*insert snicker, snort, and mad giggles here* You sweet talker, you.igazor post_id=67040 time=1561088886 user_id=6716 wrote:
Don't be too hard on yourself, you spelled a couple of words right.
That was kind of what I was thinking. Like, if I have a dozen households that I'm playing but they're spread out more or less evenly amongst, say, three linked worlds and at any one time two of those worlds are dormant, wouldn't that be LESS load overall than having a dozen households all in one constantly active world? I mean, that would make logical sense to me in an "a burden shared is half the burden" sort of way, but I don't know if that would be how the game would see it.Just kidding, you did fine. I have 16 Traveler mod connected worlds in my long-running ongoing game and yes, the 15 not being actively played at any given moment are all in states of suspended animation while the one active world is being simulated. If anything, I find that gameplay quality is better preserved this way because so much intensity is all spread out.
But if that's the case, would that also further apply to having more households and retaining dreams? Do the Dream Managers "live" in the same world that the household lives in at any given moment? So, again, if you have your households spread out across multiple worlds, that would be fewer active DMs in play at any given moment. Right? Or is that not how it works? I mean, in TS2 as my neighborhoods start to sprawl, I gradually "splinter"t them into a bunch of smaller attached subhoods, which seems to make the thing as a whole run better than if everything's stuffed into one neighborhood. TS2 isn't an open world, of course, but the more you stuff into a neighborhood and the more you travel around it, entering and exiting lots, the more texture memory garbage accumulates and then it reaches a point where it starts to barf. But if you splinter a big neighborhood into smaller ones and restrict yourself to playing the households in just one of the subhoods per play session, then at least you're not loading everything all the time and usually you can play a lot longer before things go wonky. I would imagine the idea would be more applicable in TS3's setting, given the open world and the vastly more demanding amount of data the game has to manage in a heavily-populated world. If you can reduce the amount of data it's processing by putting a chunk of it to sleep, essentially, I can only think that that would be good. At this point in my experimenting my households are small, just a single sim or a couple and maybe a couple of babies/toddlers who don't yet have dreams. So, for me it's not been much for the game to manage in any case. So far, that is.
