1: Lootboxes
2: Microtransactions
3: Online play
4: A Store
Heh...
Two of those things aren’t necessarily bad things, I’d be over the moon if TS5 had online multiplayer and so would so many people, I really think it’s moving in that direction, just look at what the influencers like Deligracy are saying, they want online play and the devs listen to their wants over anyone else I’m sure.
Also I loved the store in the past game, so that would be a welcome return instead of all these stuff packs.
@keylimepiesims - I have to disagree about the Multiplayer aspect. I would absolutely hate that so much. I like to be in control of what I'm doing and having, even the option for someone else to come into my game, yikes! Look how well Showtime worked. What would it be like if the entire game was that? Yikes is all I can say to that. A lot of people that I have seen on twitter do want a multiplayer online Sims because they want to play with their friends, but I doubt they're really thinking this through completely. Imagine what happens when none friends enter the game. It needs to stay a single player sandbox game, in my opinion.
Now however, I do agree with the store coming back. I liked it because I loved hosting contests and giving sets away.
I’d in fact be quite interested, if EA actually is considering a PC or console game to be online, if they’d share with us how exactly they’d see this. If Sims 4 indeed initially was meant to be online, the thoughts and ideas about that must have been at an advanced stage. I don’t think they’ve ever been open about that or did I miss it?
1: Lootboxes
2: Microtransactions
3: Online play
4: A Store
Heh...
Two of those things aren’t necessarily bad things, I’d be over the moon if TS5 had online multiplayer and so would so many people, I really think it’s moving in that direction, just look at what the influencers like Deligracy are saying, they want online play and the devs listen to their wants over anyone else I’m sure.
Also I loved the store in the past game, so that would be a welcome return instead of all these stuff packs.
Yeah, let’s look at influencers like Deligracy. Sorry, who? Such a good idea to listen to one person you are paying to review your game. There’s a poll here that tells a different tale. 58% Wants the game to be single player. For the people on this forum it’s 89%. I’d appreciate it if they’d start listening to their entire fanbase again.
I was talking about this subject the other day through pm with someone by the way, and we were both wondering what an online Sims game will look like. We both could imagine it works for scripted games, where the online aspect is used to compete with each other. But an online life simulating game, wouldn’t that turn into Habbo Hotel 2.0? Meaning: not exactly a safe space?
Depends how they go about it, if online play is limited to your origin friends list, and not an mmo, then yes it would be a safe space for you and your trusted friends to play together on either client hosted servers, or through a subscription service like mine craft realms. That’s how I see them implementing online play.
Yeah, that’ll work;) Sorry, but I don’t believe that for a second, Origin friends being trusted friends.
Well that's your business whether you trust your origin friends or not, personally I don't have anyone on my origin friends list because I don't have any need to, I have friends that play The Sims but I can talk to them elsewhere, but if we could play together on an optional online mode (no ones saying it would be the only way to play the game, of course they should put offline play as a priority) then I would trust them to come into my game and not start causing mischief or bully or troll.
I'm not going to fight to the ends of the earth for online play though, it's just where I see this game going. TS5 has to bring something new to the franchise, otherwise whats their marketing angle going to be? No, not Virtual Reality.
I wouldn't mind some type of limited optional online interaction in the next version, if there is one. Similar to Animal Crossing Pocket Camp where you get visitors and are able to view their inventory for items you need to complete tasks.
@JoAnne65 English isn't my first language either. I'm not excluding others.. Please tell me how adding a multiplayer version excludes other people? You'll still have your traditional single player version so I'm actually being inclusive. Simply adding multiplayer or even a standalone multiplayer sims game isn't taking ANYTHING away from you. You complain about wanting Sims to stay a safe space and then continue to say you don't want it to be child-friendly (even though this game is for 12 year olds and older) hmm seems like you're excluding them. Also, not talking about the people who'll use the multiplayer, I'm talking about the people who have no problem with it (which are the combination people). You seem to be a very strong adversary against multiplayer EVEN if it's optional. So I'm sorry but if anyone's excluding, it's you. Also that's kinda how game companies make their money. They use features that has been utilized in other games and compare sales to see what's working and what's not. So yes, you CAN compare Sims to other games. (more specifically EA games.)
I make profile pics and signatures for free. hmu if interested.
"We need Sims 5 first; that should be the last Sims game ever." from EA. Then someone else should take over please - another company that really cares about the quality in a game.
