Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
Instructor
Original Poster
#1 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 6:13 AM
Default Back to TS1
God they've gone several steps backward to TS1 here. I mean, babies aren't even considered sims by the game, they and the cradles are just objects like in TS1? And they have only ONE interaction (aside from Mom being able to breastfeed in addition to "cuddle baby")? This is very upsetting.

Seriously, we can purchase kids from the debug menu in the catalog.... ugh.
Advertisement
Lab Assistant
#2 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 7:10 AM
you can purchase them!? wth...
Lab Assistant
#3 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 3:25 PM
TSM reminds me A LOT of our old The Sims 1 when it comes to customizing sims and buying furniture. But I actually kinda like it! Even though I love TS3's high level of customization, I think it takes too much time to set textures and choose colors. In TS Medieval I create sims and decorate rooms so much faster!
Instructor
#4 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 3:48 PM
It's so stupid that kids don't grow up to be adults, it would be so much more interesting if you could have a whole dynastic thing going on with the heirs to the throne.

"Deep down I'm pretty superficial"

Lab Assistant
#5 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 4:08 PM
At least, the babies show up in the relationsships and they already have traits.

But I think the way children are handled is not totally unrealistic. In 1400, nobody in their right mind was reading books to babies and stuff. Infants were mostly nursed and wrapped into a cocoon-like cloth until they could sit and eat a peace of milk-soaked bread. As soon as they could lift a basket, they were considered as workers, at least in peasant or craftspeople families. So toddler interactions would be like "give some bread" and "put into bet" and that is all there is

Of course for a king or merchante where the son is supposed to inherit the father's position, it would be nice if s ome kind of education was possible. And it would be totally logical for a blacksmith to teach his offspring blacksmithing, or for a doctor to send the children gather herbs. As it is now, the only profession where the children are of use is merchant.

I personnaly am hoping for a familiy life extension.
Instructor
#6 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 4:21 PM Last edited by sayyadina : 29th Mar 2011 at 4:46 PM.
Quote: Originally posted by dear_dori

But I think the way children are handled is not totally unrealistic. In 1400, nobody in their right mind was reading books to babies and stuff. Infants were mostly nursed and wrapped into a cocoon-like cloth until they could sit and eat a peace of milk-soaked bread. As soon as they could lift a basket, they were considered as workers, at least in peasant or craftspeople families. So toddler interactions would be like "give some bread" and "put into bet" and that is all there is


Yes, children where considered "little grown-ups". The whole idea of childhood as a nurtured phase was invented during the 1900. Pretty much like the teenager was invented in the 50´s
Also, in medieval times the life-span was short and peoples lives where not worth much. They had no real consept of being "individuals" as we have today.

Thinking I raised generations of families in the Sims2 and 3, I dont mind going back to something simpler. This game is more about the quests and the heroes, and I like it. I dont miss having to decorate large houses either. When I want to "play house" I start up the sims3.

"The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory. "
Forum Resident
#7 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 5:14 PM
Considering that the sims 3 completely neglects any age category thats not adult, I don't mind it that much. I hardly ever have children sims in sims 3 because they can't do much, they cant even play with a toddler sibling.

Besides, here you have the quests and hero classes. You can't have it all.
Instructor
Original Poster
#8 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 8:50 PM
Aw I wouldn't say that's true... but I jsut really feel like they gutted TS3 badly. I miss it.
Fresh fruit from the bigot tree
#9 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 8:54 PM
Hey, children were more importan to families in medieval ages than in modern ones. There was no school to dump the kids and forget about them for whole hours (and to skip the "raising them" responsability as parents), so their families educated them. Families were a lot bigger too, with siblings and maybe even other relatives helping with the raising. The first born was the center of the world there, being the one that would inherit everything, ot at least more than the others. The whole family survival depended on that little person being raised properly.
You even have a nice book (the pillars of earth) to go and learn a little more. A noblewoman traveled around a whole continent to search for the father of her baby, and she took the child with her instead of leaving him with his grandmother (safer for the baby, but she was too attached to the child by that time).
Back to the sims, it IS a huge step back to sims 1. Children were the most valuable thing a family had. Not allowing them to grow up is the worst way EA could messed up the game (why I'm not surprised?). Even the lack of horses and other really necessary animals for that time (ox, cow, sheep... people could not suvive without them) are nothing compared to that.
Horses were a luxury item like an expensive car, the ox was a work tool for farmers, the cows and sheeps were a nice way to get clothes and healthy food (sometimes, an old cow was the only meat source for poor farmers). I can agree with almost everything the game lacks, but EA really ruined it by making children stuck in their childhood (and babies not having any real needs by the way)

If a modder sees this, feel free to add my ideas to your mod. I really do not want a sims 1 rip off in medieval theme (we already had that, EA!)

