My proposal still stands, if none of you like it well too bad, sounds like a personal issue.
For those who are interested in the idea I implore them to brainstorm on HOW EA can do it right.
just tell me, how can a multiplayer sims game handle the 3 types of time speed, money cheat, custom content, mods? Who will control the townies? If i kill a townie you didn't want me to kill, or marry? The big problem of a the sims online is that the game mechanics of the game doesn't suit a online game. It could have plaza chat room, where you could enter with a sim-avatar.but would me more like second life than the sims itself. (and we all know that second life is a big failure)
If the multiplayer wouldn't affect the single player game at all, then yeah, I guess it could be a fun idea to hang out with your friends or people from the forums, etc. I think that could be fun, even though I myself probably wouldn't do it much.
This quote above, however, does highlight an important issue: wouldn't you need to make sure that people can really only a) edit their own lots?; b) would they have lots or ... ? because the worlds would've to be huge if everyone has their own lot given how many players there are (or were you thinking of another way to do this? maybe only an online community lot/place to hang out?; & c) yes, how would it work with NPCs? Would there be any NPCs?
My proposal still stands, if none of you like it well too bad, sounds like a personal issue.
For those who are interested in the idea I implore them to brainstorm on HOW EA can do it right.
just tell me, how can a multiplayer sims game handle the 3 types of time speed, money cheat, custom content, mods? Who will control the townies? If i kill a townie you didn't want me to kill, or marry? The big problem of a the sims online is that the game mechanics of the game doesn't suit a online game. It could have plaza chat room, where you could enter with a sim-avatar.but would me more like second life than the sims itself. (and we all know that second life is a big failure)
If the multiplayer wouldn't affect the single player game at all, then yeah, I guess it could be a fun idea to hang out with your friends or people from the forums, etc. I think that could be fun, even though I myself probably wouldn't do it much.
This quote above, however, does highlight an important issue: wouldn't you need to make sure that people can really only a) edit their own lots?; b) would they have lots or ... ? because the worlds would've to be huge if everyone has their own lot given how many players there are (or were you thinking of another way to do this? maybe only an online community lot/place to hang out?; & c) yes, how would it work with NPCs? Would there be any NPCs?
My idea would implore the creation of a server to be simple, the server owner would be able to choose from a set listing of how many people can or could be in the server. 10, 20, 30 etc.. And however many lots they want available for use as in they would have residential lots and (as imagined) in compliance with Get to Work DLC, business lots so people can create businesses for the server. The server progression can rely on the admins to create the community on that server or it can be community driven. As for NPC's I would imagine the server admin and maybe moderators would be able to spawn them in accordingly or have them in the server settings as ON or OFF, depending on what kind of server it is. The whole idea itself in this comment I am writing now is lead to a whole bunch of new possibilities that could improve my current idea.
LMAO! You gotta love the forums- ha ha ha. Anyway, OP I could see this in a form, ala Minecraft where it's an online, social component that is connected but still separate from the main game. I have a Minecraft realm that my son and some of his friends play on together and my son and I use fan created servers often to enabled us to play together as well and it's a lot of fun. So, I can see it BUT and it's a big but, I went through the initial Sims Online experience years and years ago and hated it, so if a new version were created as say an EP add on then it needs to be very well thought out, it needs to be fan sympathetic, it needs to be "sandbox" and as user customized as absolutely possible (I dare say even more than the current Sims 4) and the EA/Maxis server network needs to be top notch from DAY ONE. I've also gone through the not to distant SimCity 13 fiasco and that is perhaps a textbook case of how NOT TO DO IT. In fact it's what gives me initial pause when even recommending the idea in a lukewarm way. EA/Maxis showed itself with the ridiculously botched launches of SimCity 13 to be wholly incapable at that time of doing it- and even months later when it was still difficult to access the files for the game you paid for in order to play. For sure, I'd require a free beta test set up like Star Wars Battlefront where I could try out the system before hand AND EA could indentify that problems and fix them before purchase/launch or I'd wait until I had watched numerous reviews over a couple of weeks of the actual product before buying.
Every online game has the risk of trolls. That's why we have -ahem- Server Admins and moderators. With all due respect, I believe you have not put that much thought into this idea..
