Forum Announcement, Click Here to Read More From EA_Cade.
Please re-release TS2.. (How much would it cost to remake?)
Goodywood
Posts: 4,615 Member
in The Sims 2
Remake it with updated graphics, open world (or semi open like TS4), traits, multitasking, added lifestages (YA no college needed, Middle Age, Pre Schooler, Preteen), new EPs, and CASt... I pretty much liked TS3 CAS with all the traits and favorites.
I wish I could hire the team myself to do this. I wonder how much it would cost(?) . Just curious
I wish I could hire the team myself to do this. I wonder how much it would cost(?) . Just curious
PLEASE FIX TEENS IN TS4! I NEED YOUNGER TEENS NOT YA TEENS! (^_^)Please add Music Bands with lead singers! Please add vehicles and garages! Vehicles have always been part of The Sims.
9
Comments
I'd also rather EA not remake anything. I'd rather they take the best parts of each of Sims 1, 2, 3 & 4 and combine them to make a new, even better Sims 5.
Why not both? With a remake of the all time favourite sims 2, they would be free to take the oncoming games in a new direction (which they are clearly already starting to do in sims 4).
They can take "the best" from every game and combine it in sims 5, but... what is the best? Some people want open neighbourhood and some want it closed, some want ultimate sandbox and some like the more quest like features in sims 4(like aspiration tells you to pick 3 flowers and then jump five times and then hug a cow).
So however they do sims 5... and whener that game will be released (don't even think it's on the drawing board), people will still miss sims 2.
And don't tell me that you don't want them to focus on more than one thing at a time. Bethesda is working on a remake of Skyrim(after just 5 years!) While still doing awesome things for fallout 4. And EA can do so too.
Skyrim and Fallout are 2 different franchises. Working on both at the same time does not split the fans of the franchise.
A Sims 2 remake and Sims 5 are in the same franchise and would COMPETE AGAINST EACH OTHER and make neither have record setting sales. Which is what companies want for their games.
And a Sims 2 remake to me would have to be GRAPHICS only and changes to the engine to make it able to run on modern OS's flawlessly, including updating the game to recognize newer graphics cards. If they add anything to the game play then it is NOT A REMAKE but Sims 5, which is what the OP was asking for. For them to remake Sims 2 but to add game play to it.
I'm not opposed to a remake of Sims 1 or Sims 2, but I would rather they focus on making a great Sims 5. Remakes don't bring in the same level of money that new games do and given how divisive Sims 4 has been, I'd rather they focus on making a game that will be a huge financial success so as to not kill the franchise.
How would it compete against each other. It's from the same company not different company. They could make the sims 2 remake and the sims 5. How? Well before the sims 5 comes out they could make a sims 2 remake for the attentive it would get. Or Sims 4 might end the series because everyone loved the sims 3 and open world and color wheel. So that will put them bankrupt if they don't be careful. They could do two projects at the same time. They have so much money from there games they could but they won't.
Because if they come out at the same time they will split the player base. Being in the same genre and aimed at the same audience would cause players to choose one or the other to get. Fallout and Skyrim are in two different genres and aimed at different audiences. One coming out shortly after another will not affect the success of each one individually as much as say an Oblivion remake coming out at the same time as Skyrim 2.
It takes money to make games, be they remakes or brand new games. And companies want a good return on that money spent. If they have 2 games aimed at the same audience AND the same genre coming out at the same time, it will make many players only get one of those games. Who is going to spend $100 total on two games in the same genre with the same premise? Sure, some will, not that many. A Sims 1 remake would be more successful. 1. It's not easily run on the newest OS's if even at all. 2. It's the most different from the other games in the series. But even that would still split the player base if released at the same time as Sims 5. Players unsure of EA's ability to make good games would be less likely to give Sims 5 a chance if they can play an updated Sims 1.
So each game is less successful financially than if EA waited and didn't release them both at the same time. It would be nice that if after Sims 4 is finished development they did a Sims 1 remake to tide players over until they release Sims 5 a decent amount of time later so that it can be a great game and not a rushed one.
