Maybe because AIM and MSN were designed as Chats Sims never was. Thats a very BIG difference
This doesn't make anything more or less safe. I hate to tell you things will change in your life, and games are going this direction. I'm suprised it hasn't happened yet, actually.
Anyway, I think everybody made valid points, and I sincerely hope that the features, when added, are safe for everybody.
no it doesent make it more or less safe but it does make it more or less wanted . Most simmers DONT WANT A CHAT IN THEIR GAME. if i want to chat ill go to a chat room or a forum
Lemonpawz is right about one thing - we are being mighty hard on her and I do think we have to give her a bit of credit for bravely supporting something she does want in the game - and that is indeed her right. We can't really be turning on one another as people should have the right to their own opinions on any matter.
I say she showed stamina in the face of opposition like a real trooper. No matter what any of us feel it does deserve respect as that simmers wishes and opinion. After all Lemonpawz is not the enemy, she is just sharing she likes the idea.
So credit where credit is due, as no simmer should be afraid or made to feel they have to defend theirselves for their own opinion. Lets just say we can all agree to disagree - but EA is not going to make us enemies of each other - not when we all love the same game and one way or the other we will all find a way to play the game the way we want to.
Night all.
ETA I am more guilty than the rest of you, so I feel I also need to say it first.
"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.....
no it doesent make it more or less safe but it does make it more or less wanted . Most simmers DONT WANT A CHAT IN THEIR GAME. if i want to chat ill go to a chat room or a forum
Please cite the statistics that say most people don't want it. And I mean most- not a small selection from their poll. That's you, I prefer to chat in my games. I respect our differences, please respect my opinion instead of yelling at me with fake statistics.
Writin, thank you very much for your last comment. I am glad people can hold an intelligent discussion without getting personal or superficial. I have enjoyed chatting with you all- even if we don't agree on everything- and I hope we can all keep enjoying the game. See you around the forums!
If I wanted, I could read to you from your last tax return tomorrow morning and even tell you whether or not you missed a deduction.
I don't know about the security systems of the US government's computers. I live in germany and as far as I know you must be either a true L33T h4xx0r if you want to make it into the servers of the tax office, or someone with an official legitimation. Prove me I'm wrong.
It should be easy for you to retreive my email address. Send me the information of my latest tax return.
no it doesent make it more or less safe but it does make it more or less wanted . Most simmers DONT WANT A CHAT IN THEIR GAME. if i want to chat ill go to a chat room or a forum
Please cite the statistics that say most people don't want it. And I mean most- not a small selection from their poll. That's you, I prefer to chat in my games. I respect our differences, please respect my opinion instead of yelling at me with fake statistics.
Writin, thank you very much for your last comment. I am glad people can hold an intelligent discussion without getting personal or superficial. I have enjoyed chatting with you all- even if we don't agree on everything- and I hope we can all keep enjoying the game. See you around the forums!
I am not bashing the chat feature either and don't get me wrong. However it means if there is no parent controls for this i have to be concerned on wether or not i will let my eldest child play sims anymore. Anyway i don't buy sims 3 however if sims 4 is changing and improving to be better i do want to buy that and i am sure sims 4 will have more social features than 3. If that's the case sims 4 will only be for me. As i've seen what some of the people do with their sims especially when playing together.
I do not feel my child needs facebook or any other chat game or program to one improve his internet skills or his social skills. That is my choice as a parent which i think you respect anyway. I certainly don't feel im sheltering him from the dangers of the internet he understand what the rules are for being online. However, unlike others i feel when he can be mature enough to excerise that caution i well allow him more priveledges.
Call me strict but as a parent I have the right to fear predators. 85% percent of children are sexually assaulted in some form in their childhood. That is a striking number. Its normally by an adult they trusted. These adult predators flock to areas where they know they will find mostly children. An unsupervised chat video game that operates as a doll house is one such place that will attract these type of people. I am certainly not mad at ea for moving to this. However i am not a person that is happy over it either if it is not designed in a manner that is safe for ault and child. Honestly the only way to know if is or isn't is to wait and see what the dev's say.
