May 28 - It's time for our Friday Highlights! You can check them out here!
Sul sul Simmers! Join us for the #DreamHomeDecorator Livestream HERE today, May 25, @11 AM PT / 6 PM UTC! 🎉
May 27: Today is patch day! 😃 To read the patch notes, click here!

Why I'm not afraid of Sims5 being multiplayer... and you shouldn't either!

Comments

  • simgirl542simgirl542 Posts: 926 Member
    My opinion, me personally, I'm not buying Sims 5 no matter the format. It's gotten too expensive for me. $40 for a base game and each expansion, $20 for game packs, and $10 for stuff packs is too much. I remember when the base game and the expansions were only $20 each. I paid $30 for The sims 2. I refuse to start over at the beginning again.

    If they did do "MMO" or online whatever it should be on console only. PC/Mac players should be single player only.

    I personally would rather see them do a legacy rerelease of Sims 1, 2, and 3 with everything, (Graphics etc.), upgraded and compatible but the same gameplay and forget Sims 5.
    Celebrating 10 years on Thesims.com. Simming proudly since 2001.
  • GreenTurtleGreenTurtle Posts: 61 Member
    The last thing I'd want is for The Sims to be competitive. There are already enough of those out there. The Sims is one of the few games you can play to relax.
  • AmaraRenaAmaraRena Posts: 6,481 Member
    The last thing I'd want is for The Sims to be competitive. There are already enough of those out there. The Sims is one of the few games you can play to relax.

    Absolutely agreed there, no matter the platform. EVERY game is based on competition and adversarial play, whether it be against other players or NPCs. The Sims stands alone in NOT being that. And that is its core strength. They change that at their peril.
  • friendlysimmersfriendlysimmers Posts: 6,938 Member
    AmaraRena wrote: »
    1. EA KNOWS no one wants a Sims MMO. They'd have to alter the game tremendously to get it to a kid friendly state. And that would kill off a HUGE portion of their player base. So by now they have figured out that THEY do not want an MMO either.

    2. A survival sandbox model would work wonderfully for The Sims. This would be composed of options for single player, co-op play with friends and, if we're lucky, private servers where large groups of players can get together and create their own version of the game tailored to their liking. ARK, Conan Exiles, Day Z, to name just a few, do very well with this model. They also have official servers of course but I don't think the Sims would even really need those. But even if they chose to have them they'd be sure to have the other three options I've mentioned. There's no longer any reason for games not to offer both single player and multi-player options for the same game. I have a hard time believing EA doesn't have this figured out.

    sorry but i disagree with your post not all players went coop players i went the sims5 to remain full offline and single player and i am a simplayer since the sims1
    If you went the sims5 to remain offline feel free to sign this petition http://chng.it/gtfHPhHK please note that it is also to keep the gallery



    Repose en paix mamie tu va me manquer :

    1923-2016 mamie :'(
  • Pamtastic72Pamtastic72 Posts: 3,759 Member
  • ArchivistArchivist Posts: 4,302 Member
    I don't trust EA to know how to balance developing for multiplayer and single-player at the same time. I barely trust them to know how to develop the single-player game in any satisfying way. I do trust them to cut costs by cutting features players love and then telling us those features no longer fit the core gameplay experience they're going for. That's the EA I'm used to getting burnt by.

    Sims base games and expansions are already very skeletal content-wise. Once EA opens the Pandora's box that is multiplayer, I imagine they will develop some gimmicky multiplayer content with every new release to keep people engaged and logging in daily, and include even less single-player content (other than couches, clothes, and other cosmetic items).

    Obviously, I could be wrong. I want to be very, very wrong. But giving EA the benefit of the doubt has left me disappointed and frustrated every time for over a decade, across multiple franchises even. I'm not convinced that that pattern is going to change any time soon.
    9d9hOnJ.png
  • AmaraRenaAmaraRena Posts: 6,481 Member
    AmaraRena wrote: »
    1. EA KNOWS no one wants a Sims MMO. They'd have to alter the game tremendously to get it to a kid friendly state. And that would kill off a HUGE portion of their player base. So by now they have figured out that THEY do not want an MMO either.

