Sims 2 to Sims 3 Graphics Comparison

#1Peach_RabbitPosted 3/17/2008 1:27:49 PM
If you go to snooty sims at the following link you will see the amazing difference of graphics from Sims 2 to Sims 3

http://www.snootysims.com/thesims3index.php?id=compare

The sims look more expressive, the lighting is much more realistic, and it appears that objects are going to be able to be placed closer together. Gone are the gigantic blocky sqaures and bad porpotion factors I feel. Maybe a rise to better sized squares and objects :D.
#2ShegevaraPosted 3/17/2008 2:46:46 PM

ok, first to say. We saw those pictures. I must say that the first comparison really kicks ass by Sims 3, and maybe the third.

I must say, that i have seen better plantlife. Also, the sims still don't look very natural. Way better against sims 2. But sims 2 is like almost 4 years old game. Sims 3 is 2009 game, it could be better. I'm neither happy, neither dissapointed. But i must say i hoped for better. We will see if anything changes. I remember first sims 2 pictures also weren't really the same as the actual game.

#3Peach_Rabbit(Topic Creator)Posted 3/17/2008 4:08:27 PM
I am glad that they are retaining a cartoony appearance and not going for realistic approach in The Sims. I do not know how many people would be upset about having super realistic looking Sims but I would be one of those upset. The way they are infusing pseudo realism into The Sims with more life like color palettes is the best path I feel for them to go.

Thank you Snooty Sim for doing the picture comparison :D. It is very nice of you to go to the trouble creating pictures then assembling the page to show the difference.
#4NA3DPosted 3/18/2008 7:20:16 AM

the cartoony part of it is one of the huge keys to the success of the Sims series. If they would go realistic it would distroy a huge part of the formula that makes the game the experience it is. There are a few key parts of this formula:

1. Cartoony/Quarky
2. Wide age range for target audience (Goes with #3, but the importance deserves it's own mark)
3. Simple (anyone can pick up and play the game)
4. Optional Depth (You can do a lot in the game to create your own story/movie, reach goals with characters, or just build houses)
5. Open (You can do a lot in the game, which means that you can put a lot of time into the game, which makes how much you paid for the game, even with all of the expansion packs, beat out buying a new DVD or paying for 200+ channels of cable TV a month [my cable TV/Internet bill is $130 a month, so it definitely beats the heck out of that {300+ channels, more importantly G4 all of the gaming news you care to know about, and then sum. (ninja warrior)}])

#5SlurpicusPosted 3/18/2008 10:16:18 AM
another reason they keep it cartoony is it keeps the pc reqirements low.

they want to make this game for the average PC.

Sims audience is large and very diverse.
Hardcore gamer to the non gamer.
there are people who only play the sims ( i consider them non gamers).

if the sims 3 needed major pc upgrades and needed a Good PC to run it. They would lose money.

I bet at the time of sims 3 release the cost of a pc that meets recommended will be under 800.

even when sims 2 was first released it didnt require a good pc. just an average one.






---
E.T.- the game that made Deadly Towers look like Final Fantasy.
#6wis3boiPosted 3/18/2008 7:03:56 PM
that first comparason pic is incredible...the lighting is lovely and the close objects really makes it feel more realistic
#7XxTAxXPosted 3/19/2008 3:49:08 AM
the first, if not the second one too, of the Sims 3 pictures look like sketches... they may or may not be, but to me, they look like one.
---
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
#8jonneymendozaPosted 3/19/2008 5:48:08 AM
IMO sims was never that GPU dependant but heavily CPU dependant so i imagine that a quad core cpu will benefit this game a heck fo alot especialy with mods for making houses with unlimited size
#9p232Posted 3/19/2008 6:58:24 AM
Sorry, but I'm acually disepointed by the graphics. Yeah, the comperison looked good, but when I looked at some pictures in bigger format in other sides, it wasn't that good, just a little better than sims 2. I guess the diffrence between sims 1 and 2 was so huge that sims 3 got to show a lot to impress me, I'll just hope the gamplay is so good that that I can forget about the graphics.
#10Nxss-effa-simPosted 3/19/2008 10:34:50 AM
I'm not impressed at all. These look like the CG clips from Resident Evil 2 in 97. This is suppose to be a 2009 game and this is what we get. I was mostly looking forward to this game because of improve graphics. I have to disagree that the cartoony element is part of the success formula for the series. I thought the reasoning behind the cartoony look was because of GPU capabilities at the time. I showed the screens to a couple friends and they were disappointed as well. EA taking a more realistc approach, graphically, would probably attract more gamers in my opinion. Imagine a virtual life simulation that actually looks real. A world where you feel like you are actually in the game; growing attached to these virtual people, worrying about them and thinking twice before you make decisions. EA should just purchase the graphics engine software from Epic Games, that would definitely satisfy my expectations.