I don't question someones charcter for liking such a feature. However, don't expect me to just think tht nothing will happen with such a feature. The reality of it is children are in danger when we dont accept the possibilities of something being harmful. It happens more in this world than many of us are willing to accept.
Anyway i don't buy sims 3 however if sims 4 is changing and improving to be better i do want to buy that and i am sure sims 4 will have more social features than 3. If that's the case sims 4 will only be for me. As i've seen what some of the people do with their sims especially when playing together.
I'm so afraid that the social/multi-player features will be the main focus of TS4, and that will be the end for me. I can't emphasize enough how much I hate the idea of "socializing" with others while I play. I tried The Sims Online and I know how it was. Everything people have been saying about 🐸🐸🐸🐸 and predators is true.
It isn't that I'm trying to protect my children (they are all college age and above now), it's just that I don't want to hang out with a bunch of immature kids or have creeps hitting on me online. I don't find dealing with people like that entertaining. I just want to play a single-player sandbox where I can escape the real world and get creative.
Yes, I know it will probably be "optional," but I am NOT going to buy a Sims game where I am going to want to turn off the main new features and miss out on a lot of the content. I'd just like them to focus on improving the game, not making it something else. :roll:
I don't see why I'm getting so much animosity targeted toward because I want a chat feature in game. I'm not the only one who wants it lol. It is so wrong to have a differing opinion...
I can understand why you enjoy chatting and socializing in other games, Lemonpawz. But The Sims is something unique and the community is so diverse...it brings in a whole different crowd and is a lot more likely to mix naive simmers (young and old) with sickos and predators. I just can't see in-game chatting not leading to a lot of problems. The Sims Online wasn't pretty.
Yes, I know it will probably be "optional," but I am NOT going to buy a Sims game where I am going to want to turn off the main new features and miss out on a lot of the content.
This is another huge point of contention for me - it feels like the game has become something where, if you don't have the extra $ or don't let them "invade" your privacy, you are penalized for it.
This will sound so dramatic, but, this game is beginning to feel "elitist".
It is one thing, if they offer content to make it an individual experience - it is another to charge exorbitant amounts that you can never possibly keep up AND budget in real life.
It has turned into something where I used to get excited for expansion packs that offered a FULL, complete experience and did not have to worry about spending even more for items that should have been in the pack in the first place to complete indifference.
The only reason I say anything, is because of the years spent playing these games and the enjoyment they have brought and hopefully they would really listen to our concerns.
At this point, I doubt it. They are on a roll and unless it cost them money, one voice won't make a difference.
In real life, when you are dealing with someone, you respect there personal boundaries, their space - i would expect the same courtesy from a company that is selling me a game that i am paying for.
People like me easily manage to get ahold of a person's complete set of personal information using only a few minutes of effort...
So who are you, a member of the NSA or FBI?
Not a member of the NSA or FBI. I might be able to call upon an FBI agent for a favor, but it's an extreme longshot and the favor itself would have to be utterly legal.
No, I can find out all of that information using a simple IP trace and a background check. There's plenty of sites on Google that'll tell you everything you want to know about a person for just $150; they don't even ask for credentials most of the time.
If I wanted, I could read to you from your last tax return tomorrow morning and even tell you whether or not you missed a deduction.
I don't know about the security systems of the US government's computers. I live in germany and as far as I know you must be either a true L33T h4xx0r if you want to make it into the servers of the tax office, or someone with an official legitimation. Prove me I'm wrong.
It should be easy for you to retreive my email address. Send me the information of my latest tax return.
Germany? I don't have the credentials to access their tax system. Mine are limited to the IRS only. I could probably get the credentials, but it would take me a minimum of a year... I'd have to learn German tax law first, then manage to arrange some way to take the necessary testing or whatever they have for qualifications, before I could even get the credentials. If they require citizenship, that's even trickier and would take much longer to arrange.
I will admit I was using a bit of hyperbole to make a point.
Anyway i don't buy sims 3 however if sims 4 is changing and improving to be better i do want to buy that and i am sure sims 4 will have more social features than 3. If that's the case sims 4 will only be for me. As i've seen what some of the people do with their sims especially when playing together.