    2. A survival sandbox model would work wonderfully for The Sims. This would be composed of options for single player, co-op play with friends and, if we're lucky, private servers where large groups of players can get together and create their own version of the game tailored to their liking. ARK, Conan Exiles, Day Z, to name just a few, do very well with this model. They also have official servers of course but I don't think the Sims would even really need those. But even if they chose to have them they'd be sure to have the other three options I've mentioned. There's no longer any reason for games not to offer both single player and multi-player options for the same game. I have a hard time believing EA doesn't have this figured out.

    sorry but i disagree with your post not all players went coop players i went the sims5 to remain full offline and single player and i am a simplayer since the sims1

    Then you didn't understand my post at all. I never said everyone wants co-op. But yes a lot of people do. And EA knows this. A lot of people are interested in other multi-player models and EA knows this too. So my main interest is in helping them figure out how to tap into a market they know exists while NOT alienating their core audience, the single players. They definitely already also know you only want a single player game. So their target needs to be to create a game that can be played in multiple modes without hurting the single player experience.
  • texxx78texxx78 Posts: 4,978 Member
    Im not interested in a sims 5 multiplayer game, not even if it's part multiplayer part offline. I know which part will be the priority. I'ld just stick to 3 and 4.
  • AmaraRenaAmaraRena Posts: 6,481 Member
    Archivist wrote: »
    I don't trust EA to know how to balance developing for multiplayer and single-player at the same time. I barely trust them to know how to develop the single-player game in any satisfying way. I do trust them to cut costs by cutting features players love and then telling us those features no longer fit the core gameplay experience they're going for. That's the EA I'm used to getting burnt by.

    Sims base games and expansions are already very skeletal content-wise. Once EA opens the Pandora's box that is multiplayer, I imagine they will develop some gimmicky multiplayer content with every new release to keep people engaged and logging in daily, and include even less single-player content (other than couches, clothes, and other cosmetic items).

    Obviously, I could be wrong. I want to be very, very wrong. But giving EA the benefit of the doubt has left me disappointed and frustrated every time for over a decade, across multiple franchises even. I'm not convinced that that pattern is going to change any time soon.

    There are times when I wonder why we continue to give them more and more money when they give us less and less of what we ask for. As I've said, not an EA fangirl. You could absolutely be right. That's why I think the focus should be on sharply reminding them how important their single player audience is and what that audience will absolutely not accept, regardless of whether or not they add multi-player features. It's futile to keep telling them, "Don't do the multi-player at all!" Because it's very obvious that they are going to. So instead maybe we should tell them how NOT to frak it up. Will they listen? It's EA. But hey, we love The Sims so it's worth a shot, no?
  • ncisGibbs02ncisGibbs02 Posts: 978 Member
    edited May 30
    AmaraRena wrote: »
    AmaraRena wrote: »
    1. EA KNOWS no one wants a Sims MMO. They'd have to alter the game tremendously to get it to a kid friendly state. And that would kill off a HUGE portion of their player base. So by now they have figured out that THEY do not want an MMO either.

    2. A survival sandbox model would work wonderfully for The Sims. This would be composed of options for single player, co-op play with friends and, if we're lucky, private servers where large groups of players can get together and create their own version of the game tailored to their liking. ARK, Conan Exiles, Day Z, to name just a few, do very well with this model. They also have official servers of course but I don't think the Sims would even really need those. But even if they chose to have them they'd be sure to have the other three options I've mentioned. There's no longer any reason for games not to offer both single player and multi-player options for the same game. I have a hard time believing EA doesn't have this figured out.

    sorry but i disagree with your post not all players went coop players i went the sims5 to remain full offline and single player and i am a simplayer since the sims1

    Then you didn't understand my post at all. I never said everyone wants co-op. But yes a lot of people do. And EA knows this. A lot of people are interested in other multi-player models and EA knows this too. So my main interest is in helping them figure out how to tap into a market they know exists while NOT alienating their core audience, the single players. They definitely already also know you only want a single player game. So their target needs to be to create a game that can be played in multiple modes without hurting the single player experience.
    I agree there’s an interest. It would be interesting to see how they could combine multiplayer and single player modes in the same game.

    I would prefer one world that’s connected. Thus keeping all the other worlds for the player. That’s how you could choose whether or not to join in online. I don’t know if that’s possible but having all worlds connected might be problematic.

    It’s time for Snowy Escapes fun! ⛷🧗🏻⛰
  • AmaraRenaAmaraRena Posts: 6,481 Member
    [
    I agree there’s an interest. It would be interesting to see how they could combine multiplayer and single player modes in the same game.

    I would prefer one world that’s connected. Thus keeping all the other worlds for the player. That’s how you could choose whether or not to join in online. I don’t know if that’s possible but having all worlds connected might be problematic.

    No game is perfect but I feel like Conan Exiles does a really good job in having a game you can absolutely play as single player, co-op or on official or private servers with, at full optimization, up to 40 players or, stretching performance, all the way up to 70 or 100 players. CE is also done on the Unreal engine. So the tech is absolutely there. The question is if EA will be smart enough to do it right.