I say let EA do Sims 5 and if they learn from their mistakes and bring the best Sim game ever to exist, then they can continue, but if not , then let someone else take over the Sims franchise.
They have tried Sims Online 4 times now and it failed miserably all 4 times. After the 4th rendition they called EA land they dismantled everything to do with Sims online - so why would they even consider bringing it back? As it was they again experimented bringing it in Sims 4 and even the developers were not happy with how it was going and was already changing it out even before Sims City 13 even failed.
Even the devs agree the Sims does not work in an online capacity - it's a sand box life simulation - not an action game - never mind the fact it is never a good thing to mix some adults in the mix with 12 year olds in a game whose entire existence is based off of life simulations. To me that sounds like a nightmare in the making.
Number one EA has an obligation to keep young kids safe in a games designed to attract them first and foremost - so how do you propose that to happen?
In past attempts at Sims online the game itself was not the game we play - and for modders and CC users, for builders and sims creators - the game was not even the sims if you ask me - it was something else - as there was no building to speak of - one lot, one sim, no cc and no mods - and all the sims did was skill - yep you could skill in the town square and chat with other simmers as their 1 sim skilled or ate a meal together.
All you have to do is check you tube for sims online and you can see how it works. Oh and it was a separate game that cost money to buy plus monthly subscription of 9.99 a month - plus you had to use real money to buy anything.
The last version called EA Land had no subscription and you downloaded it online - but it was other wise the same boring game. It lasted 5 weeks, and no one was interested. It was not the sims game we play. Not remotely like it. But if people so believe Sims online is a good idea - where were you all when we had it around for 8 years and Maxis kept trying to redo it. And no you didn't see your friends either - you saw only who was online when you were online when the servers worked.
Believe me Sim online was horrid and boring and nothing like this game. But it was the way it had to be I guess to keep the young players safe and even that didn't work.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
@JoAnne65 English isn't my first language either. I'm not excluding others.. Please tell me how adding a multiplayer version excludes other people? You'll still have your traditional single player version so I'm actually being inclusive. Simply adding multiplayer or even a standalone multiplayer sims game isn't taking ANYTHING away from you. You complain about wanting Sims to stay a safe space and then continue to say you don't want it to be child-friendly (even though this game is for 12 year olds and older) hmm seems like you're excluding them. Also, not talking about the people who'll use the multiplayer, I'm talking about the people who have no problem with it (which are the combination people). You seem to be a very strong adversary against multiplayer EVEN if it's optional. So I'm sorry but if anyone's excluding, it's you. Also that's kinda how game companies make their money. They use features that has been utilized in other games and compare sales to see what's working and what's not. So yes, you CAN compare Sims to other games. (more specifically EA games.)
That’s a lot of strawmen there.
Strawman 1: how does adding multiplayer exclude other people when it’s optional?
Answer: I didn’t say that. I said you are trying to exclude the opinions of forum members that voted in a poll against multiplayer, dismissing the results, because supposedly they’re ‘traditionalist and old fashioned and not open to innovation’ because they play predecessors. Fun fact: Sims 4 is the least innovative of them all. And multiplayer isn’t innovative. On top of that I happen to think multiplayer as an option won’t work. The set up of the game will suffer. Sims 4 is probably the example of that.
Strawman 2: You complain about wanting Sims to stay a safe space and then continue to say you don't want it to be child-friendly (even though this game is for 12 year olds and older) hmm seems like you're excluding them.
Answer: You’re confusing two things. The game as the game (offline, singleplayer) and the game as a multiplayer game. The game how I want to play it, single player, doesn’t have to be a safe place, on the contrary. I want the game to be targeted at older teens and up, not kids. Why? Because I’m not a kid, I’m not interested in playing a kids game. When they will make an MMO out of it then yes, they’ll have to add all kind of filters to it to make it safe out there, in multiplayers land. But that filtered happy happy happy game won’t be appealing to me. Cause, again, I’m not a kid. So if they’ll make the game multiplayer, it will subsequently have to be a safe, filtered place, I agree. But that won’t be a game I care to play.
Strawman 3: You seem to be a very strong adversary against multiplayer EVEN if it's optional
Answer: No, I’m a very strong adversary against multiplayer for The Sims as a PC game. Not ‘even when it’s optional’, because I don’t think they can develop it optional properly in a way that won’t affect the quality of the game. That’s a dream. No idea if it’s true, but alledgedly Sims 4’s shortcuts, the shortcuts I regret, are caused by the fact it initially was meant to be MMO. It isn’t even MMO and still it has those shortcomings I don’t want.