I'm so afraid that the social/multi-player features will be the main focus of TS4, and that will be the end for me. I can't emphasize enough how much I hate the idea of "socializing" with others while I play. I tried The Sims Online and I know how it was. Everything people have been saying about 🐸🐸🐸🐸 and predators is true.
It isn't that I'm trying to protect my children (they are all college age and above now), it's just that I don't want to hang out with a bunch of immature kids or have creeps hitting on me online. I don't find dealing with people like that entertaining. I just want to play a single-player sandbox where I can escape the real world and get creative.
Yes, I know it will probably be "optional," but I am NOT going to buy a Sims game where I am going to want to turn off the main new features and miss out on a lot of the content. I'd just like them to focus on improving the game, not making it something else. :roll:
I hear you Dark about that the social features don't bother me as long as they don't hinder gameplay. However if it was my choice i would choose to keep sims a singplayer game. I just feel at this point fans don't really have a say so, they will do it regardless of what it is we want. I know all to well how from experience that predators target children and teens in video games like sims, and anything else that would be considered more childs play. I've heard a lot of stories from sims online as well.
I don't mind multiplayer features where they are in a more player controlled setting. And more optional than what is being presented. I know gameplay advancing doesn't mean social features have to be a part of that. Majority of my friends don't play sims just a very small minority. That small minority has moved on to sims 2 like I have. So i'm afraid a feature like this will not be fully utilized by me. As im sorry im not going to come begging on a forum for others to come play with me. It just isn't my cup of tea. The only reason why i would buy it is for the gameplay, if it's still where i can play in a singleplayer environment than yeah i don't really care.
If it's like a zinga game where i have to play with someone to complete my careers or anything else then nope i consider that a limit on gameplay. sim 2 will be my last game to the series and im just fine with that.
I, too, have been doing some research on ARGs, Jarsie. EA is certainly no stranger to them: Majestic (video game)
Quoted the top bit "Majestic is one of the first alternate reality games (ARGs), a type of game that blurs the line between in-game and out-of-game experiences. It debuted on July 31, 2001. While noted for its unusual concept, it did not fare well commercially and was discontinued in 2002."
I, too, have been doing some research on ARGs, Jarsie. EA is certainly no stranger to them: Majestic (video game)
Quoted the top bit "Majestic is one of the first alternate reality games (ARGs), a type of game that blurs the line between in-game and out-of-game experiences. It debuted on July 31, 2001. While noted for its unusual concept, it did not fare well commercially and was discontinued in 2002."
Wow, to judge by that article, then, it's very possible that EA would back up Will Wright's latest game "HiveMind", despite the fact that there is no mention of EA in the linked article. Scary.
And Lemonpawz, regarding the social features in Showtime, it's not the chat. The chat can be turned off. It's Simport itself. Simport changes the Sims 3 from a single player game to a cooperative gameplayer experience, in which the player must rely on others to help complete their goals. *That's* why people are so against it, *because it can't be turned off* The player can only opt out, which means Simport is still there, but it's up to the player *not* to use the feature. However, by making it enticing to the player in the form of rewards, it will be hard for most players to resist trying the feature at least once. Unfortunately, after they've had one positive experience and decide it's not so bad after all, then they discover that, like most Facebook type social gameplay, it takes more than one friend to accomplish those goals.
So, while you may welcome the new chat features (which CAN be turned off), be aware that Simport radically changes the dynamic of the game, and even though most people are saying that they'll opt in and then opt out, they may find that they can't do that as easily as they thought, if the opportunities become more challenging and the offered rewards become more enticing.
But, I've said this before, various times, in various places, and in more or less the same words.
EA Marketing Department Motto:
"We Don't Care If You LIKE The Game, Just As Long As You BUY The Game!"
I Disapprove (Naturally) I Took The Pledge!
I will use simport to get the content, but after that I'll cut the cord, just like with generations, "Memories". I got the items I disabled the memories.
I guess my personal feeling about simport is we don't really know much about it yet. I understand that it can't be turned off- but what does that exactly mean? I feel like it is an assumption only that is will constantly nag you, so I don't really want to condemn it when I don't know exactly what it will do. I just feel like they haven't given enough information about it. If I turn it off, where does it say it will send me 800 notifications? If I opt out, how could people even send me their sim, for it to nag me about it? I just think it won't be as limiting as some people say, but I also don't know for sure. I think we need to wait and see because unfortunately, you are right- they will put it in regardless of what anybody thinks.
