"Aeroprincess87;c-18305493" wrote:
"Horrorgirl6;c-18305474" wrote:
"Sarah26Cat;c-18305463" wrote:
Or we could compare Sims 4 with Sims 2&3, games that came out many years (sorry I'm too lazy to find real numbers) before it. Sims 4 is going to suffer either way, because it is a cheap excuse to sell us DLC. Anyways, we are comparing LBY and Paralives to what is currently out on the market, and unless EA wants to reveal more about Project Rene, that's going to be Sims 4. It's just their good luck, picking now to go public with the games. (Not, I know it's a lot of strategic business stuff behind the reason they released now. But I'm just glad we are getting other options, not just one but two, on the market, which EA has had a monopoly of for YEARS. Look at history, when monopolies are broken, the selection of what is offered on the market goes up in quality.
I mean again I am not defending Sims 4 here.To me comparing it two and three is fair game here.I just think In comparisons it's not really logical to compare game that was released in 2014 vs games that are going to be 2024 or latter. Also I am excited for life by you ,and paralives.I think competition is good and like life simulation games in general .
To be fair, Sims 4 sucks in comparison to Sims 2 and Sims 3. Sims 3 lacked the detail of Sims 2 like opening cupboards to cook and having kids slide down the railings of spiral staircases, but it also added an open world that was revolutionary at the time and the color wheel. Sims 4 in comparison only took steps back with no pools, no minor gameplay details, black and white maps, no open world, ghosts, etc. at launch and has only added alot of things in the coming years through overpriced DLC.
Oh I can understand that statement.I not disagreeing sims 4 has taken step backwards.I will say there was a few upgrades.Like the building mechanic,cas minus the color wheel,buy minus the color wheel and multitasking.
