>>1082459
When the facial tracking works properly, it's definitely a bit uncanny, it looks a bit too real. And when it glitches it feels unsettling for a different reason. Just goes to show how the usual live2D sock puppet vtubers and their movements really are easer to watch. If the vtuber trend somehow started with these models, it probably wouldn't have exploded in popularity as much. But I digress. It is funny to see her usual live2D model at the bottom corner, frozen, unblinking like a discarded husk of a body.
>>1082338
Life sim players really do like their men with piercings, don't they? That aside, congrats on making it to the top ten, I'd use her in my town or city if I could somehow run this game.
>>1082344
>#9 is just Bryan Dechart.
True, though my first thought was that he kind of looks like Nick Jonas.
>>1082248
>having graphical fidelity is nice and all but when visuals are put on a higher priority than actually getting to do things I've lost interest, having more interactions is the main thing that appeals to me in a sims game
I agree. The more cartoonish look and exaggerated motions/expressions that The Sims is known for is not a recipe for automatic success like some seem to think it is. A game with less of that but focuses on higher detailed characters/environments can potentially be more successful. But if a ton of focus is put into making things look pretty, the game will become a shiny wasteland with robotic denizens, which is exactly what a sims game does not want to have. The mindset of the devs behind this game is probably "go big or go home", pushing the graphics to insane levels to get attention and impress potential players. But if they dialed back the graphics a bit, made the game less of a burden to run, and made sure there were enough interactions, the game could maybe be more fun to play. But there is also the risk of it not standing out enough.