I guess my personal feeling about simport is we don't really know much about it yet. I understand that it can't be turned off- but what does that exactly mean? I feel like it is an assumption only that is will constantly nag you, so I don't really want to condemn it when I don't know exactly what it will do. I just feel like they haven't given enough information about it. If I turn it off, where does it say it will send me 800 notifications? If I opt out, how could people even send me their sim, for it to nag me about it? I just think it won't be as limiting as some people say, but I also don't know for sure. I think we need to wait and see because unfortunately, you are right- they will put it in regardless of what anybody thinks.
I feel like I am talking in circles, and you are deliberately misunderstanding the point I, and others are trying to make. No one said anything about 800 notifications. All *I* said was that playing with one of the 3 careers would allow the game to present the player with opportunities that would involve the use of Simport in order to accomplish whatever goal the opportunity presented the player with. And that is *all* I have been saying. As far as "If I turn it off"...on the one hand you say that you understand that Simport can't be turned off, but on the other, you sound like you believe it *can* be turned off. But, as you say, let's agree to disagree on this point and wait and see what happens.
EA Marketing Department Motto:
"We Don't Care If You LIKE The Game, Just As Long As You BUY The Game!"
I Disapprove (Naturally) I Took The Pledge!
I feel like I am talking in circles, and you are deliberately misunderstanding the point I, and others are trying to make. No one said anything about 800 notifications. All *I* said was that playing with one of the 3 careers would allow the game to present the player with opportunities that would involve the use of Simport in order to accomplish whatever goal the opportunity presented the player with. And that is *all* I have been saying. As far as "If I turn it off"...on the one hand you say that you understand that Simport can't be turned off, but on the other, you sound like you believe it *can* be turned off. But, as you say, let's agree to disagree on this point and wait and see what happens.
I'm sorry you feel that way. If I'm misunderstanding I assure you it isn't deliberate. Here is what I am gathering from the posts:
-It doesn't matter that simport can be opted out of, because it will still bother you to complete tasks- that is what I mean by a lot of notifications. Is this accurate? If it only asks you once or twice it would not be bothersome, so it wouldn't matter if you couldn't turn it off, because opting out would accomplish the same goal as turning it off. Perhaps you didn't say this yourself, but it has been said and that's why I included it because I thought it was the issue, but maybe I am misunderstanding.
If people are not worried about what I described above, I have to say I really don't understand what the big issue with simport is.
After everything I read today, it does not matter whether we like it or not or even whether you buy Showtime or not. The system is going on all games EA publishes, including all their partners games that are rated family or ten and up - no and, ifs, or buts and they don't need showtime to give it to you. Showtime is the first of their eps to show you some of it's priviledges. They don't care if you use it or not - it is the future of all games from the sounds of it, and EA will have all their games on that system technically before Showtime comes out. As of today according to what different articles i read, EA already has 100 games on the system, Banacle Bay is only purchaseable through Origin now and not for Sims points either - it's 19.99. Different games call the simport different things, but it is named according to what game it is for and it works precisely for that game. They add the extra's for each ep the same as they add eps to the base game for the simport. Battlefield has Battlelog as it's Simport and it is already running on that, Starwars has one, Need for Speed Forza 4 is listed to have Autolog as it's simport - Harry Potter games has it, all the sports games already have it - Fifa and NFL Managers has the ability to put the users face on their player in the game - not sure what the point of that is, Battlefield sounds totally dependant on it and you have to do what it's Battlelog offers or not play from the way that sounds - but there was tons more. The engineers and Game experts did say EA new system is the best though - called it innovative and very secure compare to Valve's steam and capables of far more than Steam. All non-EA expert seem to give it a big thumbs up and players using it already I have to admit all said real positive stuff on all the different forums. But EA was considered ahead of it's time because it connects all systems from consoles, to xbox to pcs to Mac to one systems and apparently this system is capable of finding problems with the different games and fixing them as long as it's a true game problem without people waiting endlessly for patches or a group of patches to come out it will help identify a problem that will be dealt with as soon as there is a solution. it also has a down side to anyone who likes to use stolen content - it will catch you and you wil be perma banded for life - so bewarned. I take from what I read all games do have to be connected to play them and have store content in their game. The system will update all the content including the store immediately when there is an update which is when you add an ep or sp - I'm not sure about CAW as that wasn't mentioned but it said content and tools, so I assume it means CAW too. But the way one person said seems if you do not have a new ep or sp, you do not have to worry about getting updates you can't use - so i assume there won't be as many problems as the games will be updated to just what ever level you play - that is if i understood it right as I was getting info from several different tech type sites that came up in my search and it was not just the Sims - it was EA's new system i looked up - so if there are particulars to just Sims I don't know them.
