Sims 4 update removed gender restrictions

[DeliveryGodNoah_v1legacy]

Neat.
There always was a couple female hair styles I wanted to try on men, and modding is there but it's a pain sometimes. Or I'm lazy.
Anyway, now it's supported by the devs themselves, so my laziness wins again!

Happened upon this story while on *shudders* Facebook. Don't even look at the comments. A bunch of children who think they're hilarious and some of the most thick skulled, brain dead people the planet has to offer, acting like this is a forced interaction rather than simply the devs adding in some extra code that gives you the option.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

Its honestly now I think of it strange a game with so much gay sex in it was even restricting this in the first place.

I guess restricting such things was just the default choice for the programmers and they didnt think about it. Cause it really doesnt matter and hey some of those sims dont even look trans, like afroguy or the edgy hairflick asian guy.

So the story goes is that the programmer for the sims 1 secretly added gay sex because they were angry at EA and thought it would get them into trouble. It kind of ended up sticking, but EA has kind of been a little ancy about it. They never intended it to be a thing, in part because they wanted to sell the game in places what didn't allow gay content, but they got stuck with it and couldn't take it out without upsetting fans..

Also I think hairflip is a woman? Maybe?

Shed be a bit flat if she was but I guess its possible. Super androgynous.

Itd totally make sense that EA wasnt brave enough to put gay sex in, but who knows maybe thats just me being cynical.

 

[MiskWisk]

As Barbas said, more options would improve the game. It's a game based around customisation so it's an entirely reasonable addition. If you don't like the new options, don't use them.

I haven't really seen any backlash against it but c'mon, this is the internet. The anti-SJW brigade is probably foaming at the mouth at The Sims pushing its "liberal agenda".

As someone who visits a site with a large "anti-SJW brigade" I can safely say response to this has either been "I have no idea what you're talking about" and "Oh, like Saints Row 2? That's cool."

 

[Dizchu]

As someone who visits a site with a large "anti-SJW brigade" I can safely say response to this has either been "I have no idea what you're talking about" and "Oh, like Saints Row 2? That's cool."

I'm talking about the same group of people who were up in arms when Facebook allowed more than two gender options.

 

[MiskWisk]

As someone who visits a site with a large "anti-SJW brigade" I can safely say response to this has either been "I have no idea what you're talking about" and "Oh, like Saints Row 2? That's cool."

I'm talking about the same group of people who were up in arms when Facebook allowed more than two gender options.

Oh, you mean the wailing banshees. Should probably be more specific.

 

[Dizchu]

Oh, you mean the wailing banshees. Should probably be more specific.

"Wailing banshees" sounds far too metal in my opinion.

 

[inmunitas]

As someone who visits a site with a large "anti-SJW brigade" I can safely say response to this has either been "I have no idea what you're talking about" and "Oh, like Saints Row 2? That's cool."

I'm talking about the same group of people who were up in arms when Facebook allowed more than two gender options.

I think there is a big deference between a developer adding player freedom and Facebook being stupid.

 

[Amaror]

Cool, I guess. Not that I play Sims 4, though I did play Sims 3, and more options are always neat. I would probably not use them myself if I played the game, since I always roleplay myself to some point in Sims games but more choice is always a good thing.
Don't really see how this would become overly "controversial".
I mean, sure, you will most likely still have some idiots and trolls screaming bloody murder over this on some sites, but I don't see it being a too big deal. Generally the bigger resistance to this kind of stuff comes when this is put as a character in the game. Like in the Dragon Age games where you can have gay character hitting on your character whether you want to or not. Some people just get uncomfortable from this kind of stuff and dislike it because of that. Not that I agree with it, but it is at least a somehwhat understandable critique were this change makes their experience at least a little bit worse.
This just gives more options for everyone. And, besides, gay characters were always possible in the Sims. They didn't even add that in they just gave everyone some more options and I don't think there will be too much outrage about it.
Hell this news is a few days old by now and I have not seen any major outrage over this.

 

[Don Incognito]

As someone who visits a site with a large "anti-SJW brigade"

You're talking about here, aren't you?

 

[Dizchu]

I think there is a big deference between a developer adding player freedom and Facebook being stupid.

Isn't it essentially the same thing though? Facebook allowed users more options. If you don't identify as a quad-gender demimasculine hyperboy, "male" and "female" still exist. Personally I'm fine with just "other" but that's me.

 

[Nazulu]

I reckon it's great. I'm a little surprised they restricted it in the first place. You know, it just seems like that type of game where there would be no restrictions.

 

[nomotog_v1legacy]

I reckon it's great. I'm a little surprised they restricted it in the first place. You know, it just seems like that type of game where there would be no restrictions.

There are normally restrictions in most games. The ones that don't are rare and they do it for humor. GTA 5 lets trever wear dresses because they think it's funny. A game that dose it because they want to support transgender characters is kind of rare. (I don't recall any game saying or implying that is why they did such a choice.)