You'll find a lot of opposition to anything online in these forums, I'm afraid, a lot of which assumes that it would be mandatory or would take away from other development. Personally, I'd like co-op on private servers, so I could play a version of Sims 4 with friends who also play, whether that would be just having our Simselves hang out together and use a side chat, or actually playing out huge stories together, or building together. It doesn't matter to me that there are other online games (or spaces - I do wonder if all the people saying "play Second Life" actually know much about Second Life) with building or chatting; they aren't Sims.
So I've noticed. But being in game development myself I know how things work on the inside. In game development, you have teams that work on one thing or the other. For this case, they would have a team that works on Multiplayer and Singleplayer. It's all very complicated.
My proposal still stands, if none of you like it well too bad, sounds like a personal issue.
For those who are interested in the idea I implore them to brainstorm on HOW EA can do it right.
just tell me, how can a multiplayer sims game handle the 3 types of time speed, money cheat, custom content, mods? Who will control the townies? If i kill a townie you didn't want me to kill, or marry? The big problem of a the sims online is that the game mechanics of the game doesn't suit a online game. It could have plaza chat room, where you could enter with a sim-avatar.but would me more like second life than the sims itself. (and we all know that second life is a big failure)
If the multiplayer wouldn't affect the single player game at all, then yeah, I guess it could be a fun idea to hang out with your friends or people from the forums, etc. I think that could be fun, even though I myself probably wouldn't do it much.
This quote above, however, does highlight an important issue: wouldn't you need to make sure that people can really only a) edit their own lots?; b) would they have lots or ... ? because the worlds would've to be huge if everyone has their own lot given how many players there are (or were you thinking of another way to do this? maybe only an online community lot/place to hang out?; & c) yes, how would it work with NPCs? Would there be any NPCs?
My idea would implore the creation of a server to be simple, the server owner would be able to choose from a set listing of how many people can or could be in the server. 10, 20, 30 etc.. And however many lots they want available for use as in they would have residential lots and (as imagined) in compliance with Get to Work DLC, business lots so people can create businesses for the server. The server progression can rely on the admins to create the community on that server or it can be community driven. As for NPC's I would imagine the server admin and maybe moderators would be able to spawn them in accordingly or have them in the server settings as ON or OFF, depending on what kind of server it is. The whole idea itself in this comment I am writing now is lead to a whole bunch of new possibilities that could improve my current idea.
Yeah I kind of like that idea actually. So basically you'd have the option to open a multiplayer game & invite people to it? Would it then not be useful if there was a maximum of lots? I'm just gonna guess that the worlds won't be larger than the current ones. Also, would you play in the same worlds or do you think it'd be better to create empty world just for this purpose alone? Oh .. how great a CAW tool would be for this But I fear we'll never get that. I'm glad I could help you find some ideas haha. Like I said, although I probably wouldn't use it much myself, I like the idea itself. And well, asa my own game play doesn't get changed by it, why not.
So, would there be a chat option, too? Because how fun would it be if you could choose, literally, what sims say to each other
ETA: nevermind the last question, I see you've included that in your OP
My proposal still stands, if none of you like it well too bad, sounds like a personal issue.
For those who are interested in the idea I implore them to brainstorm on HOW EA can do it right.
just tell me, how can a multiplayer sims game handle the 3 types of time speed, money cheat, custom content, mods? Who will control the townies? If i kill a townie you didn't want me to kill, or marry? The big problem of a the sims online is that the game mechanics of the game doesn't suit a online game. It could have plaza chat room, where you could enter with a sim-avatar.but would me more like second life than the sims itself. (and we all know that second life is a big failure)
If the multiplayer wouldn't affect the single player game at all, then yeah, I guess it could be a fun idea to hang out with your friends or people from the forums, etc. I think that could be fun, even though I myself probably wouldn't do it much.
This quote above, however, does highlight an important issue: wouldn't you need to make sure that people can really only a) edit their own lots?; b) would they have lots or ... ? because the worlds would've to be huge if everyone has their own lot given how many players there are (or were you thinking of another way to do this? maybe only an online community lot/place to hang out?; & c) yes, how would it work with NPCs? Would there be any NPCs?