Do not install pescado's mod. It is the one producing the errors it warns you about. Get Twallan's instead. It cleans your save file and prevents glitches.
Forum Resident
#10 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 9:03 PM
The game is about heroes though, which has been pretty clear for quite a while through the marketing. Its not about family like the sims 3.

Considering all the stuff these heroes have to do, juggling a family of a wife and several children along with that would be too much.
Lab Assistant
#11 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 9:37 PM
Well you are right, too. The first-born (male) of course was special. And it was a totally whole different thing in noble families or families of craftsmen in free cities. But they were not too interested in little children (half of whom died before their 6th birthday) and often left to nurses in these first years, if the family was rich enough. This is why a toddler stage in TSM seems pretty irrelevant to me.
Only in the later years, education became important, children of noble or rich families were taught reading, writing, mathematic, literature, rhetorics, poetry, history, latin, music, riding and sword-fighting by private tutors at home, they were taken on travels and presented to important friends and so on.
But in the world of peasants and simple townsfolk, children mostly had to do one thing and that is work. They did not need education because all they needed to know in order to inherit the father's farm or workshop was what they were learning by working.
That is why I'd like to see my doctor's daughter run around and collect herbs, or my blacksmith's to fill in new coal for him and so on.
I also don't think that a teenager stage is historically important, because in there years, kids were already considered adulds. The could marry and everything, and a boy of 14 could become the new master of his dead father's farm without anyone throwing a strange look at him.

One or two of the siblings might have the luck to be sent out and learn a profession at a master's workshop, if the family had saved enough money for the premium of apprenticeship. The rest only had the chance to stay on their parent's farm as workers or to go of to someone else's farm as menial.
Noble children were often sent to be a knave in a knight's castle or a servant in a royal household, or they were sent to a monastery for education, if the father did not need them as help.
So in TSM, there could be a mod that does not need a teenage stage, where the children disappear at the docks (be sent for apprenticeship/knavehood/scholarship) to one of the loyal countries (blacksmith in Craftshole, merchant in Tredony, spy in Aarbyville, ....) and come back as adulds with the title "journeyman blacksmith [name]" or something like this.
Or that they become the new hero at lvl 1, and the old one retires! If you do not want this you can send the kid off to learn another profession than the father's (or to learn pseudo-profession, like cook in Gastrobury), or don't sent them off at all and keep them as help, or sent them off forever (or until the parent dies) The modding possibilities are endless! (at least in my fantasies)
Forum Resident
#12 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 9:48 PM
Well the problem is that they are trying to be politically correct to a fault in this game.

Children don't have to work, genders are equal, middle eastern and black people show up in important functions in an appearantly western european kingdom, etc.
Lab Assistant
#13 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 10:01 PM
Not to talk about the elves, the wizards, the pit monster, the speaking toads, the genie ... Yeah I suspect that historical correctnes is not what they had in mind as primary game scope
Inventor
#14 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 10:32 PM
Actually, the whole agricultural thingie is absent. Peasants are wondering around all day long, having a good time, while wheat obviously sows itself, grows by itself, then reaps itself and marches off to the shoppe where your hero can buy it.

A real simulation of the Middle Ages would be a great thing but I don't think EAxis people are capable of making one. It was stupid of them to advertise this game as such; they should have said it was a fantasy, loosely based on medieval themes, and most of us would be quite happy. Though the omission of the dynastic aspect would look bad even in such context.

BTW, if you are interested in real simulations - just google and you will find some interesting surprises.
Test Subject
#15 Old 29th Mar 2011 at 11:32 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Inhuman One
Well the problem is that [...] genders are equal, middle eastern and black people show up in important functions in an appearantly western european kingdom, etc.


You could always choose only white, male people for important roles and kill everyone you dislike of, for example by feeding them to the blue, wormlike pit monster that lives in that western European kingdom. Or have your wizard contantly hex them.
For historical accuracy and such.

I really like the simplicity of the house design. In Sims 3 my houses sometimes stay basically unfurnished because I just can't decide on the right patterns; here I just don't care. And while at first I was a little disappointed that my princess wouldn't get to grow up and inherit the throne, I'm actually relieved not to have to worry about the upbringing of a child while I try to force some timeladies under my rule.
Test Subject
#16 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 2:26 AM
Default Don't worry guy's
Hey this is a good game give it time and let them come out with a expantion pack or two and it will be a pretty good game.Really they need to make this game more like the sims 2 and the sims 3 then it will be really good.
Top Secret Researcher
#17 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 4:25 AM
Quote: Originally posted by alexpilgrim
It's so stupid that kids don't grow up to be adults, it would be so much more interesting if you could have a whole dynastic thing going on with the heirs to the throne.