To summarize: I’m against a multiplayer The Sims PC game and the fact so many people seem to share that opinion gives me hope it will never happen. There’s Sims Mobile for that.
@JoAnne65 Not trying to exclude opinions from the forum..I'm trying to bring in new ones. So you want the game to target teens and up because you're not a kid and it doesn't appeal to you? Wow..I'm sorry but that was a very selfish thing to say. EA doesn't revolve around you nor exist to cater to ONLY you. Guess what? There are younger people who enjoy this game too! And you say I'm excluding opinions of others..
So many people are FOR multiplayer as well...so that gives me hope that it will happen But then again, EA isn't that responsive to their fanbase and what they want so I honestly doubt it'll come to fruition. I guess time will tell..
I make profile pics and signatures for free. hmu if interested.
@JoAnne65 Not trying to exclude opinions from the forum..I'm trying to bring in new ones. So you want the game to target teens and up because you're not a kid and it doesn't appeal to you? Wow..I'm sorry but that was a very selfish thing to say. EA doesn't revolve around you nor exist to cater to ONLY you. Guess what? There are younger people who enjoy this game too! And you say I'm excluding opinions of others..
So many people are FOR multiplayer as well...so that gives me hope that it will happen But then again, EA isn't that responsive to their fanbase and what they want so I honestly doubt it'll come to fruition. I guess time will tell..
Then where were all you people for Sims online. EA did everything they could to get players for years and people except for a tiny few steered clear of that game. Also those sims in your picture and your avatar could not be in a sims online game. No cc was allowed - no mods were allowed. Even in Sims 3 brief online port in Showtime you could not send a sims online with CC of any kind. Maxis content only other wise the game rejected your sim. Lots of simmers (I am not one of those by the way) won't even play a sims game without CC. But it's the way sims work - just like EA said it will always be a game for ages 12 + - so they won't up the rating. You even talk about anything that raises the rating and that is technically a bannable offense. Read the rules. It's been that way for 18 years - it is not going to change.
But porting from a sims game just doesn't work . I was a tester for Showtime - and believe me - it doesn't work in a non-scripted sand-box game like the sims.
Like I said they spent a good 8 years trying to get interest in their Sims online and even the people who wanted online was not interested when they learned they could not play the game we actually play on line. Never mind the failure when EA did try with Showtime.
In this game you can't have it both ways. It's been tried and proven - neither way works for simmers. You want online - you need a scripted game for online without it's sand box features tagging along. A sand box game is not meant to be shared live. MMO's are not sandbox games. Or you end up with something like mindcraft. Which to me look like animated leggos.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
It never made sense to me when they said "If Sims 4 isn't successful we won't make a Sims 5". Wouldn't it make more sense to just quit Sims 4 early? Yeah, like before going to the trouble of Seasons? It's a different engine we have, so it'd work in a different way.
And you know what they did with Cats&Dogs? They upped specifications. That means they are confident enough in the number and dedication of players, that they believe there will be enough players with these higher specifications to still turn a profit in the future. It also shows they are planning for future more powerful computers with their future Expansions or why take the trouble and wipe out a large number of Laptop players?
I feel like Sims 4 will be the last single-player Sims game, but also that EA has zero intention of ending its development in the foreseeable future. And that means at least four years yet. There's just too much money we haven't given them to give it up.
@Loanet - I'm pretty sure that comment was made by Grant in a heated moment before or just after the release of TS4 when the gurus did a QA. Because Simmers now had an idea of what would be in the base game, they weren't particularly happy and kept asking about Sims 5, so he said that. It wasn't an official statement and probably said out of frustration.
IMO, they never should have lowered the specs to begin with. These games aren't meant to be played on laptops and as more packs get upgraded, more powerful specs are needed. I think they should up the specs for PC and for those that don't want to or can't upgrade, that's what side games, mobile, and console should be for.
They lower the specs to make the game appeal to a larger audience. Raise the specs so you need a gaming desktop in order to play? You lose the college students who use laptops because they're more flexible (you can go from class to library to student union and back to your dorm and take your computer with you), or people who travel a lot for business and might want to relax with a Sim session after a day of dull meetings, or people who are in postage stamp-sized apartments who don't have room for a desktop system. Appealing to a larger audience means they can recoup their investment faster, both base game and DLC. Or the game could turn into a niche product for those who can buy a "real" computer and lose money, which is what in the end will doom the game.