I was just thinking well a lot of people may say forget it EA. Surprise - Surprise, the other Giant Activision/Blizzard is building it own version only they are charging a 50 dollar fee to subscribe - the catch is you won't be able to play the games with out it and it will incorporate it's Battle.net MMO system into their version of the Steam/EA system. Those playing Skyrim - heads up they are in talks with Activism to get on Board possibly with their system as a partner. Apparently they like the though of extra 50 bucks every 6 months and the fact these things identify problems wuith out their engineers scrambling in labs, so I guess they cut time away from making more games. But there was nothing definite yet they are still in talks and of course Valve wants to keep them there, but they are looking someone down at Valve right now for pretty much the same reason EA is pulling their games from Valve as I guess Valve won't let them use DLC or tools off the parent sites - for one, so it does sound like they are leaning elsewhere.
The guess on one site of engineers thinks the smaller companies who are already seeing the positive (I can't imagine how without these in full operation yet) and will either form an alliance and build their own system or they will be begging the big boys for space as they all agree this is the best direction and the only systems that will die out are those that can't use the internet.
But I started my search on goggle using
EA's New Simport
as the search, eventually changed that to
EA's new Origin System
and EA Games and Origin.
"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.....
unless EA is willing to go all the way back to the very first games they and all their subsidiaries have made then not all thier games are going to be on orgin
I won't be buying Showtime or anything TS3-related regardless, but Origin won't stop me from buying TS4. It sounds a lot like Ubisoft's Uplay, which I have experience with from playing Assassin's Creed (single-player mode only), and it hasn't caused me any problems yet.
What bothers me and will stop me from buying TS4 are the socializing and multi-player aspects. I am only interested in playing The Sims as a single-player game. If I need to interact with other simmers to advance or I miss out on a lot of content by not socializing, I am gone.
As popular as skyrim is i haven't found anything other than http://forums.gametrailers.com/thread/should-bethesda-release-skyrim/1261233 This was something made up by some dumb former, because i haven't heard or read anything like this in any gaming news. So im going to say whay you said just isn't true unless you have an article that shows Bethesda is considering this.
I'd like to see the article and proof Writing that Skyrim V. Elder Scrolls is moving from single player game to mmo. And charging fans who have already purchased the game 50 dollars to subscribe which is an absurd accusation to make.
From my understanding Bethesda was in talks about a new project that has nothing to do with their current version of elder scrolls. They were looking to make an online game. It wasn't really bethesda.
However what fans seem to be getting confused is the parent company of bethesda is making the mmo. ZeniMax. It certainly is not something that has anything to do with skyrim
There is a mod out that offers online player feature but again bethesda rejected it saying they only want to focus on singleplayer features of the game. However they aren't stopping people from modding their game and using that mod.
I haven't even seen any talks about them even teaming up with Activision at all. From what iv'e seen they've been pretty much rival companies. The onlything i've seen them agree on is they want to market their games on nintendo wii but it had nothing to do with together.
As far as Blizzard/Activision they specialize in mmo's most of their games have a subscription fee. Frankily 50 dollars for 6 months is pretty cheap considering a regular sub fee is 15.99 a month. Even for them i haven't seen them wanting to charge for a service like origins. Lol especially since wow has been losing their fanbase like crazy to other games, they've even offered diablos 3 for free. I don't see them charging more for anything in the future.
Comments
This doesn't make anything more or less safe. I hate to tell you things will change in your life, and games are going this direction. I'm suprised it hasn't happened yet, actually.
