Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Sims 4/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 4 November 2024 [1].

---

The Sims 4

Nominator(s): TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 16:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

This article is about the 2014 social simulation game The Sims 4. Initially released to mixed reception due to its limited variety of content and gameplay features, the game has since been significantly expanded upon by its developer Maxis, who has continued to support the game via free updates and many many DLC add-ons (thanks EA!). The game differentiates itself from previous entries in the series in several ways, such as: its stronger representations of gender identities and sexual orientations, fully-featured versions of the game on consoles, built-in online features (thankfully optional, unlike Maxis' SimCity, at launch), and being free-to-play from 2022 onwards.

This article achieved GA status in November 2022, after its third nomination (That was my fault, oops! I was a way more inexperienced editor back then.), and I have done a lot of work to the article to make it happen, including basically re-writing the whole thing. It's my first time attempting an FAC, so I am receptive to feedback and changes (including major ones, if necessary), but I do believe that the article has reached a point where it qualifies for FA status. Thank you in advance! TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 16:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Vacant0

Welcome to FAC! I'll have a look and review this. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

• Ref 114: Change title to "The Sims 4 Review", add website: The Escapist
• Add the website for Ref 117, 122
• Ref 143: Change VGC to Video Games Chronicle
• Try to find a replacement for Ref 158 (Dexerto)

@Vacant0: Done. TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 15:58, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

• Please mention the EU/AU and UK release dates in the prose.
• Remove references for release dates in the infobox.

@Vacant0: Done. TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 17:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll have a look at some parts of the prose this week. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

• Wikilink the first mentions of macOS and Windows in the Gameplay section.
• "The newborn and infant life stages were introduced to the game in a 2023 update, and replace the baby life stage." → "The baby life stage was replaced by newborn and infant life stages in a 2023 update."
• "A new feature introduced in The Sims 4, is the ability to resize" – remove the comma
• "When constructing a building, buildings can have multiple floors" → "Buildings can be constructed with multiple floors."
• I did not notice any major issues in the rest of the Gameplay section. Everything looked understandable and clear.
• No issues spotted in Development.
• "A free playable demo of the Create-a-Sim feature was made available for download on August 12, 2014" – on which platforms?
• No issues were spotted in Release and marketing.
• In Missing features controversy, change "AI" to "artificial intelligence". Add the abbreviation AI in parenthesis if it's mentioned further in the article.
• I'm curious, but was there any reception regarding the soundtrack?

Another thing, @TenthAvenueFreezeOut:. Considering that this is your first nomination, FACs need to be assessed by several reviewers in order to get promoted. This also includes source and image reviews. It's soon gonna be a month since you've nominated this article for FAC, and so far, I've been the only one who left a review. So as a recommendation, you should follow the advice at §How to get the best from the process or simply ask WP:VG FAC editors to leave a review. Cheers and good luck, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I’ve made the above changes. Thank you for your feedback so far! TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 12:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll take another look at the article tomorrow. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Support Did not spot any further issues. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Coordinator note

This has been open for more than four weeks and has yet to pick up a support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I’ll get to working on this within the next two weeks! I’m still committed to working on the FAC. TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 17:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

This isn't your fault @TenthAvenueFreezeOut! Gog let's you know about this out of formality. It's possible for FACs to close simply due to a lack of user reviews, unfortunately. Panini! • 🥪 13:24, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

I understand, thank you! TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 17:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Review from Hurricanehink

Support - I figured I should since I have an open FAC with Hurricane Dennis. I've never played The Sims 4, just the first three, so I'm curious about the read.