Check out my Gallery! Origin ID: justme22
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
I really like the innovation I'm seeing in Sims4. I would still like the quintessential Sims game, which to me would be the culmination of all that is good in EACH iteration. Yes, I like new things, too, especially if they come with a nice twist, but certain things should always be in the game. To leave them out would be like watching a swash-buckler movie and there's no sword fight, or a romance where the objects full on hate each other. We need slow-dancing in the game. I would like to see two Sims be able to hold hands as they walk side-by-side, or even with their arms about each other's waists. I liked how in Sims3 the prospective groom could ask the bride's parents for their blessing, essentially. (Talk about family play, that's it right there in a nutshell.)
With what has been done with toddlers in this iteration, and with Parenthood, allowing the player to help shape the type of Sim as they grow, I can foresee this at all age-stages. They touched on mid-life crisis, in Sims3 — which admittedly not ever person in RL will experience, but it would be fun to have random Sims in the game go through something a bit profound as they grow older. I believe, as the toddlers/child/teens have Values to work on, so our YAs/A/Elders should have values/traits to add or change in their life's journey.
Suffice it to say we ALL evolve over time. Our Sims should do the same. I look forward to hopefully see this in my lifetime. I would love to play that game!
@Writin_Reg I know The Sims Online was a hot mess (keep in mind the subscription fee could've also contributed to it's failure), but that was back then when multiplayer wasn't that popular/good. Now, the top games out there are multiplayer such as GTA, Fortnite, and many more because the gaming industry is becoming so social/connected than it was back then. Before, gaming was mostly just solo but now there is Xbox Live, gaming competitions, party chat and more. And also I really couldn't care less about having no CC in multiplayer mode. Lots of simmers CAN play the game without CC.....so your point is? I know you're really trying hard to convince me that multiplayer is a bad idea but I still stand by what I said - I think it could work especially in this day and age.
"A sand box game is not meant to be shared live." I don't mean to sound rude, but you need to get with the times..Haven't you ever heard of GMod?? It's literally a sandbox multiplayer game and one of the most popular games ever with a 10/10 rating on Steam. If it was possible for GMod (which had significantly less funding/attention than the Sims franchise) then It's 100% possible for the Sims. Let's also not forget GTA (90+ million sales) with it's GTA Online feature, quite possibly the biggest sandbox multiplayer game. GTA's revenue increased greatly AFTER implementing the GTA Online feature that was released in 2013 yet people consistently play it until this day. Why? Because multiplayer doesn't usually get boring because of the many different people and possibilities.
"I know a lot of younger players who flock to Online, as it’s the ultimate “mess around” sandbox for them and their friends" - EA, take notes.
Post edited by Zara on
I make profile pics and signatures for free. hmu if interested.
I want the series to continue until TS5 so it can have a glorious finale combining the best of all previous installments.
Or alternatively it'll be plum.
I wish people would stop assuming Sims 5 (if it happens) will be awesome just because they don't like Sims 4. I think that their next Sims game will be online and try a stab at multi-player - like, visiting the homes of other players.
Prepping a list of mods to add after Infants are placed into the game. Because real life isn't 'nice'.
@JoAnne65 Not trying to exclude opinions from the forum..I'm trying to bring in new ones. So you want the game to target teens and up because you're not a kid and it doesn't appeal to you? Wow..I'm sorry but that was a very selfish thing to say. EA doesn't revolve around you nor exist to cater to ONLY you. Guess what? There are younger people who enjoy this game too! And you say I'm excluding opinions of others..
So many people are FOR multiplayer as well...so that gives me hope that it will happen But then again, EA isn't that responsive to their fanbase and what they want so I honestly doubt it'll come to fruition. I guess time will tell..
Indeed, EA doesn’t revolve around me nor exists to cater only me, they are catering ‘young teen girls’ now (Drake). Which means I’m not buying their game anymore. But isn’t the OP’s question:
What do you want for the future of Sims?
(obviously nobody can predict the future, so speculate your own.)