My idea would implore the creation of a server to be simple, the server owner would be able to choose from a set listing of how many people can or could be in the server. 10, 20, 30 etc.. And however many lots they want available for use as in they would have residential lots and (as imagined) in compliance with Get to Work DLC, business lots so people can create businesses for the server. The server progression can rely on the admins to create the community on that server or it can be community driven. As for NPC's I would imagine the server admin and maybe moderators would be able to spawn them in accordingly or have them in the server settings as ON or OFF, depending on what kind of server it is. The whole idea itself in this comment I am writing now is lead to a whole bunch of new possibilities that could improve my current idea.
Yeah I kind of like that idea actually. So basically you'd have the option to open a multiplayer game & invite people to it? Would it then not be useful if there was a maximum of lots? I'm just gonna guess that the worlds won't be larger than the current ones. Also, would you play in the same worlds or do you think it'd be better to create empty world just for this purpose alone? Oh .. how great a CAW tool would be for this But I fear we'll never get that. I'm glad I could help you find some ideas haha. Like I said, although I probably wouldn't use it much myself, I like the idea itself. And well, asa my own game play doesn't get changed by it, why not.
So, would there be a chat option, too? Because how fun would it be if you could choose, literally, what sims say to each other
ETA: nevermind the last question, I see you've included that in your OP
I wouldn't know if there would be a maximum of lots, I would assume there would be a limit to keep it from stressing the server too much OR how ever they approach it. If they do it like battlefield it may be ending up like a 60 player server, if they did what Minecraft has, it could wind up being 100+ if they allow external sources to run servers. I would imagine people would create empty servers with basic necessities.
You know, I was thinking about this this morning for whatever reason and thought this would be a great way to make their goal-based game play a bit more appealing, by for instance, opening multiplayer games with very specific objectives that need to be met, like having to produce x amount of generations in x amount of time or you'll be removed (therefore you'll have to make a sim attractive to the other players or you won't make it), or by having to make x amount of money with your retail store / restaurant per sim week (so you'll have to make it a place other players actually want to hang out at for instance), etc. etc.
If I were the one to make an online Sims game, I would allow players to create their own world in an online server (either managed by players or EA). The owner of the world can set the rules of their world, for example whether the world is open or closed to other players. If closed, then it becomes a single-player game saved in an online server. If open, the owner can set what other players can do in the world, for example whether they can build and what kind of sims interactions are allowed. Maybe two worlds created by two different players can even interact.
It is indeed problematic to deal with time speed, cheat, custom content, and mods. Since the owner of the world can define the rules, I think the owner can decide whether certain cheats and mods will run in the world. Other players just play according to the rules of that particular world. It would be a shame if custom-made clothing would not be allowed for an online game, but it is one way to remove this issue.
This is a terrible idea, not only does EA have the worst track record with online servers, but also The Sims 4 has been out too long to be made multiplayer at this point.
Make it as a separate game, don't screw with the main series.
The idea of another Sims Online game makes me so happy. That was honestly one of my favorites, I thought it was such a good twist and so much fun being able to play sims with people around the world.
Online multiplayer is better suited to being the theme of a separate spinoff title than a feature of a main Sims game. As it is right now, the single player mode of this game still needs a lot of love and tweaking, so tacking on an online mode is probably a bad idea. Knowing how things have been going so far with the game, I shudder to think of all of the bugs, glitches, and such that such a mode would come with if it was rushed out just to appease the masses...
I still think that this would be a valid opinion and mode for Sims 4 or future Sims games. However the intense negativity and hostility I am getting from people on here is unnecessary. I respect your opinion but please do not lash out at me and start insulting the topic and others in the topic based on their thoughts or opinions.
Please keep in mind that nobody is forcing you to play such a mode and that my initial idea would sync Multiplayer DLC with singleplayer content and DLC.
What your suggesting sounds like something completely seperate from the Sims four series and as more of a standalone Sims game using Sims features. Which might work better than incorporating it into the Sims series. Also sounds like something that would be all profit for the game creators and still not my type of thing.
I still think that this would be a valid opinion and mode for Sims 4 or future Sims games. However the intense negativity and hostility I am getting from people on here is unnecessary. I respect your opinion but please do not lash out at me and start insulting the topic and others in the topic based on their thoughts or opinions.