    I admit their talk of "competitive" content worries me. And CE, my main game, is played on a private server with PVP and permadeath for your characters if they lose. But that's part of the whole Conan genre. It's not the Sims. Darn near every game is a fighting game of one sort or another. The charm and joy of the Sims is that it isn't. So if combat isn't what they mean by "competitive" then what DOES that mean to them?

  • JyotaiJyotai Posts: 236 Member
    edited May 31
    As I noted in my first post in this thread - one corporate bigwig sitting in the wrong presentation and everything goes bad no matter what anyone wants.

    Too many game companies just try to copy what the other guy did. Silicon Valley also has this problem to a major degree. Everyone out there is just trying to sell you another phone app that is 90% identical to the last one.

    Anytime your product pitch is "it's the X of Y" where X is the market leader and Y is some new niche you're doomed. You're just in copy mode.

    Going multiplayer would just make this 'Second Life with a Teen rating" - which Second Life itself already closed down years ago because an open ability to mod something doesn't mix well with multiplayer and teen (as Roblox is now finding out the hard way - with massive trouble policing scams and predators)...

    So instead, they'd have to lock out modding.

    Consider all the arguments in various forums over what kinds of traits and storylines should the game officially support. Like the hate's children one.

    Now consider an online Sims where they not only won't put that trait out - but if you want it in a mod, they will block you from being able to have that mod, and remove you from your copy of the game if you 'violate the terms' and mod your game for it.
    - And frankly I'd agree with them for doing that, once it's an online game the needs are different.

    There's a lot of these things, like the whole argument I have about the alien abduction stuff that I feel is wrong for EA to be doing - but I feel is right for modders to do. Once the game goes online, the argument is that even modders need to be blocked from doing that because no one's copy of the game is private anymore. You put it in your game, and somebody's 12 year old kid in another country is seeing it.



    I don't use Discord because it doesn't support multiple accounts and I don't need folks at work wondering what I'm doing even on my own time. Until Discord catches up with every single other voice / video conferencing system, I limit where I use it:
  • ncisGibbs02ncisGibbs02 Posts: 978 Member
    AmaraRena wrote: »
    [
    I agree there’s an interest. It would be interesting to see how they could combine multiplayer and single player modes in the same game.

    I would prefer one world that’s connected. Thus keeping all the other worlds for the player. That’s how you could choose whether or not to join in online. I don’t know if that’s possible but having all worlds connected might be problematic.

    No game is perfect but I feel like Conan Exiles does a really good job in having a game you can absolutely play as single player, co-op or on official or private servers with, at full optimization, up to 40 players or, stretching performance, all the way up to 70 or 100 players. CE is also done on the Unreal engine. So the tech is absolutely there. The question is if EA will be smart enough to do it right.

    I admit their talk of "competitive" content worries me. And CE, my main game, is played on a private server with PVP and permadeath for your characters if they lose. But that's part of the whole Conan genre. It's not the Sims. Darn near every game is a fighting game of one sort or another. The charm and joy of the Sims is that it isn't. So if combat isn't what they mean by "competitive" then what DOES that mean to them?
    That’s a good question, what do they mean by competition? In the Sims Mobile you complete tasks. If you don’t complete tasks then you can’t advance. I’m hoping it’s something like who has the best house for that week or best room design.

    My concern with this competition element is could other players block your advancement? Remove your Sim? Or will it be like a race, the first ten get any reward?

    I’ve not played the Conan game but I remember the movies.

    It’s time for Snowy Escapes fun! ⛷🧗🏻⛰
  • AmaraRenaAmaraRena Posts: 6,481 Member
    [
    That’s a good question, what do they mean by competition? In the Sims Mobile you complete tasks. If you don’t complete tasks then you can’t advance. I’m hoping it’s something like who has the best house for that week or best room design.

    My concern with this competition element is could other players block your advancement? Remove your Sim? Or will it be like a race, the first ten get any reward?

    I’ve not played the Conan game but I remember the movies.