I’m not dictating EA what to do, I sure want them to listen to all opinions. The opinions of kids, of teens and the opinions of the dinosaurs. I don’t want to exclude any of the audiences they are making this game for where it comes to listening for advice. It’s up to them who they listen to. Not to the dinosaurs at the moment, that’s for sure A solution could be two life simulation games (or even more). One for kids and teen girls and one for an older age group. I think they’d be amazed how well the second game would sell.
Number one EA has an obligation to keep young kids safe in a games designed to attract them first and foremost - so how do you propose that to happen?
How about their parents actually parent?! I always find it interesting when it's said that the responsibility of someone's child falls to someone else. For example, when people have a go at celebrities because their kid did the same thing they did. That sort of thing boggles my mind!
To summarize: I’m against a multiplayer The Sims PC game and the fact so many people seem to share that opinion gives me hope it will never happen. There’s Sims Mobile for that.
This right here is it! Leave the PC game alone and they can develop side games to their heart's content!
@JoAnne65 Not trying to exclude opinions from the forum..I'm trying to bring in new ones. So you want the game to target teens and up because you're not a kid and it doesn't appeal to you?
@Zara - you do realise that it's rated T for teen? So, what @JoAnne65 is saying isn't selfish at all. If kids want to play the game, that's down to their parents, not EA to make it all disney-fied -or else they should change the rating!
It never made sense to me when they said "If Sims 4 isn't successful we won't make a Sims 5". Wouldn't it make more sense to just quit Sims 4 early? Yeah, like before going to the trouble of Seasons? It's a different engine we have, so it'd work in a different way.
And you know what they did with Cats&Dogs? They upped specifications. That means they are confident enough in the number and dedication of players, that they believe there will be enough players with these higher specifications to still turn a profit in the future. It also shows they are planning for future more powerful computers with their future Expansions or why take the trouble and wipe out a large number of Laptop players?
I feel like Sims 4 will be the last single-player Sims game, but also that EA has zero intention of ending its development in the foreseeable future. And that means at least four years yet. There's just too much money we haven't given them to give it up.
@Loanet - I'm pretty sure that comment was made by Grant in a heated moment before or just after the release of TS4 when the gurus did a QA. Because Simmers now had an idea of what would be in the base game, they weren't particularly happy and kept asking about Sims 5, so he said that. It wasn't an official statement and probably said out of frustration.
IMO, they never should have lowered the specs to begin with. These games aren't meant to be played on laptops and as more packs get upgraded, more powerful specs are needed. I think they should up the specs for PC and for those that don't want to or can't upgrade, that's what side games, mobile, and console should be for.
They lower the specs to make the game appeal to a larger audience. Raise the specs so you need a gaming desktop in order to play? You lose the college students who use laptops because they're more flexible (you can go from class to library to student union and back to your dorm and take your computer with you), or people who travel a lot for business and might want to relax with a Sim session after a day of dull meetings, or people who are in postage stamp-sized apartments who don't have room for a desktop system. Appealing to a larger audience means they can recoup their investment faster, both base game and DLC. Or the game could turn into a niche product for those who can buy a "real" computer and lose money, which is what in the end will doom the game.
I highly doubt upping the specs from the off would doom the game. It would keep people informed as to what they'll need. This game is processor heavy anyway - and they're really not meant to be played on laptops (weaker ones at least). As I said, when more packs are added, the specs raise anyway. When C&D was released, many people were over in tech fretting because they were afraid their computers wouldn't work with it; there were some that upgraded and others that stopped playing. I don't think that's fair at all. You up the specs from the beginning, you know what you have to have computer-wise and there's no surprises 3 years in.
Number one EA has an obligation to keep young kids safe in a games designed to attract them first and foremost - so how do you propose that to happen?
How about their parents actually parent?! I always find it interesting when it's said that the responsibility of someone's child falls to someone else. For example, when people have a go at celebrities because their kid did the same thing they did. That sort of thing boggles my mind!
I agree with that, which is why I created that Habbo Hotel account to see what it was about. But even though I saw things I wasn't happy about and warned my kids against that, I didn't forbid them to play it. Because I figured they would continue secretly anyway if I would and I'd rather that they felt free to share certain frustrations and annoying things (I've reported certain accounts because they did more than once). At one point my son even got robbed in a real sly way. Their decision to quit playing the game was a direct result and somehow I felt it more educational for them to come to that conclusion themselves. To bump into nasty things (it's impossible to fully protect them against that anyway) and feel they can always talk about that without having to feel ashamed or guilty. This is a very difficult subject for parents though, opinions about this differ and I have no idea what's wrong and what's right. I think it also depends on your kids, mine are pretty down to earth and communicative. They never keep their feelings bottled up.