First of all... Skyrim and Fallout are basically the same, don't deny it. And I am not saying that they should release the sims 2 remake and sims 5 at the same time, that would be silly.
Ofcourse they can't add or remove gameplay content. They can add some features though, like more clothes, furniture, paint, maybe easy ways to turn furnitures in 45 degree angle etc. That's just a touch up.
When it comes to "I'd rather they focus on making sims 5" all you're really saying is "I want they to put all of their time to give me what I want and I don't care that you want something else". They CAN have several projects at the same time. It is very common.
Edit: The last thing I wrote is not aimed towards you, it's just a general answer for some comments like that which I see very often
Skyrim and Fallout are two very different games. They are aimed at two completely different audiences both in theme and in genre. Skyrim is full on fantasy. Fallout is full on post-apocalypse. Skyrim is traditional RPG. Fallout is FPS with some RPG elements. A Sims 1/2 remake and Sims 5 would be too similar for EA to be able to get enough players to buy both at the same time. They'll buy one and then the later one much later when the numbers don't really count for was the game a success within the company.
I have no issue with them doing a remake. I just don't want it to be at the expense of Sims 4 or of Sims 5 (or whatever number we're up to). It would be a great tool to give some time between Sims 4 and Sims 5 (or Sims 5 and Sims 6) so that Sims 5 can be the best possible and give players who aren't interested in remakes in general time to collect their money for Sims 5 and their EP's. But I don't want it to be a take a team from Sims 5 and then Sims 5 suffers from it. Or taken from Sims 4 and Sims 4 suffers from it.
And that bridge between Sims 4 and Sims 5 is why I think Sims 1 would be the best choice at this time. Enough of us can and still do play Sims 2 that many of us wouldn't spend money on the remake. I know I wouldn't. Not just for prettier graphics and a handful more clothes and some QoL changes (like angling furniture easier). Sims 1 I'd be more likely to do as 1. It would be a single install (I'd say remake all of the EP's and release in one pass or not at all). 2. There are more players who can't install Sims 1 on their current computer. 3. It's hard to find copies of the game to buy even if one has a computer that the game can run on. 4. EA needs to go back to basics to remember just where this series started off so they can see where they went wrong. And the best place for that is with Sims 1.
fallout is VERY MUCH like skyrim. They are similar in a great number of ways. Fallout is full of post-apocalypse yes but have you played it? Can you compare a deathclaw and a dragon? Or is a deathclaw completely normal to you? They work basically the same with quests, they have almost the same open world-style. The difference is that Fallout uses guns while Skyrim uses magic. They both use swords and axes etc. You have alchemy in Skyrim, and chemistry in Fallout. Cooking in both. You can't say that they are too different. The only real difference that is big enough to point out is that they have different themes. Slightly different mechanics ofcourse since fallout uses guns. It's difficult to compare that though unless you compare Skyrim mechanics to Fallout 3 mechanics, but overall they are veeery similar. It's not like comparing Skyrim and Mass Effect.
There's way more of a difference between the two games than there is between any of the Sims series. And I didn't say that there weren't any similarities between the games. Just not enough of a similarity that they would compete against each other directly.
The mechanics of playing Skyrim and Fallout are entirely different. WAY MORE different than the differences between any of the Sims games.
Players who pick up both Skyrim and Fallout for the first time at the same time are more likely to play both at the same time than someone who would pick up a Sims remake and a Sims 5 game. The similarities between the two Sims games would make it harder to learn the games than it would for a player playing both Fallout and Skyrim for the first time. So players would be less likely to buy the Sims games at the same time. They'd pick one or the other depending on which they thought they'd like more.
Long term there would be no difference, the internal competition wouldn't hurt the company in the long run. But companies operate a lot on the short term as they try to gauge what players want next. Internal competition hurts the bottom line for the individual game in the short term. EA may decide to not do anymore Sims games because the sales are below the threshold when looked at separately since not many would likely buy both games due to how similar they are. Whereas if there is enough time between the releases there wouldn't be any internal competition and both versions would exceed the threshold.
