be boring. Themes are updated to match the present day, and new things are tried to keep things fresh and different and interesting. What's the point of making the same exact thing over again the exact same way you did it before? It makes the series stale and predictable. Now, with all of that said, I do think that many of the earlier EPs of Sims 4 fell very flat and should have had more to them. But what they needed were not necessarily the things that were in Stuff Packs. The Stuff Packs should have been in addition to complete and satisfying EPs, even if those EPS were done differently than previous games, which would be acceptable. Also, things like Vampires would never have been expanded on the way they were if they were part of an EP. They would have been, like in the past, just another same-'ol life state with barely a new twist to matter.

So, because I'm probably going to start phasing out of this discussion since you are unable to concede that your opinion is just that - an opinion, and using all the "facts" and skewed perspective you can dream up isn't going to change that ultimate truth - I'm going to wrap this post up with a final word.

No matter how many paragraphs or spread sheets or charts or poly counts or presentations you make to try to prove that one game is "objectively" better than another, you will always fail. Because there is no such thing. That is the real fallacy. I can trash talk Sims 3 until the cows come home and nitpick and make an example with gathered evidence for every single bad choice that was made, but it won't make someone who loves it see my way. The same principle applies here. I don't even know why you are on such a desperate crusade to prove your opinion to be "the right one", or why you have such a difficult time accepting that players just prefer different things. In the end, all feedback matters to the company. So you can present a post with 17 paragraphs of why you believe StrangerVille is so "inferior", and the next Simmer could write one sentence saying they enjoyed the story and the town and the items that came with it, and you know what? Both posts are equally valid. Your use of manipulative debate tactics to try to out-argue people into a corner to get them to back down just to prove yourself "right" are transparent, a little bullyish, and totally unnecessary. It might benefit you to learn how to agree to disagree and accept that there are people who just like things that you don't. It's just a game. If people are entertained by it, that's all the argument they need.

https://i.imgur.com/0pPAkxE.gif

Hmmm... for me, it hasn't made any difference how many Lots are in each world or how empty or full they are.

I bought Lucky Palms and regretted it afterwards. Never liked the world and therefore hardly ever played in it.

Strangerville is appealing to me. I enjoy playing in it and haven't stopped playing in it since its release.

@LiELF So you're upset because I back up my claims with evidence and facts and you don't, right? The whole entirety of your comments are: "this is a matter of opinion and personal taste." While you're entitled to your opinion, opinions aren't really helpful when comparing and contrasting products. I learned that the first time I wrote an argumentative essay. Opinions are actually discouraged, as you can't disprove an opinion. Facts are facts. And facts don't care about your feelings.

- My saying that objects in TS2 and 3 have a higher polycount and texture frequency isn't an opinion; it's a fact.
- My saying that 10/14 gameplay objects featured in TS4 Stuff Packs were included in expansions in past games isn't an opinion; it's a fact.
- My saying that Lucky Palms SE and Gold Edition cost at the most $17 USD and $24 USD respectively in my region isn't an opinion, it's a fact.

You just don't care about facts. It's all about what you think and what you feel. That's perfectly fine, but I find your rants hilarious when all I'm trying to do is present facts and data to support my arguments.

First... polycounts. Who cares?

Imagine thinking that higher quality meshes don't matter. Might as well keep playing PlayStation 1 games if that's the case. Why did people even try to upgrade Lara Croft's model from 200 faces to 33K if graphics don't matter?

Most people look at the game and decide if it's aesthetically pleasing or not.

Those are two different things. Graphics and aesthetics aren't the same. My argument was about graphical quality, an objective value, yours is about aesthetics, a 100% subjective one. Some people prefer TS1-3 pseudo-realistic art style, others prefer TS4 highly stylized one. Whether something looks pleasing is assessed through a subjective lens (beauty is in the eye of the beholder). The graphics aren't subjective. A vertex, a pixel, a face, keyframes per animations, are quantifiable data. When analyzing the amount of work put into a pack is important to take these things into account. It doesn't take the same amount of work for a 3D artist to model an object with 100 faces than an object with 1K faces.

Simmers can look at a low poly style and like it better than the high poly one and it's perfectly valid. So that's a useless argument.

It's useless because you say so? What? The problem is that you're twisting my argument (straw manning as always). I never say you have to like this because it has higher quality meshes. We're comparing Stuff Packs and pointing out the fact that TS4 SPs feature lower polycounts than objects in TS3 packs is important for this argument.

This weak argument about breaking up expansion packs and selling them "piecemeal."

Again all these qualifiers are laughable when you don't even prove WHY they're weak. The concrete evidence you're looking for is PRECEDENT. Precedent is definied as: "an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances." That's exactly what I'm using when making the assertion that EPs in TS4 are broken up in smaller pieces to be sold "piecemeal" as you put it. The precedent set by all previous games. Something else you're ignoring is that 10 out of 14 packs include gameplay objects that had previously been included in EPs. That's a pattern.
I do agree about vampires and I wish more packs added enough gameplay value to justify the extra price you have to pay for them. Regrettably, Vampires is the exception, not the rule.

So, because I'm probably going to start phasing out of this discussion since you are unable to concede that your opinion is just that - an opinion, and using all the "facts" and skewed perspective you can dream up isn't going to change that ultimate truth

I love how you want me to concede. I'm not going to concede because you want me to. By the way, facts are facts, they aren't "facts" with quotation marks. Skewed perspective because you say so? Ultimate truth? What are you even on about?

or why you have such a difficult time accepting that players just prefer different things

It's not what I'm trying to do and you know it. Stop straw manning my arguments to make them easy to attack. I'm perfectly okay accepting people prefer different things. As a logical person I try to understand WHY. It inevitably leads me to analyze things from an objective point of view, or as objective as possible can. I'm not perfect, but I do make an effort and I don't leave it as "it's a matter of opinion." Liking or preferring one thing over another IS A MATTER OF OPINION. One game/pack being better than another can be assessed with a more objective perspective, and that's why I'm trying to do. The difference between the former and the latter is that your preference or taste will always be subjective because you're a person. Video games are OBJECTS and therefore can be analyzed by facts.

Both posts are equally valid.

Both may be valid, but doesn't mean that one isn't better than the other. If what you're saying were true, academia wouldn't exist. What's the point of an evolutionary biologist publishing a carefully researched paper if their dissertation has the same value than a random person on the internet writing "evolution doesn't exist."

Your use of manipulative debate tactics

Those scary debate tactics.

If people are entertained by it, that's all the argument they need.

Done. Thread should be closed. Heck, Forum should be closed. What's the point of a DISCUSSION forum if we can't discuss things related to the game? Imagine every post being: "I'm entertained by this game/pack" - "I'm not entertained by this game/pack." This is a discussion forum, the point IS to discuss.