I suppose if they had enabled aging, then the heroes would grow and die, and players will lose all their heroes level and skills, and other people would come here and whine about that too.
Lab Assistant
#18 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 9:31 AM
they made the Sims 1 medieval on the Sims 3 Engine, very nice

Back in the building
Forum Resident
#19 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 11:08 AM
It took sims3 three expansions to really get going if you ask me, I think a single expansion would already do a lot for sims medieval, if the right gameplay elements are touched upon.

Base game sims 3 was just boring. Nothing to do aside work, and aside from cars there was nothing to save money for. Building a big house was pointless since there was no way to fill it. Interactions where hardly improved from sims 2.

World Adventures was nice, but it didnt improve things at home at all, aside the ability to really stock up the museum or have a private collection at home.

Ambitions added some good stuff, but still lacked in home interiour objects. Some interesting new skills where added though.

It took them untill nightlife to finally add hottubs, Piano's, Elevators and other stuff. All that combined makes for a full experience.

But a lot of basic things are still missing from sims 3 such as a pooltable, any stairs that are not straight, any kind of interaction between children and toddlers, let alone any real addition to ages other than adult to make them more fun to play.


With the right expansion and some patches, Sims Medieval could already be a very full experience. Think about it.

Freeplay mode could easily be fixed through a patch I am sure, to allow experience to be gained and tasks to still require to be fulfilled. Perhaps some special quests could be added that can only be done when the ambition is completed. These could be extra difficult and require level 10 heroes.

For an expansion they could easily improve the experience by a lot if they would provide a new kingdom map with a different building style, add perhaps two classes and new skills such as archery and horse riding, new spells, new clothes, armor customisation and more controll over the kingdom, possibly allowing a coat of arms to be made and set uniforms for the guards. Perhaps a seperate forest area could be added as well, or the map could be expanded that way.
Lab Assistant
#20 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 11:19 AM
likin the idea, probably since i have a level 10 spy

(reminds you on anything?)

Back in the building
Instructor
Original Poster
#21 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 4:11 PM
Looks like one of the Black Hand dudes from Oblivion
Lab Assistant
#22 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 5:48 PM

Back in the building
Forum Resident
#23 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 7:42 PM
I personly find the Reinassance style leather armor with the sword and dagger more fitting for the Assasin's Creed look, it allows for some red patterns to show as well. Its great to have a game capable of this though.

Personly I remade one of my Neverwinter Nights characters pretty much spot on.
Test Subject
#24 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 9:08 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Rafe Weisz
Hey, children were more importan to families in medieval ages than in modern ones. There was no school to dump the kids and forget about them for whole hours (and to skip the "raising them" responsability as parents), so their families educated them. Families were a lot bigger too, with siblings and maybe even other relatives helping with the raising. The first born was the center of the world there, being the one that would inherit everything, ot at least more than the others. The whole family survival depended on that little person being raised properly.
You even have a nice book (the pillars of earth) to go and learn a little more. A noblewoman traveled around a whole continent to search for the father of her baby, and she took the child with her instead of leaving him with his grandmother (safer for the baby, but she was too attached to the child by that time).
Back to the sims, it IS a huge step back to sims 1. Children were the most valuable thing a family had. Not allowing them to grow up is the worst way EA could messed up the game (why I'm not surprised?). Even the lack of horses and other really necessary animals for that time (ox, cow, sheep... people could not suvive without them) are nothing compared to that.
Horses were a luxury item like an expensive car, the ox was a work tool for farmers, the cows and sheeps were a nice way to get clothes and healthy food (sometimes, an old cow was the only meat source for poor farmers). I can agree with almost everything the game lacks, but EA really ruined it by making children stuck in their childhood (and babies not having any real needs by the way)

If a modder sees this, feel free to add my ideas to your mod. I really do not want a sims 1 rip off in medieval theme (we already had that, EA!)


I agree w/ a lot of aspects. A little mishaps as well. Horses were luxury in the British Isles, France, Spain, Italy, Portugal, and Greece . Horses were not luxury in Poland, Russia, Bohemia/Czechia, Germany, Hungary, Serbia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Croatia, Montenegro, Romania, Bulgaria, Mongolian Empire in Europe . Children becoming NPC's worst thing Maxis did in the Sims Medieval. There were Monarchs who had 11 children. The small map is crazy because the entire map looks more like one region and not a European sized map. They should have added choose your region; East, West, Balkans, Greece, Italy, Germany, Scandinavia.
Lab Assistant
#25 Old 30th Mar 2011 at 9:41 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Inhuman One
The game is about heroes though, which has been pretty clear for quite a while through the marketing. Its not about family like the sims 3.

Considering all the stuff these heroes have to do, juggling a family of a wife and several children along with that would be too much.


Yes your right, they did say from the start that its not sim3 with medieval clothes. It would have been a bit of a rip off when you can download medieval stuff from this site for free.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top