 

[inmunitas]

I think there is a big deference between a developer adding player freedom and Facebook being stupid.

Isn't it essentially the same thing though? Facebook allowed users more options. If you don't identify as a quad-gender demimasculine hyperboy, "male" and "female" still exist. Personally I'm fine with just "other" but that's me.

For one thing there are only two genders, "male" and "female", that is what the term "gender" refers to. Those other options are just "descriptors", some of which are arguably nonsensical.

 

[Saelune]

I think there is a big deference between a developer adding player freedom and Facebook being stupid.

Isn't it essentially the same thing though? Facebook allowed users more options. If you don't identify as a quad-gender demimasculine hyperboy, "male" and "female" still exist. Personally I'm fine with just "other" but that's me.

For one thing there are only two genders, "male" and "female", that is what the term "gender" refers to. Those other options are just "descriptors", some of which are arguably nonsensical.

I think you mean sex, ie genitals and how we work to reproduce. Gender is more a social construct than the biological one that the sexes are.

 

[Nazulu]

I think there is a big deference between a developer adding player freedom and Facebook being stupid.

Isn't it essentially the same thing though? Facebook allowed users more options. If you don't identify as a quad-gender demimasculine hyperboy, "male" and "female" still exist. Personally I'm fine with just "other" but that's me.

For one thing there are only two genders, "male" and "female", that is what the term "gender" refers to. Those other options are just "descriptors", some of which are arguably nonsensical.

Thank you for informing me.

I really didn't know. I don't play these types of games obviously. I just remember playing a wrestling game on the 64 that allowed me to make my own wrestler however I wanted, even a women with a moustache wearing a tutu and full body knight armour. Now that think about, it probably was just for humours sake. I think it was on 64.

Edit: Ignore this post. It was meant for nomotog

 

[inmunitas]

I think there is a big deference between a developer adding player freedom and Facebook being stupid.

Isn't it essentially the same thing though? Facebook allowed users more options. If you don't identify as a quad-gender demimasculine hyperboy, "male" and "female" still exist. Personally I'm fine with just "other" but that's me.

For one thing there are only two genders, "male" and "female", that is what the term "gender" refers to. Those other options are just "descriptors", some of which are arguably nonsensical.

I think you mean sex, ie genitals and how we work to reproduce. Gender is more a social construct than the biological one that the sexes are.

No, I mean gender. Sex only refers to biological anatomy, gender is basically everything else indirectly associated with ones sex, that is what is meant by "social construct". Example: modern western society associates dresses and the colour pink with the female sex, that association is socially constructed, there is no real reason why the male sex cannot where dresses or pink.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

The only thing I don't like it apparently GLADD was involved in this some how I heard. I've heard stories about them.

Beyond that, this is just no brainer stuff, EA should of did this from the start. It's always better to have more options than less.

Now if only Nintendo will follow suit and let boys wear dresses in the next Pokemon game. Traptastic.

Yuke's Co. sits in the corner, bitterly wondering what the big deal is.

Spoiler

Heh, heh, not knocking the decision. It's neat. Just find it amusing how Maxis is finally doing something that wrestling games, literally the worst at this kind of thing, have been doing for years. Not sure if they allow it any more tho. Yuke's got softlocked by Visual Concepts.

Not recently, no. But to be fair, they just switched over to the new system to games ago, and it was only this year we were even able to make Lady Caws... so i figure with time, maybe it'll get there again?

If Yukes is bitter about anything its that all everyone does is pine for that fucking AKI system.

 

[Weaver]

I'm kind of surprised you couldn't do this in the first place TBH.

 

[MiskWisk]

Oh, you mean the wailing banshees. Should probably be more specific.

"Wailing banshees" sounds far too metal in my opinion.

Perhaps, but "screeching monkeys" I find is too much of an insult to the monkeys to be usable.

As someone who visits a site with a large "anti-SJW brigade"

You're talking about here, aren't you?

Not in the slightest. I suppose I should clarify that in the site I visit it is a site wide group rather than what has happened here where people sort of claimed there own sections of the site.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Now it just needs an update that removes 75% of the nonsensical design decisions and it'll be worth buying.

If you ever wanted ammunition to shoot at EA, their ridiculous mismanagement of their Golden Goose Sims franchise is about as high caliber as it gets. You can be a greedy, stupid company if it works. You can sell people microtransaction and DLC ridden garbage all day and all night if they're willing to buy it. Hard to argue with glowing Q4 earning reports. Their sales numbers on Sims have been crashing since 2011 though. When Sims 4 launched to miserable critical reviews and public scorn, they actually threatened to cancel the series out of spite if the 4th game didn't start getting a better reception.

This is a game franchise that is among the highest selling in history. It's up there with Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, World of Warcraft and the various Nintendo mega-franchises as a gaming sales phenomenon. And EA has been expertly running it into the fucking ground for half a decade. It's tragic. No one needs you to reinvent the wheel, guys. It's fucking virtual dolls. Figure it out.