• "The game was released in North America on September 2, 2014, for Windows" - odd to specify the release of North America, but not mention the rest of the world in the lead. And I get it, Europe/Japan was two days later, followed by the UK, so North America was the release to the world. But it was basically a worldwide release in September 2014. Also a nitpick, but you don't mention anywhere that the game was released in Japan, South Africa, or India, but that's available in ref 84.
• "It is the fourth major title in The Sims series, following The Sims 3 (2009). " - there should probably be a mention of The Sims 3 original release date with a citation, since the 2009 bit isn't backed up anywhere.
• Since you mention that it became free-to-play, is it worth mentioning how much the game cost at release?
• "Sims primarily make money by getting a job, and Sims need to develop skills for jobs; for example, Sims in the Culinary career track need to be proficient in the Cooking and Mixology skills." - I get that it's called the Sims, but could you find a way of saying "Sims" just once this sentence?
• "Paid downloadable content (DLC) packs expand the number of features, objects, worlds, and gameplay options available to play with." - the ending "available to play with" seems clunky, and would work fine ending at "options".
• "where individual Sims and families can be created and placed in the game world" - here is another example where I think you're saying "Sim" too many times, and just saying "where individuals can be created and placed". I mention that because you can also create two sims at the same time in Create-a-Sim and have them as roommates but not related, so it's not just necessarily families.
• "A new feature introduced in The Sims 4, is the ability to resize, move and duplicate entire rooms and buildings, along with all objects placed within the room or building." - should this be in new gameplay features?
• "A Sims-themed gaming headset, mouse, and "Plumbob" USB light designed by SteelSeries were released alongside the game's launch in 2014" - I feel like just quoting Plumbob doesn't do it justice what that word means, and how iconic that symbol is to the series. Might wanna explain what that is, at least until there's an article for Plumbob at some point in the future.
• "Content and feature updates continue to be developed for the game, as of 2024." - this might be a spot worth mentioning the upcoming expansion pack, since it's unsourced right now.

A pretty good read! Nothing major stood out to me, so it won't be much to get my support. Let me know if you have any questions about these comments. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for the review.

• According to WP:VG/DATE, release dates for non-English markets should not be included, since this game was developed and published in the US. I’ve changed the phrasing to simply reflect its earliest official release date.
• Added in prose
• Price probably isn’t necessary for the article (WP:NOTPRICE)
• Done
• Done
• Done - changed it to “households”, which is the term used in the game.
• It’s an enhancement of the Build Mode portion of the game (present in all Sims games), rather than a completely new feature.
• An explanation of the “Plumbob” probably belongs in the The Sims article rather than here. (It is a good suggestion) I can’t currently find citations specifically discussing the Plumbob, so I’ll leave it as is for now.
• I’ve added a relevant citation, though it’s not about the expansion pack.

TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 13:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick replies, happy to support! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Comments from Panini!

Leaving this here to lock myself into making sure I do it. Ping me if it takes me a while. Panini! • 🥪 03:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

...Yeah it's taken me a while. I can complete a review tomorrow. Panini! • 🥪 03:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

There's not much from me, save some few comprehensiveness concerns.

• I've done some general edits of my own for time's sake.
• "The Sims 4 topped the all-format video game chart in 2014" - Which chart?
• I was going to comment that you should link Maxis in Development where it first appears, but upon my immediate publishing in between edits you changed this regardless. I was scratching my head wondering if I was crazy and if Maxis was ever the first word of Development the first place.
• I had a general concern about the comprehensiveness of the Development section, but it doesn't seem like there's much to say in that regard after my own source hunting. I've added what I could find in the meantime.
• Is it possible to generalize more of the critic reviews within the reception section? GameSpot discusses visual design, and PCGamesN the depth, but I'm certain the critics have more overlap on subjects such as these. With being able to combine similar statements, something like "Critics praised the levels of depth", it can help break up the monotony of the "A said B" formula that most reception sections accidentally fall into. Once you have these generalized statements you can call on specific developers' insight, such as the ones that have unique phrasing or really specific compliments regarding a broad subject.
• LGBT representation is a hot subject among social simulation games. Considering how so many reporters covered these inclusions in future updates, I recommend it's worth a mention in reception if there's any specific critic commentary within these update announcements.
• Considering how this game is dominantly dependent on the people that play it (which is especially clear since looking through these sources, the players are very vocal about how this game is treated), are there any large audience praises/complaints that you can generalize into an "Audience response" subsection within Reception? I'm thinking something similar to The Last of Us Part II. Just general audience feedback about what they commonly enjoy about the game, and what they were vocal about; similar to the Missing features controversy but specifically for post-release commentary.