@JoAnne65 Not trying to exclude opinions from the forum..I'm trying to bring in new ones. So you want the game to target teens and up because you're not a kid and it doesn't appeal to you? Wow..I'm sorry but that was a very selfish thing to say. EA doesn't revolve around you nor exist to cater to ONLY you. Guess what? There are younger people who enjoy this game too! And you say I'm excluding opinions of others..
So many people are FOR multiplayer as well...so that gives me hope that it will happen But then again, EA isn't that responsive to their fanbase and what they want so I honestly doubt it'll come to fruition. I guess time will tell..
Sims multiplayer would be simply amazing. I hope it does happen cuz im kinda getting bored of the Sims 4 as it is
I say let them have a crack at TS5 and go from there. There's no need to make a decision on whether or not it should be the last.
But the games have to end eventually. I personally do think they have to make a decision eventually because they need to figure out how to spend their finances and what to improve on/scrap. Especially considering sales for the Sims games have been decreasing:
"Sims sold 11.24 million copies.
Sims 2 sold 6 million.
Sims 3 sold 7.72 million.
Sims 4 sold 5 million."
So yes, I think they do have to decide when it's time to stop investing into this franchise.
Even a sims producer himself said that sims 5 wouldn't happen if Sims 4 doesn't sell well.
It was 5M in March 2016, and SimGuruLyndsay confirmed it was beyond that number in Q3 2016 which means it sold 1 million in a matter of months.
On top of that, the game playerbase has grown 30 - 40% each quarter since we found out it was a minimum of 6 million in Q3 2016.
So there is that to acknowledge when comparing figures.
The 6 million for TS2 doesn't include Mac sales, and the 7.72m for TS3 is for physical disc only.
And now TS4 is out on console, we can also advise that The Sims 2 sold over 13 million on all platforms, and The Sims 3 sold over 10 million as of 2014.
As I remember it, it was 5M in around Q2 of 2017.
The 5M button was shown and people immediately assumed it meant 5mil sales, but instead of simply confirming this, they did no such thing. Likewise if you bothered digging up the few stats we have about sales, it didn't really look like it would've achieved that many in that time.
By the time Parenthood was releasing, now Lyndsay was commenting they'd sold 5mil.
You are also falling for the exact marketing trick they want you to fall for: 30% growth for EPs =/= 30% growth of the fanbase in it's entirety. For all we know, the Stuff packs and GPs could be selling horrendously. There is absolutely a reason that stat specifically mentioned Q3 and EPs, and that's because that must be the only pack performing that well. I find it odd you even add "30 to 40%" even though that latter half is 100% factually untrue to the point EA themselves confirmed the growth was 30%.
I think they did need to up the specs - but they didn't have a gun to their heads. The Devs said, "We're gonna need better computers to play Cats&Dogs, or the EP will be crap, but that will cut down on the number of compatible computers" and the bosses said, "Our player-base is strong and loyal enough to take that, go knock yourselves out."
It's very hard to know what EA means by a successful game, and even if the game is successful they might not bother with going to all the trouble of a Sims 5, choosing to concentrate on games with more lootboxes in them and just turning out endless SPs instead.
Prepping a list of mods to add after Infants are placed into the game. Because real life isn't 'nice'.
Comments
Well that's your business whether you trust your origin friends or not, personally I don't have anyone on my origin friends list because I don't have any need to, I have friends that play The Sims but I can talk to them elsewhere, but if we could play together on an optional online mode (no ones saying it would be the only way to play the game, of course they should put offline play as a priority) then I would trust them to come into my game and not start causing mischief or bully or troll.
I'm not going to fight to the ends of the earth for online play though, it's just where I see this game going. TS5 has to bring something new to the franchise, otherwise whats their marketing angle going to be? No, not Virtual Reality.
exactly how i feel about it.
Even the devs agree the Sims does not work in an online capacity - it's a sand box life simulation - not an action game - never mind the fact it is never a good thing to mix some adults in the mix with 12 year olds in a game whose entire existence is based off of life simulations. To me that sounds like a nightmare in the making.
Number one EA has an obligation to keep young kids safe in a games designed to attract them first and foremost - so how do you propose that to happen?