Please keep in mind that nobody is forcing you to play such a mode and that my initial idea would sync Multiplayer DLC with singleplayer content and DLC.
Given that this thread is in the idea corner, I do think that the negativity regarding some form of online Sims is uncalled for. I believe that some people think that online means MMO style, and they didn't look in detail the ideas presented. Having that said, I understand why people tend to say no:
1. Sims 4 is rumored to be an online game called Olympus (is it a rumor?). The online version was scrapped and Sims 4 is remade into a single-player game.
2. MMO style is not compatible with rotational gameplay and probably CAW. While this is not what you are proposing, but still, making sims online shouldn't be just to make people login and play as a sim.
3. Some people just want a single-player Sims game. They want to create their own story and don't want other people to login and screw things up. I understand that you are proposing a server. If you don't allow people to login, it effectively becomes a single-player game, but still, these people won't be interested in such online capability.
4. cc and mod are problematic if the game is online.
5. It is probably too late for Sims 4 to make it online again (but who knows). Maybe it is better if the idea is talking about a future Sims game.
I still think that this would be a valid opinion and mode for Sims 4 or future Sims games. However the intense negativity and hostility I am getting from people on here is unnecessary. I respect your opinion but please do not lash out at me and start insulting the topic and others in the topic based on their thoughts or opinions.
Please keep in mind that nobody is forcing you to play such a mode and that my initial idea would sync Multiplayer DLC with singleplayer content and DLC.
Given that this thread is in the idea corner, I do think that the negativity regarding some form of online Sims is uncalled for. I believe that some people think that online means MMO style, and they didn't look in detail the ideas presented. Having that said, I understand why people tend to say no:
1. Sims 4 is rumored to be an online game called Olympus (is it a rumor?). The online version was scrapped and Sims 4 is remade into a single-player game.
2. MMO style is not compatible with rotational gameplay and probably CAW. While this is not what you are proposing, but still, making sims online shouldn't be just to make people login and play as a sim.
3. Some people just want a single-player Sims game. They want to create their own story and don't want other people to login and screw things up. I understand that you are proposing a server. If you don't allow people to login, it effectively becomes a single-player game, but still, these people won't be interested in such online capability.
4. cc and mod are problematic if the game is online.
5. It is probably too late for Sims 4 to make it online again (but who knows). Maybe it is better if the idea is talking about a future Sims game.
The idea of Sims Online is a thought on the screen now, all we can do now is trial and error ideas and logic with the games idea and hope for the best. I understand the points you have addressed, however the idea of Sims Online needs to be heavily refined in itself. As the community I feel it is up to us how good of a quality the next Sims game will be due to our feedback on the previous one.
I said this in another post but The sims 4 was built to be multiplayer in the beginning but they changed it but i can only imagine the coding is dead in the game still and not completely removed.
I think it would be neat though to have some sort of function online with friends it would be pretty cool to be able to build and converse when building a lot together kinda like a team effort build or just simply having your Sims visit your friends sims at their house
I'm borrowing this quotes from @SimsILikeSims from the very FIRST thread I linked too:
The problem with having both a single player and a multiplayer option in the same game, is that inevitably all the development resources go away from the single player game to the multiplayer mode game. It would mean no new improvements to the single player game. I don't want to be in a Sims-themed chat room where people trash talk each other about their real-life social status, brag about their accomplishments, or try to flirt with just anyone.
Also, if the multiplayer feature was developed but players seemed reluctant to use it, the developers would add content that would only be available if you use the multiplayer feature, so that they could collect ad revenue from the multiplayer option.
Q1: Simply not true, if inserted properly, the DLC will be made playable in both modes. I know multiple several games where DLC was made for both singleplayer and multiplayer. For example, Arma III Apex Expansion. I own it and it is made for both singleplayer and multiplayer, users can create their own servers that could allow the normal Altis or Stratis or with the new DLC Apex, Tanoa.
Q2: There would be no risk of users not using the multiplayer, if anything it would boost sales, activity and productivity. I do not see where they would have a place to put ads for multiplayer. If anything if they did it would likely prevent them from doing micro-transactions as most multiplayer games do now a days. But even so, all of EA's games for multiplayer are NOT ad revenue.