Panini! • 🥪 17:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to read through the article and add comments!

3. I noticed the coincidental timing too. :P I kinda edited what you added, if that's okay.

4. Yeah, there really isn't much that can be done about the Development section. There's some additional stuff that I wanted to add about the game's online multiplayer origins (Google "The Sims Olympus" for more info), but there isn't a single citable article that I could use, so it's been watered down to "a stronger focus on online functionalities".

5. This is already the generalized version of the Reception section, per "Reviewers criticized The Sims 4's missing gameplay features and content compared to previous titles, particularly The Sims 3's "Create-a-Style" color customization tool, open worlds, and gameplay elements from its expansion packs; reviewers also noted encountering frequent loading screens and occasional glitches" and "On the positive end, reviewers praised the game's improved graphical quality, intuitive Build mode and Create-a-Sim tools, the Sim emotion and multitasking systems in gameplay, and the Gallery feature", because the reviews almost always just repeat these points over and over again. Wish I could add more, but critic reviews only covered the release version of the game, or its expansion packs. I'll try to tweak that section a little more though. However, I can't further trim the "Reception" section, as it had already previously been criticized as short by other editors.

6 and 7. These are good suggestions! I'll try to add those in the future. TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 19:34, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Image review

• Suggest adding alt text

• File:Sims4CAS.png and File:Sims4_Room_BuildMode.png have largely identical FURs to each other and to the lead image. Generally speaking, the more non-free imagery is used, the stronger the rationale needed to justify each. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Done! TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 16:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Airship

• Prose is generally clunky. From the lead:
  • "The game was moved to a free-to-play model on October 18, 2022, monetized by the purchase of various paid downloadable content packs that have been developed since its release." This sentence faces a severe lack of clarity. Grammatically, it means that the game was monetized by whoever did the moving then purchasing various content packs—if you were to keep it in the passive voice, you'd need to say "selling" instead of "purchase". Then, we have the unnecessary date—just say October 2022 or 2022—and "that have been developed since its release", which says pretty much nothing.
  • "the new emotion and personality systems" the article should be removed, because you have not referred to it before.
  • "Development of The Sims 4 began as an online-focused title" does not make sense, what you actually mean is "The Sims 4 began development as an online-focused title"
  • "but plans were shifted to a single-player experience" again, unnecessary use of the passive voice, and what exactly does the word "experience" mean here? Sounds like something out of a brochure.
  • "In the months leading up to the game's release, Maxis revealed that several features present in prior The Sims main titles would be omitted at launch" in addition to being wordy, this omits what seems to be the main relevance—that the cuts were controversial and heavily criticised by the playerbase.
  • "the lack of content compared to prior The Sims titles...and missing features" the difference being?
  • "numerous paid downloadable content packs, namely seventeen expansion packs, twelve game packs, and several stuff packs and kits; expansion packs are the largest content packs" excessively wordy, you can probably cut everything before the first comma and after the semicolon, and add "larger" or "smaller" where necessary.
  • Why do the "free content updates" get details of what they include but not any of the expansions or game packs?
• Lead needs work to match MOS:LEAD. Per MOS:OPEN, the first paragraph should define and identify the topic while providing context. Currently, the first and third sentences are good, but they are surrounded by sentences on release dates and pricing. Would suggest moving the latter information later in the lead, combining the second paragraph with the remainder of the first, and reorganising appropriately.
• "The most recent expansion pack, The Sims 4: Life & Death, is set to be released on October 31, 2024." is likely WP:RECENTISM and should be removed.
• Would expect worlds to be at least touched on in the lead, considering the frequency with which they come up in the body.
• At a glance, much of the infobox, such as the directors, producers, designers, and artists, are uncited.

