"filipomel;c-16426044" wrote:
"JoAnne65;c-16426000" wrote:
@filipomel Thanks :)
I absolutely agree concerning the necklace and things like that, in terms of that it looks flat, but I don't quite see how that adresses art style inconsistency. That's comparable to that ball pit or the fruit bowl in Sims 4, or the awfully designed small animals. And most recently the flat hamster habitat tubes that appear to be painted on the wall, totally flat as well. As for the hairstyles, nothing wrong with the first one imo, but the second and the third one are just really poorly done.
Your 'on the verge of realism' isn't on the verge of realism at all.
http://i64.tinypic.com/2ql8q5d.jpg
The statement "some items are fully modelled 3D items, while others are just flat textures, and for some reason these flat textures all look fuzzy around the edges" actually can be said for Sims 4 as well. The lighting looks realistic, the graphics often are quite sharp, but then there's that ball pit, or the squirrel, or those flat tubes, or the fruit bowl.
https://i.imgur.com/TA5CdxM.png
Some clothes are done well, where other clothes suddenly look rushed and poor quality. Sims 4's art style is consistent where it comes to appearance (it all looks like everything's made of rubber and I think that's a deliberate choice). I prefer a stylized look that makes wood look like wood however, rock like rock, skin like skin, fabric like fabric myself but always loyal to the art style. I honestly think that's what you might be confusing here. But again: that's no different for Sims 2. Sims 2's and 3's art styles are very similar, I often confuse them even seeing pictures.
Perhaps it's not so much art style inconsistencies, but more so just inconsistencies with the quality of assets we get, I just feel like a lot of the stuff in 3 is a mixed bag of good quality assets and questionable assets. I don't think the small animals in 4 are that bad in my honest opinion, but those flat hamster habitat tubes are just wall decals, I don't think they are or were supposed to be 3D models or anything, although that would have been pretty cool.
I may be wrong when I say "verge on realism," but by that I mean instead of the grass looking like a grass texture that fits the Sims overall aesthetic, it kind of just looks like a picture of grass that was taken with a camera.
As for fuzzy Sims 4 objects, I agree, some objects look like they could've been done better, the fruit bowl I don't mind as it's a pretty small object just for décor, but something like the ball pit on its release was absolutely ugly, and for such a big object too, in terms of its actual size but also the fact that it was one of the main features of the pack, thank goodness they updated it.
Personally I just think Sims 4 delivers much better quality assets and items overall than 3 and even 2, especially considering how much I adore the Sims 4 overall aesthetic. I still do like the Sims 3 visuals, it's an iconic look that really can't be replicated in other games, it also holds a lot of nostalgia for me as Sims 3 was my first Sims game back in the day.
I agree items in 3 can look surprisingly well and others surprisingly poor (like the shiny basegame clothes for instance), but my point is I just don’t see any difference in that respect with Sims 4, since the same happens in that game. The only difference is that one is a 2009 game and the other 2014, so in some respects graphics improved. But Sims 3’s landscaping isn’t aiming to be realistic, it’s all stylized. I remember showing an ingame picture of China once to my father who is an avid Tomb Raider player and he sort of giggled. Clearly used to a very realistic art style and not understanding stylized can have charm too.
The cartoon doll accusation, sorry, but that comes down to the time you are prepared to spend in CAS (JackJack), apart from the fact you’re highly exaggerating the ‘reality’ of landscape and items in the game there to make your point. I mean, it’s far from this.
https://www.netflix-nederland.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Who-Framed-Roger-Rabbit-Netflix.jpg
In fact it’s often the other way around for me when people cover their sims in realistic CC. Then they quite often look out of place in their stylized environment (but the very same thing goes for Sims 4, I also see that when people have grass replacements but the trees still have their PlayMobil appearance). Sims 3’s art style (and Sims 2’s) is trying to approach reality more than than Sims 4’s, but in Sims 3’s case that includes the sims. They are not cartoony, they just have a tendency to look puffy when you don’t use the facial sliders, but that’s up to the creator.
Art style is a matter of taste, but for me - despite the banana skins that also hit Sims 4 - they did a more than fine job. I often pause and awe in the game and that can happen with both landscapes and my sims. And their houses for that matter.
As for the squirrels not being that bad...
https://pre00.deviantart.net/0a13/th/pre/i/2015/039/d/b/the_sims_4___squirrel_by_bmts4photography-d8h5l9p.png
We all have out own standards then ;) To me they don’t exactly fit the art style to say the least.
(I’d like to see an example of a cartoon looking rabbithole by the way, I have no idea what rabbitholes you are referring to there)(and if anything the somewhat more realistic sims in Medieval in fact mismatch more with the more cartoony environment, not less, though I like the art style in that game as well; in fact I was hoping Sims 4 would bring us something like that)
ETA: found this picture of a typical Sims 3 landscape. Grass, plants, trees, the far away montains, the rocks, I can’t but find it all completely matching (and gorgeous but that’s me).
http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l512/Jo-Anne2/Album3/Raven_036_zps826dd180.png