And why I prefer EA to work on new things is because new things focus on what players are into now. Whereas remakes are focused on what players were into when the game was released. The new Sims 5 will likely be more successful than a Sims 1 or a Sims 2 remake. Which is why I don't want the production of Sims 4 or of Sims 5 hurt by any decision to work on a Sims 1 or a Sims 2 remake. And given the Ultimate collection helping players with Windows 8 and 10 be able to play the game, Sims 1 would be the more successful remake most likely given how old it is.
Wishful thinking.
So true ... I had hopes for TS4 being all that. :sniff:
Sims 1 would not be popular if they remade It. Why? Because I know for a fact that the age group that they are targeting would not like a game like the sims 1. Sims 5 might come, might not. Fans of the series Is now loosing hope for the sims 4.
A remake would also target the players who played it when it first released as a nostalgia trip.
And where are all the results of the studies you've done and the interviews to determine what age range EA would be targeting and what they would want in the next Sims game? If you can't back it up, don't claim it as fact.
And nowhere in my post did I say it would be popular or sell as much as Sims 4 or a future Sims 5. I just said Sims 1 would be the more successful remake between Sims 1 and Sims 2. I'd actually be shocked if a Sims 1 or Sims 2 remake was as successful as the original. Because remakes rarely sell that many. Which is why I wouldn't want production on a remake to interfere with the production of Sims 4 or Sims 5. But would be a great between series off shoot (like Sims Medieval or the Sims Stories games) to bring in money while they work on making Sims 5 the best possible.
How do I know what the age group is. Well look at the community. Or look at the age rating 13 years old. Teens and young adults play the game and some older people but it's main target is younger people. Or just look at youtube and see what they want. Also where's your data about sims 2 remake would be less popular then a sims 1 remake. For people to like what sims 1 is very unlikely. Sims 2,3, and 4 are better then 1. Yes even 4. The only thing that most people like about one is the music.
Here's why I think that Sims 1 remake would be more popular than Sims 2 remake:
1. Sims 1 is hard to find. Either piecemeal or the complete collection version.
2. It can't be run on Windows 8 or Windows 10 and hoops have to be jumped through for Windows 7.
3. Sims 2 is still easily obtained today given the fact that EA still hands out the Ultimate Collection on Origin if you contact support.
Given that the average age of gamers is increasing steadily, the belief that all gamers are teens and young adults is what's going to get game companies in trouble. There are gamers in their 30's and 40's now. The people that grew up with the games of the 1980's. Releasing some games that appeal more to the older gamers is not a bad thing and would actually be a good idea. The gamers who grew up before youtube and wiki's and the internet. When you had to basically figure out a game by yourself if you wanted to win it.
And the gamers that youtube will also steadily increase in age as the years go on. Right now they are younger than the average gamer as youtube itself is younger than many gamers.
And I like Sims 1 more than Sims 4. Sims 1 has got way more humor than Sims 4 does, it's more challenging, it's got a certain something that Sims 4 doesn't have. There's something that I can't quite put my finger on that's missing from Sims 4 that the other games have.
I definitely agree with this. We (I'm 37) grew up with computers and consoles and all these games first. Statistics show a huge percentage of gamers are 30+. I have kids who obviously are growing up with this stuff as well, so companies do need to target them. BUT, they don't have to forget their core existing fan base to do it. My 16 year old loves Sims 2 the most and hates 4. My 12 year old daughter on the other hand loves 4 the most, and 3 is a close second. I love 2, with 3 a close second. I don't hate 4, but haven't played it in months.
What I was hoping for with 4 was for it to move forward while retaining a lot of what the others held for me. But what I feel like I got, was that it moved forward and left behind most of what appealed to me before (and apparently my son feels even more strongly about this then I do).