Such extensive problems before we reach the body does not bode well for the article, and a quick skim shows quite a few issues. Lack of clarity, such as how can you construct a lot? Slightly promotional tone in the downloadable content packs section, see e.g. "Explore ruins, uncover artifacts, and encounter challenges in a Latin American-inspired jungle world. Learn about local cultures and collect unique ingredients"

I'm going to note an oppose for this nomination; I would suggest working it over with the help of a copyeditor or an experienced video game writer before renominating. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the review :). I have generally addressed the above points mentioned. The lead for this article has been a little difficult to write, due to the open-ended scope of the game, and its many changes over the years. I hope it's clearer now, as of the latest article revision. If you're willing to further evaluate the article, I'm happy to cooperate. Also, I hope this citation for the credits is suitable, as I am not 100% sure how to cite game credits. TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 15:14, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I've played Sims 4 often times, but got bored with it eventually. I'm gonna add that you also need to italicize game titles in the citation titles per MOS:CONFORMTITLE and possibly include some content like this one [2]? 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 05:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Done @ the italicising game titles. I didn't add the link you requested, since there's already five other citations by Jess Lee in the article, and the section about Project Rene already has sufficient citations at the moment. But do let me know if I need to add more citations.

P.S. I do agree that it's easy to get bored with The Sims 4. Not my favourite in the series, I like Sims 2 a little more. TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 11:06, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't like how "The Sims 4 received mixed reviews from critics upon its initial release, who praised the game's visual design, improved artificial intelligence simulation for Sims, and the simplified building tools, but lamented the lack of or missing content compared to prior The Sims titles, frequent loading screens, glitches." was written (also, I don't understand what the "online-focused title" is). Sadly, after reading the lead, I will oppose this nomination aswell. The length of this article will make it challenging, but take your time with it. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 12:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I've done some major copyediting to the article, including fixing the lead, and I rephrased the "online-focused" to "a stronger focus on online functionalities", but given the current discussion, I'll most likely withdraw the FAC anyway. Thank you for participating in the discussion! TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

SC

Rather reluctantly I'm also going to oppose. Can I suggest you withdraw this and work on it a bit further before bringing it back. Issues include (and these are only examples, there are others):

• "The game introduces a newly developed custom game engine": "introduced". (Although we should write about plots, characters in the present, the introduction of a game engine happened in the past
• Link to game engine
• "an online-focused title": what does this actually mean? I think I know what you're trying to say, but I'm not sure. Do you mean "an online game" instead?
• "leading up to the game's release, Maxis revealed that several features present in prior The Sims main titles would be omitted at launch": as the game hadn't been released, do we need "at launch"?
• "but lamented the lack of or missing content": leaving aside that "lamented" isn't terribly encyclopaedic, is there something missing here?
• "expansion packs and twelve game packs, which are larger packs": any chance of a synonym for the final "pack" which explains what a "pack" is? (Not everyone plays computer games and the terminology doesn't always make sense to outsiders)

That's just the lead, and I could carry on in the same vein with the rest. It's not a bad article by any stretch—it's very good in many respects and in many places—but I think it needs a bit of a polish before it is reopened at FAC. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 10:26, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I've done some major copyediting to the article, including fixing the lead, and I rephrased the "online-focused" to "a stronger focus on online functionalities". I think I've resolved all the issues in the lead that you've mentioned. There's additional development history about the game's online multiplayer origins (Google "The Sims Olympus" for more info), but due to lack of citable sources, it's been reduced in the prose to "a stronger focus on online functionalities". Given the current discussion, I'll most likely withdraw the FAC anyway. Thank you so much for your participation! TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 18:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

• Sadly it does not look as if a consensus to promote will be reached at this time, so I am going to archive this. The usual two-week hiatus re new FAC nominations will apply. The comments above look helpful and the nominator should be aware of GoCE and PR. I hope to see the article back here before too long. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.