1 - How do we know it would be "inserted properly"? We don't.
2 - There would be plenty of risk of users not using the multiplayer, ESPECIALLY if they used micro-transactions, which are one reason people avoid Facebook "fremium" games, or block their kids from playing them. Hundreds or thousands of dollars could be potentially be spent on micro-transactions in an average "fremium" game by one person alone. And if the micro-transactions aren't enough, typically subscription services are added for "VIP status" on top of that, as well as the option for the player to watch an ad to get premium game currency or desirable game content. Considering how much corporations are willing to pay for advertising, it would be hard to keep advertising completely out of a multiplayer game, if it was popular enough. Besides, servers are expensive, and the more players, the more servers would be required. An insufficient number of servers KILLED SimCity (multiplayer version).
Just pulling people off the current teams to explore adding multiplayer will end up costing us content, because fewer people working on packs equals pack delays.
As for advertising, it would be very easy for EA to insert ads for "real life" products -- for example, the billboards in City Living. And in Sims 3, we had the product tie-ins with Toyota and other car companies that produced Priuses and other vehicles.
Check out my Gallery! Origin ID: justme22
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
I do play IMVU, and I wasn't aware that having a single player mode in a game MADE it mandatory for people to play online.. Hmm I must be slow then..
IF online happened it would forced to people who want a SANDBOX game to play a non-sandbox game with other people who could be 18+ trolls
It could be done with an option at game launch. You'd choose either Sandbox Mode or Online Mode. Parental controls (maybe through Origin) could be provided to disable Online Mode.
My concern at this point is that developing an online or co-op mode for Sims 4 will take away time and resources from the core gameplay. You'll have to pull folks off the current development teams to work on the project. That could end up delaying work on toddlers, or pets, or weather, or any other projects currently on the development board.
We had co-op play in The Sims -- Simport in Sims 3 Showtime -- and most people hated it, partially because you were forced to use it to unlock in-game content (at least till the mods to unlock all that content without Simport were developed). What's to stop EA from trying to do that again to drum up interest in co-op play?
Also, regarding DLC, how do you ensure that everyone has the same content? EA's not going to give that away for free, especially something big like Pets or Seasons. So you'd be requiring people to purchase content that they might not normally be interested in or even might have moral objections against (in the case of supernatural/occults like vampires or witches or zombies).
I could see a server-based or co-op version of The Sims eventually, as a stand-alone game or maybe something included in a potential Sims 5. But not at the expense of the single-player experience, and I fear exploring the idea at this stage of Sims 4 would only hurt the sandbox crew.
Check out my Gallery! Origin ID: justme22
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
I do play IMVU, and I wasn't aware that having a single player mode in a game MADE it mandatory for people to play online.. Hmm I must be slow then..
IF online happened it would forced to people who want a SANDBOX game to play a non-sandbox game with other people who could be 18+ trolls
It could be done with an option at game launch. You'd choose either Sandbox Mode or Online Mode. Parental controls (maybe through Origin) could be provided to disable Online Mode.
My concern at this point is that developing an online or co-op mode for Sims 4 will take away time and resources from the core gameplay. You'll have to pull folks off the current development teams to work on the project. That could end up delaying work on toddlers, or pets, or weather, or any other projects currently on the development board.
We had co-op play in The Sims -- Simport in Sims 3 Showtime -- and most people hated it, partially because you were forced to use it to unlock in-game content (at least till the mods to unlock all that content without Simport were developed). What's to stop EA from trying to do that again to drum up interest in co-op play?
Also, regarding DLC, how do you ensure that everyone has the same content? EA's not going to give that away for free, especially something big like Pets or Seasons. So you'd be requiring people to purchase content that they might not normally be interested in or even might have moral objections against (in the case of supernatural/occults like vampires or witches or zombies).
I could see a server-based or co-op version of The Sims eventually, as a stand-alone game or maybe something included in a potential Sims 5. But not at the expense of the single-player experience, and I fear exploring the idea at this stage of Sims 4 would only hurt the sandbox crew.
I'm only going to touch onto the DLC sync, since its 1am. In Arma 3, Call of Duty, Battlefield etc.. It will not let you join the server unless that server has select DLC's enabled. This has always been the case with Multiplayer style games.