    [/quote]

    "Advancing?" Oh man I hope not. I don't want to play that game. And if introducing "competition" means no more cheats? I'd be so out! LOL
  • TLM08TLM08 Posts: 104 Member
    My thing is how will you create families if it's all online. I am not totally opposed to an online component but I don't want to have to have internet to be able to play either. I think it might be interesting to have like an online marketplace/town where your sim's can visit, but then I think I meet most of my sims spouses in the park or bars or public places, so if those are online how does that work? Like I'm not going to be comfortable if my sim has to woohoo or have a romantic relationship with another sim controlled by a real live person. How do you even keep the young players safe from a predators? how do you monitor that?
    I feel like if they make it a fully online game you will only be able to control one sim. I'm not sure how you could have a family? and If they make it a partly online game then part of your gameplay will be controlled by other people and I'm not sure I'm into that option. Also I don't like the packs like strangerville where you have to complete the challenge to even be able to play in that world so I definitely don't want to be forced into some sort of quest driven gameplay for "competition". The whole point of the sims is that it's your world that you control. If they make it multiplayer or all online community, that fundamentally changes the point of the game.
  • EnkiSchmidtEnkiSchmidt Posts: 3,570 Member
    My problem with multiplayer is that is relegates the individual player to a participant instead of a ruler/creator. When I'm free to play my own life story, but in their world, then why should I play The Sims 5? I could just as well dig out Oblivion or The Guild again.
    In single player my sims adhere to my houserules, but the moment I enter a public space, these dos and don'ts are voided by the official EA lore, not to mention that the other players have no idea that Anton Bellamy is the mayor of Sim City or that "Sim City" is Detroit in my headcanon. There may even be a player controlled mayor, who got decided in a monthly challenge or public vote.

    All things considered, for story- and characterfocused play multiplayer would never be ideal.

    I'm honest with you all, The Sims is a hobby for me, not just a game, so of course I will buy Sims 5 (on a sale) and play it for a bit. But then it will join the pile of beaten games, with little longterm pull.
    my sims blog alternates between gameplay with the Villareal and picture stories with my Detroit (android) sims
  • SimburianSimburian Posts: 6,417 Member
    I wouldn't be surprised if any Sims 5 would be a re-iteration of Sims 4 reproduced with their Unreal engine and updated. Now they've put emotions in Maxis are not likely to want to give them up.
  • lisamwittlisamwitt Posts: 4,651 Member
    I don't care how well they implement it, I don't want to play online all the time or with other people. I don't want to play on an EA server that could go down at any minute. I don't want to play an RPG, MMORPG, or anything similar.
    The entire reason I have enjoyed playing Sims for 21 years is because of the way it was played. It took me 5 years to start playing Sims 4 because they made changes that made it less "Sims" for me. They go further down that road and they've lost me.

    All that said, as a game company they can market to whomever they want and if they can be successful, then more power to them. It is ultimately about money after all and maybe they are seeing trends I don't see.
    Gallery ID: LadyGray01
  • AmaraRenaAmaraRena Posts: 6,481 Member
    lisamwitt wrote: »
    I don't care how well they implement it, I don't want to play online all the time or with other people. I don't want to play on an EA server that could go down at any minute. I don't want to play an RPG, MMORPG, or anything similar.
    The entire reason I have enjoyed playing Sims for 21 years is because of the way it was played. It took me 5 years to start playing Sims 4 because they made changes that made it less "Sims" for me. They go further down that road and they've lost me.

    All that said, as a game company they can market to whomever they want and if they can be successful, then more power to them. It is ultimately about money after all and maybe they are seeing trends I don't see.

    I agree to an extent. I think it's crucial that The Sims ALWAYS have a single player, offline mode. Maybe I'm giving EA too much credit but I think, by now, they know that too. But yes there are a lot of players who would like some sort of ability to play this game with others. My husband, for instance, is an awesome builder, way better than me! But he doesn't like to decorate so much, which I absolutely love to do and will obsess over for hours. We're the perfect team! LOL So we've long wished there was a co-op mode so we could play the same game together! And yes, he's built houses for me before and put them on the exchange but that's still not quite the same thing as being able to play the same game together.

    Most younger players are used to social games (yes they also play single player games but these are typically not sandbox games like the Sims and many other games, most sandbox games in fact, are multiplayer in one way or another) and like having the ability to play with others and are probably a bit puzzled about why the Sims can't be played that way. There was, after all, a reason EA thought it would be a good idea to make The Sims 4 an MMO when they first started working on it.

    So, again, I feel like our focus should be on keeping the pressure EA to make sure there IS a single player, offline mode for any future iteration of The Sims.
  • SimSpockSimSpock Posts: 118 Member
    I don't fear it. I just know that it's not for me, based on what the original plans were for TS4, and the comments they have already made about the objectives for the next game.

    Multiplayer and single player are not compatible in this genre. Multiplayer needs to have a framework for rich, and reasonably well controlled, social interactions by actual humans. Single player needs to have a framework for rich interactions with well-programmed simulated ai.