In past attempts at Sims online the game itself was not the game we play - and for modders and CC users, for builders and sims creators - the game was not even the sims if you ask me - it was something else - as there was no building to speak of - one lot, one sim, no cc and no mods - and all the sims did was skill - yep you could skill in the town square and chat with other simmers as their 1 sim skilled or ate a meal together.
All you have to do is check you tube for sims online and you can see how it works. Oh and it was a separate game that cost money to buy plus monthly subscription of 9.99 a month - plus you had to use real money to buy anything.
The last version called EA Land had no subscription and you downloaded it online - but it was other wise the same boring game. It lasted 5 weeks, and no one was interested. It was not the sims game we play. Not remotely like it. But if people so believe Sims online is a good idea - where were you all when we had it around for 8 years and Maxis kept trying to redo it. And no you didn't see your friends either - you saw only who was online when you were online when the servers worked.
Believe me Sim online was horrid and boring and nothing like this game. But it was the way it had to be I guess to keep the young players safe and even that didn't work.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Strawman 1: how does adding multiplayer exclude other people when it’s optional?
Answer: I didn’t say that. I said you are trying to exclude the opinions of forum members that voted in a poll against multiplayer, dismissing the results, because supposedly they’re ‘traditionalist and old fashioned and not open to innovation’ because they play predecessors. Fun fact: Sims 4 is the least innovative of them all. And multiplayer isn’t innovative. On top of that I happen to think multiplayer as an option won’t work. The set up of the game will suffer. Sims 4 is probably the example of that.
Strawman 2: You complain about wanting Sims to stay a safe space and then continue to say you don't want it to be child-friendly (even though this game is for 12 year olds and older) hmm seems like you're excluding them.
Answer: You’re confusing two things. The game as the game (offline, singleplayer) and the game as a multiplayer game. The game how I want to play it, single player, doesn’t have to be a safe place, on the contrary. I want the game to be targeted at older teens and up, not kids. Why? Because I’m not a kid, I’m not interested in playing a kids game. When they will make an MMO out of it then yes, they’ll have to add all kind of filters to it to make it safe out there, in multiplayers land. But that filtered happy happy happy game won’t be appealing to me. Cause, again, I’m not a kid. So if they’ll make the game multiplayer, it will subsequently have to be a safe, filtered place, I agree. But that won’t be a game I care to play.
Strawman 3: You seem to be a very strong adversary against multiplayer EVEN if it's optional
Answer: No, I’m a very strong adversary against multiplayer for The Sims as a PC game. Not ‘even when it’s optional’, because I don’t think they can develop it optional properly in a way that won’t affect the quality of the game. That’s a dream. No idea if it’s true, but alledgedly Sims 4’s shortcuts, the shortcuts I regret, are caused by the fact it initially was meant to be MMO. It isn’t even MMO and still it has those shortcomings I don’t want.
To summarize: I’m against a multiplayer The Sims PC game and the fact so many people seem to share that opinion gives me hope it will never happen. There’s Sims Mobile for that.
So many people are FOR multiplayer as well...so that gives me hope that it will happen
Then where were all you people for Sims online. EA did everything they could to get players for years and people except for a tiny few steered clear of that game. Also those sims in your picture and your avatar could not be in a sims online game. No cc was allowed - no mods were allowed. Even in Sims 3 brief online port in Showtime you could not send a sims online with CC of any kind. Maxis content only other wise the game rejected your sim. Lots of simmers (I am not one of those by the way) won't even play a sims game without CC. But it's the way sims work - just like EA said it will always be a game for ages 12 + - so they won't up the rating. You even talk about anything that raises the rating and that is technically a bannable offense. Read the rules. It's been that way for 18 years - it is not going to change.
But porting from a sims game just doesn't work . I was a tester for Showtime - and believe me - it doesn't work in a non-scripted sand-box game like the sims.
Like I said they spent a good 8 years trying to get interest in their Sims online and even the people who wanted online was not interested when they learned they could not play the game we actually play on line. Never mind the failure when EA did try with Showtime.
In this game you can't have it both ways. It's been tried and proven - neither way works for simmers. You want online - you need a scripted game for online without it's sand box features tagging along. A sand box game is not meant to be shared live. MMO's are not sandbox games. Or you end up with something like mindcraft. Which to me look like animated leggos.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
They lower the specs to make the game appeal to a larger audience. Raise the specs so you need a gaming desktop in order to play? You lose the college students who use laptops because they're more flexible (you can go from class to library to student union and back to your dorm and take your computer with you), or people who travel a lot for business and might want to relax with a Sim session after a day of dull meetings, or people who are in postage stamp-sized apartments who don't have room for a desktop system. Appealing to a larger audience means they can recoup their investment faster, both base game and DLC. Or the game could turn into a niche product for those who can buy a "real" computer and lose money, which is what in the end will doom the game.