Yes but, Arma 3, CoD, BF, ETC all use fixed characters on fixed maps... The Sims has changable houses.
If you were to put TS4 (or a future version) online (even for coop) whenever you change a single tile, move a potted plant or do any change no matter how small to the house, the game has to transmit the entire house, all of the objects, positions, tiles, textures, gardening, decorations, windows, doors (plus open or closed state)... Essentially everything that is the house has to be sent over the internet and it takes a lot of time to receive, worse still the only way to ensure it gets completely received is to send it multiple times.
That's why they pruned down what you were able to do in TS Olympus, which later become TS4 (no terrain tools, etc), but it still wasn't enough.
Comments
If the multiplayer wouldn't affect the single player game at all, then yeah, I guess it could be a fun idea to hang out with your friends or people from the forums, etc. I think that could be fun, even though I myself probably wouldn't do it much.
This quote above, however, does highlight an important issue: wouldn't you need to make sure that people can really only a) edit their own lots?; b) would they have lots or ... ? because the worlds would've to be huge if everyone has their own lot given how many players there are (or were you thinking of another way to do this? maybe only an online community lot/place to hang out?; & c) yes, how would it work with NPCs? Would there be any NPCs?
My idea would implore the creation of a server to be simple, the server owner would be able to choose from a set listing of how many people can or could be in the server. 10, 20, 30 etc.. And however many lots they want available for use as in they would have residential lots and (as imagined) in compliance with Get to Work DLC, business lots so people can create businesses for the server. The server progression can rely on the admins to create the community on that server or it can be community driven. As for NPC's I would imagine the server admin and maybe moderators would be able to spawn them in accordingly or have them in the server settings as ON or OFF, depending on what kind of server it is. The whole idea itself in this comment I am writing now is lead to a whole bunch of new possibilities that could improve my current idea.
LMAO! You gotta love the forums- ha ha ha. Anyway, OP I could see this in a form, ala Minecraft where it's an online, social component that is connected but still separate from the main game. I have a Minecraft realm that my son and some of his friends play on together and my son and I use fan created servers often to enabled us to play together as well and it's a lot of fun. So, I can see it BUT and it's a big but, I went through the initial Sims Online experience years and years ago and hated it, so if a new version were created as say an EP add on then it needs to be very well thought out, it needs to be fan sympathetic, it needs to be "sandbox" and as user customized as absolutely possible (I dare say even more than the current Sims 4) and the EA/Maxis server network needs to be top notch from DAY ONE. I've also gone through the not to distant SimCity 13 fiasco and that is perhaps a textbook case of how NOT TO DO IT. In fact it's what gives me initial pause when even recommending the idea in a lukewarm way. EA/Maxis showed itself with the ridiculously botched launches of SimCity 13 to be wholly incapable at that time of doing it- and even months later when it was still difficult to access the files for the game you paid for in order to play. For sure, I'd require a free beta test set up like Star Wars Battlefront where I could try out the system before hand AND EA could indentify that problems and fix them before purchase/launch or I'd wait until I had watched numerous reviews over a couple of weeks of the actual product before buying.
So I've noticed. But being in game development myself I know how things work on the inside. In game development, you have teams that work on one thing or the other. For this case, they would have a team that works on Multiplayer and Singleplayer. It's all very complicated.
.....
Yeah I kind of like that idea actually. So basically you'd have the option to open a multiplayer game & invite people to it? Would it then not be useful if there was a maximum of lots? I'm just gonna guess that the worlds won't be larger than the current ones. Also, would you play in the same worlds or do you think it'd be better to create empty world just for this purpose alone? Oh .. how great a CAW tool would be for this
So, would there be a chat option, too? Because how fun would it be if you could choose, literally, what sims say to each other
ETA: nevermind the last question, I see you've included that in your OP
I wouldn't know if there would be a maximum of lots, I would assume there would be a limit to keep it from stressing the server too much OR how ever they approach it. If they do it like battlefield it may be ending up like a 60 player server, if they did what Minecraft has, it could wind up being 100+ if they allow external sources to run servers. I would imagine people would create empty servers with basic necessities.