    Single player will take away resources needed for multiplayer design. Multiplayer will take away resources needed for single player design. The only way to have a chance at making both work well is for EA to dump the sort of resources into it that they did for TOR or Anthem. That's just not going to happen.
  • MagdaleenaMagdaleena Posts: 899 Member
    edited June 4
    While I definitely prefer playing my game alone, there are actually still many times I would have liked to share a neighborhood with friends, so I personally wouldn't mind this... if it was OPTIONAL.

    And there are many games out there in which the multiplayer mode is totally optional! Minecraft comes to mind; very fun to share a world with friends, but also quite nice to play alone.

    But yeah... wasn't this literally the reason why Sims 4 came out so lackluster in the first place? They literally planned on making THIS one multiplayer, but they backed out of it due to SimCity completely flopping, releasing a hardly-even-bare-bones base game.

    What makes them think it'll go better this time??? While I like the concept in theory, I'm not sure if I can trust them to get it right this time either.

    (besides, if this completely flops, i'll still have sims 4 i guess)
    8VhSrwA.gif
    they/them, he/him
  • calaprfycalaprfy Posts: 3,534 Member
    Learnt my lesson playing GTAV online. Play alone, in one's own world. Bliss.
  • playermarko456playermarko456 Posts: 4,969 Member
    EA never has and never will care about the playerbase. They'll do whatever it takes to make a quick buck. It is what got them their reputation in the first place. Do you honestly believe that EA cares about what any of us thinks? As long as they our money, they don't care what we think.

    And this is where it starts to get ironic. Players claim they'll boycott EA/Sims (and some do), but as soon as they put out a shiny new product, all is forgiven and that is the problem. This is how EA is taking advantage of you. Because some do not have the restraint to do so; if you are no longer going to support EA/Sims, put your money where your mouth is.

    Now listen, I'm not going to sit here and bash players for liking the Sims 4 because that is something I would never do; you like what you like and I like what I like. But, lets be honest here, Sims 4 is nothing but a glorified set builder. Why else do you hardly ever see gameplay videos for the Sims 4 on Youtube? Because Sims 4 hardly has any gameplay! They even gave up Whims. Why else is it disabled by default?

    That being said, there are few things that Sims 4 has it going for, but the amount of negatives and glaring issues outweighs the positive. As a long time simmer having played from Sims 1 to Sims 4, I'm extremely disappointed in the current iteration. The love, the care, and attention to detail that was present in the first three games aren't present in Sims 4 and it shows.

    No lore, returning Sims being white washed, Sims' "stories" not being reflected in the relationship panel, reused meshes/models, reused animations, content being cut from packs and moved into base game via patches, every patch breaking CC, game being buggy, game lagging, the list goes on and on. If EA/Maxis can't get it together, Sims 5 will be far worse than Sims 4, I guarantee it.

    What they need to do is go back and look at what made the Sims the Sims; look at what made the past three games so successful. Sims 4 may have sold more, but that is because of the amount of times the base game and packs were put on sale/free.

    P.s I know I'm going to get hate for it, but Kits are glorified store items similar to the Sims 3 store, but without the option of being able to pick and choose which items you want.
  • ncisGibbs02ncisGibbs02 Posts: 978 Member
    AmaraRena wrote: »
    I agree to an extent. I think it's crucial that The Sims ALWAYS have a single player, offline mode. Maybe I'm giving EA too much credit but I think, by now, they know that too. But yes there are a lot of players who would like some sort of ability to play this game with others. My husband, for instance, is an awesome builder, way better than me! But he doesn't like to decorate so much, which I absolutely love to do and will obsess over for hours. We're the perfect team! LOL So we've long wished there was a co-op mode so we could play the same game together! And yes, he's built houses for me before and put them on the exchange but that's still not quite the same thing as being able to play the same game together.

    I really like the idea of players being able to build and furnish a house together. Sort of like a virtual DIY show. I would like an element of where players could choose who builds the shell, and then allocate rooms. Working together to make a great house.

    That aspect would appeal over the normal online games I see.

    It’s time for Snowy Escapes fun! ⛷🧗🏻⛰
  • FlamingoKicker1FlamingoKicker1 Posts: 4,394 Member
    I played the original Sims Online and it was terrible. Lots of sad catfishing people and you had to pay pay pay and it was nowhere near as fun as just playing the regular Sims on your own. So if that's what they insist on doing again I'll just have to insist on not playing. 20 + years is enough for any game. Besides they are getting lazy with the Sims 4 so I don't think they will make Sims 5 more interesting.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Return to top