Anyway, I think everybody made valid points, and I sincerely hope that the features, when added, are safe for everybody.
I say she showed stamina in the face of opposition like a real trooper. No matter what any of us feel it does deserve respect as that simmers wishes and opinion. After all Lemonpawz is not the enemy, she is just sharing she likes the idea.
So credit where credit is due, as no simmer should be afraid or made to feel they have to defend theirselves for their own opinion. Lets just say we can all agree to disagree - but EA is not going to make us enemies of each other - not when we all love the same game and one way or the other we will all find a way to play the game the way we want to.
Night all.
ETA I am more guilty than the rest of you, so I feel I also need to say it first.
"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.....
Please cite the statistics that say most people don't want it. And I mean most- not a small selection from their poll. That's you, I prefer to chat in my games. I respect our differences, please respect my opinion instead of yelling at me with fake statistics.
Writin, thank you very much for your last comment. I am glad people can hold an intelligent discussion without getting personal or superficial. I have enjoyed chatting with you all- even if we don't agree on everything- and I hope we can all keep enjoying the game. See you around the forums!
I get your point in general but there are two things that raise my eyebrows. So who are you, a member of the NSA or FBI?
I don't know about the security systems of the US government's computers. I live in germany and as far as I know you must be either a true L33T h4xx0r if you want to make it into the servers of the tax office, or someone with an official legitimation. Prove me I'm wrong.
It should be easy for you to retreive my email address. Send me the information of my latest tax return.
I am not bashing the chat feature either and don't get me wrong. However it means if there is no parent controls for this i have to be concerned on wether or not i will let my eldest child play sims anymore. Anyway i don't buy sims 3 however if sims 4 is changing and improving to be better i do want to buy that and i am sure sims 4 will have more social features than 3. If that's the case sims 4 will only be for me. As i've seen what some of the people do with their sims especially when playing together.
I do not feel my child needs facebook or any other chat game or program to one improve his internet skills or his social skills. That is my choice as a parent which i think you respect anyway. I certainly don't feel im sheltering him from the dangers of the internet he understand what the rules are for being online. However, unlike others i feel when he can be mature enough to excerise that caution i well allow him more priveledges.
Call me strict but as a parent I have the right to fear predators. 85% percent of children are sexually assaulted in some form in their childhood. That is a striking number. Its normally by an adult they trusted. These adult predators flock to areas where they know they will find mostly children. An unsupervised chat video game that operates as a doll house is one such place that will attract these type of people. I am certainly not mad at ea for moving to this. However i am not a person that is happy over it either if it is not designed in a manner that is safe for ault and child. Honestly the only way to know if is or isn't is to wait and see what the dev's say.
I don't question someones charcter for liking such a feature. However, don't expect me to just think tht nothing will happen with such a feature. The reality of it is children are in danger when we dont accept the possibilities of something being harmful. It happens more in this world than many of us are willing to accept.
I'm so afraid that the social/multi-player features will be the main focus of TS4, and that will be the end for me. I can't emphasize enough how much I hate the idea of "socializing" with others while I play. I tried The Sims Online and I know how it was. Everything people have been saying about 🐸🐸🐸🐸 and predators is true.
It isn't that I'm trying to protect my children (they are all college age and above now), it's just that I don't want to hang out with a bunch of immature kids or have creeps hitting on me online. I don't find dealing with people like that entertaining. I just want to play a single-player sandbox where I can escape the real world and get creative.
Yes, I know it will probably be "optional," but I am NOT going to buy a Sims game where I am going to want to turn off the main new features and miss out on a lot of the content. I'd just like them to focus on improving the game, not making it something else. :roll:
I can understand why you enjoy chatting and socializing in other games, Lemonpawz. But The Sims is something unique and the community is so diverse...it brings in a whole different crowd and is a lot more likely to mix naive simmers (young and old) with sickos and predators. I just can't see in-game chatting not leading to a lot of problems. The Sims Online wasn't pretty.
This is another huge point of contention for me - it feels like the game has become something where, if you don't have the extra $ or don't let them "invade" your privacy, you are penalized for it.
This will sound so dramatic, but, this game is beginning to feel "elitist".
