I think I have to agree that despite its origins as a dollhouse builder, the core of the Sims games has become its live mode- when what you've built or dressed up comes to life, and live mode is really what ties the minigames of the Sims (decorating, dressing up) into a whole package.

Otherwise there are other games like Tiny Glade, Interior Designer, House Flipper, Small Spaces, IMVU, Second Life, even games like Planet Zoo/Coaster that all seem to have more player customization in their respective paper doll/decorator elements- but they don't have that element of interactability or gameplay once you're done IMO.

I am reinstalling my Sims 2.....I like the faces better on it-BUT I also love the open world and color choices of Sims 3. Before they came up with Sims 4 I thought they would be putting the two together--That would have been amazing!!!! Each time they were coming up with a new game I had to update something - better video card for Sims 2 and 3.
Sims 4 is same games, but now some of the stuff we really want we have to get 2 or 3 eps to make that "set" complete.

What is this even about now? Ppl keep arguing with me about my comment about what Paradox mentioned about customization. But we agree about live mode. Everyone understands that just customization and character creation does not make a game. I never claimed otherwise. Saying that customization is important and that some players just build and create characters, does not say anything about how I think about live mode.

But I keep getting hit with strawmen by you guys as if I did and I then have to be explained how important live mode is as if I am new to the sims franchise.

My point is, that it is clear that no one would mind lots of customization if live mode is good enough. This is always seen as a plus in this type of game. This is why i thought Paradox was acting ridiculous about it as if it doesn't matter. It is also not as if live mode failed because they only worked on making customization and mods possible. The devs dont all occupy the same chair.

I am very gratefully playing Paralives now, but I am finding myself thinking back to this game (and the other programs that didn't make it also).
The frustrating thing was that there was lots to like, and just before everything exploded, they started making good hair :D
It's made me wonder about the differences in the two teams (PL and LBY).
PL absolutely made the right decision in picking an art style and sticking to it. They did the right thing putting off creating vehicles as well.
LBY made a wrong turn using unity assets for their people models. Would we have rescued the characters from their water retention (legs fatter at the bottom) syndrome?
Would LBY have got better if they'd had time, or were the flaws simply unfixable?

I think the game was fixable, but LBY team needed lots and lots of resources (money especially) and time to fix the models. Every animation needed to be redone: from going to the bathroom to proposing marriage. That is a huge issue and it is not easily fixable.

I think they could have used mocap, just like inZOI team did. Paradox has the money and resources for mocap.

I have a feeling that Paradox is kind of like EA. Cities Skylines, as an example, has dozens and dozens of DLCs. The sequel got a negative response because it was barebones, just like TS4.

Paradox definitely has trended towards EA, the moment they went public.

"Dedicated small fan bases, looking for very specific experiences": that perfectly describes me (and, I think, the majority of my fellow players) a quarter of a century ago, long before Steam and Steam reviews. And we got our dose, game after game. Perhaps the problem is that those games, as far as gameplay is concerned, were just too good. It's not that the developers did not try: they tried very hard and added all kinds of stuff but they could not better the gameplay - more often than not they diluted it. So, when I am looking for a specific experience now I find myself in the same situation as all those years ago, a part of a dedicated group that is, because of Steam, usually bigger than it used to be but still quite small.

If only TS4 players (and people who play other EA games) were like this, and by that I mean that they shouldn't tolerate bad games. I do play TS4, but it is mostly fun because of a few good mods and a few good DLCs such as Seasons and Pets (Cats and Dogs, actually).

Imagine if TS4 players united and started giving bad reviews because of all the bugs and shallow features (that also require mods to be interesting).

I feel kind of sorry for Paradox because it is their simulation games that also underperfomed (in my opinion), or they simply got cancelled. At the same time, I think they should have known better. They have huge resources to give to their various game studios and a lot of employees.