Just wanted to add that
It is indeed problematic to deal with time speed, cheat, custom content, and mods. Since the owner of the world can define the rules, I think the owner can decide whether certain cheats and mods will run in the world. Other players just play according to the rules of that particular world. It would be a shame if custom-made clothing would not be allowed for an online game, but it is one way to remove this issue.
Make it as a separate game, don't screw with the main series.
(And sorry about the constant edits, wasn't really sure on my opinion.)
I still think that this would be a valid opinion and mode for Sims 4 or future Sims games. However the intense negativity and hostility I am getting from people on here is unnecessary. I respect your opinion but please do not lash out at me and start insulting the topic and others in the topic based on their thoughts or opinions.
Please keep in mind that nobody is forcing you to play such a mode and that my initial idea would sync Multiplayer DLC with singleplayer content and DLC.
1. Sims 4 is rumored to be an online game called Olympus (is it a rumor?). The online version was scrapped and Sims 4 is remade into a single-player game.
2. MMO style is not compatible with rotational gameplay and probably CAW. While this is not what you are proposing, but still, making sims online shouldn't be just to make people login and play as a sim.
3. Some people just want a single-player Sims game. They want to create their own story and don't want other people to login and screw things up. I understand that you are proposing a server. If you don't allow people to login, it effectively becomes a single-player game, but still, these people won't be interested in such online capability.
4. cc and mod are problematic if the game is online.
5. It is probably too late for Sims 4 to make it online again (but who knows). Maybe it is better if the idea is talking about a future Sims game.
The idea of Sims Online is a thought on the screen now, all we can do now is trial and error ideas and logic with the games idea and hope for the best. I understand the points you have addressed, however the idea of Sims Online needs to be heavily refined in itself. As the community I feel it is up to us how good of a quality the next Sims game will be due to our feedback on the previous one.
I think it would be neat though to have some sort of function online with friends it would be pretty cool to be able to build and converse when building a lot together kinda like a team effort build or just simply having your Sims visit your friends sims at their house
Just pulling people off the current teams to explore adding multiplayer will end up costing us content, because fewer people working on packs equals pack delays.
As for advertising, it would be very easy for EA to insert ads for "real life" products -- for example, the billboards in City Living. And in Sims 3, we had the product tie-ins with Toyota and other car companies that produced Priuses and other vehicles.
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
It could be done with an option at game launch. You'd choose either Sandbox Mode or Online Mode. Parental controls (maybe through Origin) could be provided to disable Online Mode.
My concern at this point is that developing an online or co-op mode for Sims 4 will take away time and resources from the core gameplay. You'll have to pull folks off the current development teams to work on the project. That could end up delaying work on toddlers, or pets, or weather, or any other projects currently on the development board.
We had co-op play in The Sims -- Simport in Sims 3 Showtime -- and most people hated it, partially because you were forced to use it to unlock in-game content (at least till the mods to unlock all that content without Simport were developed). What's to stop EA from trying to do that again to drum up interest in co-op play?
Also, regarding DLC, how do you ensure that everyone has the same content? EA's not going to give that away for free, especially something big like Pets or Seasons. So you'd be requiring people to purchase content that they might not normally be interested in or even might have moral objections against (in the case of supernatural/occults like vampires or witches or zombies).
I could see a server-based or co-op version of The Sims eventually, as a stand-alone game or maybe something included in a potential Sims 5. But not at the expense of the single-player experience, and I fear exploring the idea at this stage of Sims 4 would only hurt the sandbox crew.
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
I'm only going to touch onto the DLC sync, since its 1am. In Arma 3, Call of Duty, Battlefield etc.. It will not let you join the server unless that server has select DLC's enabled. This has always been the case with Multiplayer style games.
If you were to put TS4 (or a future version) online (even for coop) whenever you change a single tile, move a potted plant or do any change no matter how small to the house, the game has to transmit the entire house, all of the objects, positions, tiles, textures, gardening, decorations, windows, doors (plus open or closed state)... Essentially everything that is the house has to be sent over the internet and it takes a lot of time to receive, worse still the only way to ensure it gets completely received is to send it multiple times.
That's why they pruned down what you were able to do in TS Olympus, which later become TS4 (no terrain tools, etc), but it still wasn't enough.