this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2025
294 points (95.9% liked)

Games

20374 readers
1137 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
294
EA’s latest The Sims 4 patch is making everyone pregnant, including the men and the chaste (www.videogamer.com)
submitted 5 days ago by brot@feddit.org to c/games@sh.itjust.works
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 67 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

While not every player is not privy to the nightmare of every person in their game becoming with child, those who have the bug are finding a large number of Sims randomly marked as pregnant.

Who the fuck wrote this?

Once a character is pregnant, they can’t Woo-Hoo anymore,

Never pegged The Sims for being so Puritain.

[–] lordnikon@lemmy.world 35 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Also Woo-Hoo is a term used in the game.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 21 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Is pegging?

Asking for a friend.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 17 points 5 days ago

Sounds like you might have some wicked whims

[–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It’s not a story EA would tell you.

It’s an old loverslab legend…

[–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 15 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

FYI, the Sims 4 version is Wicked Whims.

But I find mods in generally have become difficult to maintain since EA starting putting out a new patch seemingly every week.

[–] lordnikon@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago

Yes but only if you download the unofficial patch off of FilePlanet lol

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 19 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm aware. Just funny that you can't have sex for fun apparently when you're pregnant.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 20 points 5 days ago (3 children)

You might dent the baby sim's head!

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 25 points 5 days ago (1 children)

[–] grue@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago

¿Can U get... prrrreganté?

[–] Rozz@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 5 days ago

You would just get poked with the green diamond on the top of the head

[–] dalekcaan@feddit.nl 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

There are a lot of euphemisms in The Sims so they can keep their T rating, with sex being called woo-hoo probably being the biggest one. The other big one I can think of is that alcohol is referred to as "Juice"

[–] tal@lemmy.today 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I don't think the Puritans had any issue with pregnant people having sex.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I assumed they were generally against the concept of sex not strictly for the purpose of reproduction.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 21 points 5 days ago (2 children)

https://www.bostonmagazine.com/arts-entertainment/2016/10/18/puritans-and-sex-myth/

Debunking the Myth Surrounding Puritans and Sex

The Puritans weren't prudish. In fact, they were passionate.

From the beginning, Puritans maintained sexual intercourse was necessary for procreation, but also asserted sex was an important way for couples to bond in a loving relationship.

“They talk about the duty to desire, that you’re supposed to engage in intercourse with your married partner and that this is good,” says Bremer. “There will actually be some people in early New England who are censured by the church because they have deprived their married partner of sex for three months or more and this is seen as bad.”

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

TIL thanks

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

“There will actually be some people in early New England who are censured by the church because they have deprived their married partner of sex for three months or more and this is seen as bad.”

Bet I can guess the gender of the people who were censured...

[–] tal@lemmy.today 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I'm assuming that you're guessing "female"?

https://sexualityandthecity.com/2016/11/26/when-women-wanted-sex-much-more-than-men/

In the 1600s, a man named James Mattock was expelled from the First Church of Boston. His crime? It wasn’t using lewd language or smiling on the Sabbath or anything else that we might think the Puritans had disapproved of. Rather, James Mattock had refused to have sex with his wife for two years.

Looking at other sources, the expulsion was in 1640.