Fun must be always -- Tomas Hertl (San Jose Sharks hockey player)
With what has been done with toddlers in this iteration, and with Parenthood, allowing the player to help shape the type of Sim as they grow, I can foresee this at all age-stages. They touched on mid-life crisis, in Sims3 — which admittedly not ever person in RL will experience, but it would be fun to have random Sims in the game go through something a bit profound as they grow older. I believe, as the toddlers/child/teens have Values to work on, so our YAs/A/Elders should have values/traits to add or change in their life's journey.
Suffice it to say we ALL evolve over time. Our Sims should do the same. I look forward to hopefully see this in my lifetime. I would love to play that game!
http://www.getfreeebooks.com/star-trek-original-series-fan-fiction-trilogy/
"A sand box game is not meant to be shared live." I don't mean to sound rude, but you need to get with the times..Haven't you ever heard of GMod?? It's literally a sandbox multiplayer game and one of the most popular games ever with a 10/10 rating on Steam. If it was possible for GMod (which had significantly less funding/attention than the Sims franchise) then It's 100% possible for the Sims. Let's also not forget GTA (90+ million sales) with it's GTA Online feature, quite possibly the biggest sandbox multiplayer game. GTA's revenue increased greatly AFTER implementing the GTA Online feature that was released in 2013 yet people consistently play it until this day. Why? Because multiplayer doesn't usually get boring because of the many different people and possibilities.
"I know a lot of younger players who flock to Online, as it’s the ultimate “mess around” sandbox for them and their friends" - EA, take notes.
Get with the times - really? Okay then.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
In dreams - I LIVE!
In REALITY, I simply exist.....
Well according to it's 10/10 rating on Steam, I'd say it's a pretty good game.
Or alternatively it'll be plum.
I wish people would stop assuming Sims 5 (if it happens) will be awesome just because they don't like Sims 4. I think that their next Sims game will be online and try a stab at multi-player - like, visiting the homes of other players.
How about their parents actually parent?! I always find it interesting when it's said that the responsibility of someone's child falls to someone else. For example, when people have a go at celebrities because their kid did the same thing they did. That sort of thing boggles my mind!
This right here is it! Leave the PC game alone and they can develop side games to their heart's content!
@Zara - you do realise that it's rated T for teen? So, what @JoAnne65 is saying isn't selfish at all. If kids want to play the game, that's down to their parents, not EA to make it all disney-fied -or else they should change the rating!
I highly doubt upping the specs from the off would doom the game. It would keep people informed as to what they'll need. This game is processor heavy anyway - and they're really not meant to be played on laptops (weaker ones at least). As I said, when more packs are added, the specs raise anyway. When C&D was released, many people were over in tech fretting because they were afraid their computers wouldn't work with it; there were some that upgraded and others that stopped playing. I don't think that's fair at all. You up the specs from the beginning, you know what you have to have computer-wise and there's no surprises 3 years in.
Sims multiplayer would be simply amazing. I hope it does happen cuz im kinda getting bored of the Sims 4 as it is
As I remember it, it was 5M in around Q2 of 2017.
The 5M button was shown and people immediately assumed it meant 5mil sales, but instead of simply confirming this, they did no such thing. Likewise if you bothered digging up the few stats we have about sales, it didn't really look like it would've achieved that many in that time.
By the time Parenthood was releasing, now Lyndsay was commenting they'd sold 5mil.
You are also falling for the exact marketing trick they want you to fall for: 30% growth for EPs =/= 30% growth of the fanbase in it's entirety. For all we know, the Stuff packs and GPs could be selling horrendously. There is absolutely a reason that stat specifically mentioned Q3 and EPs, and that's because that must be the only pack performing that well. I find it odd you even add "30 to 40%" even though that latter half is 100% factually untrue to the point EA themselves confirmed the growth was 30%.
It's very hard to know what EA means by a successful game, and even if the game is successful they might not bother with going to all the trouble of a Sims 5, choosing to concentrate on games with more lootboxes in them and just turning out endless SPs instead.