> fallout is VERY MUCH like skyrim. They are similar in a great number of ways. Fallout is full of post-apocalypse yes but have you played it? Can you compare a deathclaw and a dragon? Or is a deathclaw completely normal to you? They work basically the same with quests, they have almost the same open world-style. The difference is that Fallout uses guns while Skyrim uses magic. They both use swords and axes etc. You have alchemy in Skyrim, and chemistry in Fallout. Cooking in both. You can't say that they are too different. The only real difference that is big enough to point out is that they have different themes. Slightly different mechanics ofcourse since fallout uses guns. It's difficult to compare that though unless you compare Skyrim mechanics to Fallout 3 mechanics, but overall they are veeery similar. It's not like comparing Skyrim and Mass Effect.
As a proud Fallout and TES fanboy, your wrong. Now, let me go throw all your sentences and say how you are wrong.
"fallout is VERY MUCH like skyrim." You didn't even put a capital letter for Fallout and Skyrim.
"They are similar in a great number of ways." Alright then, let's see your points.
"Fallout is full of post-apocalypse yes but have you played it?" Yes, I have played it, a lot of people have played it.
"Can you compare a deathclaw and a dragon?" Yes. Deathclaws are genetically engineered creatures that roam the wastes of the wasteland. Dragons breed like mammals.
"Or is a deathclaw completely normal to you?" No. They're scary when you see one. They can rip you a part and you have to boot to a quicksave.
"They work basically the same with quests," Huh, one is the main storyline villain and the other is a side enemy in an futuristic RPG.
"they have almost the same open world-style." No, they don't. Deathclaws are random enemies that use ground to kill you, they get there claws out and kill you. Dragons in Skyrim act as mini boss fights. They fly and kill you by fire breathing. Not a claw, fire breathing.
"The difference is that Fallout uses guns while Skyrim uses magic." Yeah. They are very different. Completely different. Context and use.
"They both use swords and axes etc." No. You played Fallout? You tend to use guns, and when you do use melee, there is swords and axes but they are context sensitive. Skyrim has a limited range of weapons while Fallout has larger much varying range of weapons.
"You have alchemy in Skyrim, and chemistry in Fallout." I don't think you have played Fallout. Chemistry? I have played all the Fallouts, even down to Fallout 76 and Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel. Chemistry has never been a part of Fallout. Alchemy has been in Skyrim and chemistry hasn't. The only thing that is remotely close to that is Science. And science is mainly to craft more ammo for energy weapons. What?
"Cooking in both." If your playing survival mode, yeah, in Skyrim I forgot that you could do that and thought you could only craft weapons.
"You can't say that they are too different." I can indeed, I can say a lot, have you forgotten about questline, storylines, companies. Sure, Fallout is now owned by Bethesda but it was originally owned by Interplay, a completely different company to Bethesda.
"The only real difference that is big enough to point out is that they have different themes." You could point that out, but Fallout and Skyrim are very different, skills, story, factions, perks, traits, classes, world building, derived stats, SPECIAL, 🐸🐸🐸🐸 Skyrim doesn't even have a attribute system.
" Slightly different mechanics of course since fallout uses guns." Yeah, also lockpicking, computers, Power Armor, attribute system, derived stats. So, no, it is very different.
"It's difficult to compare that though unless you compare Skyrim mechanics to Fallout 3 mechanics" mhm, the core of the game is different.
"but overall they are veeery similar." It isn't, it just isn't, I don't think you have even played Fallout, I don't think you've played Skyrim. I think you've only played Fo4 and Skyrim. Two of the worst games ever.
"It's not like comparing Skyrim and Mass Effect." I don't think that was brought to the table here. Plus, Skyrim, Mass Effect and Fallout are very different games.
Your wrong. I don't care. All the points you brought made me lose brain cells.
We also need EA to get off their 🐸🐸🐸🐸 and release that 64 bit Sims 3 for everyone. Its good to future proof your games.
See my Sims 3 studio for latest progress.