It is one thing, if they offer content to make it an individual experience - it is another to charge exorbitant amounts that you can never possibly keep up AND budget in real life.
It has turned into something where I used to get excited for expansion packs that offered a FULL, complete experience and did not have to worry about spending even more for items that should have been in the pack in the first place to complete indifference.
The only reason I say anything, is because of the years spent playing these games and the enjoyment they have brought and hopefully they would really listen to our concerns.
At this point, I doubt it. They are on a roll and unless it cost them money, one voice won't make a difference.
Not a member of the NSA or FBI. I might be able to call upon an FBI agent for a favor, but it's an extreme longshot and the favor itself would have to be utterly legal.
No, I can find out all of that information using a simple IP trace and a background check. There's plenty of sites on Google that'll tell you everything you want to know about a person for just $150; they don't even ask for credentials most of the time.
Isn't the internet wonderful?
Germany? I don't have the credentials to access their tax system. Mine are limited to the IRS only. I could probably get the credentials, but it would take me a minimum of a year... I'd have to learn German tax law first, then manage to arrange some way to take the necessary testing or whatever they have for qualifications, before I could even get the credentials. If they require citizenship, that's even trickier and would take much longer to arrange.
I will admit I was using a bit of hyperbole to make a point.
I hear you Dark about that the social features don't bother me as long as they don't hinder gameplay. However if it was my choice i would choose to keep sims a singplayer game. I just feel at this point fans don't really have a say so, they will do it regardless of what it is we want. I know all to well how from experience that predators target children and teens in video games like sims, and anything else that would be considered more childs play. I've heard a lot of stories from sims online as well.
I don't mind multiplayer features where they are in a more player controlled setting. And more optional than what is being presented. I know gameplay advancing doesn't mean social features have to be a part of that. Majority of my friends don't play sims just a very small minority. That small minority has moved on to sims 2 like I have. So i'm afraid a feature like this will not be fully utilized by me. As im sorry im not going to come begging on a forum for others to come play with me. It just isn't my cup of tea. The only reason why i would buy it is for the gameplay, if it's still where i can play in a singleplayer environment than yeah i don't really care.
If it's like a zinga game where i have to play with someone to complete my careers or anything else then nope i consider that a limit on gameplay. sim 2 will be my last game to the series and im just fine with that.
I, too, have been doing some research on ARGs, Jarsie. EA is certainly no stranger to them: Majestic (video game)
Quoted the top bit "Majestic is one of the first alternate reality games (ARGs), a type of game that blurs the line between in-game and out-of-game experiences. It debuted on July 31, 2001. While noted for its unusual concept, it did not fare well commercially and was discontinued in 2002."
Wow, to judge by that article, then, it's very possible that EA would back up Will Wright's latest game "HiveMind", despite the fact that there is no mention of EA in the linked article. Scary.
And Lemonpawz, regarding the social features in Showtime, it's not the chat. The chat can be turned off. It's Simport itself. Simport changes the Sims 3 from a single player game to a cooperative gameplayer experience, in which the player must rely on others to help complete their goals. *That's* why people are so against it, *because it can't be turned off* The player can only opt out, which means Simport is still there, but it's up to the player *not* to use the feature. However, by making it enticing to the player in the form of rewards, it will be hard for most players to resist trying the feature at least once. Unfortunately, after they've had one positive experience and decide it's not so bad after all, then they discover that, like most Facebook type social gameplay, it takes more than one friend to accomplish those goals.
So, while you may welcome the new chat features (which CAN be turned off), be aware that Simport radically changes the dynamic of the game, and even though most people are saying that they'll opt in and then opt out, they may find that they can't do that as easily as they thought, if the opportunities become more challenging and the offered rewards become more enticing.
But, I've said this before, various times, in various places, and in more or less the same words.
"We Don't Care If You LIKE The Game, Just As Long As You BUY The Game!"
I Disapprove (Naturally)
I Took The Pledge!
The two reference links below in the article go more indepth. Good reads.
I feel like I am talking in circles, and you are deliberately misunderstanding the point I, and others are trying to make. No one said anything about 800 notifications. All *I* said was that playing with one of the 3 careers would allow the game to present the player with opportunities that would involve the use of Simport in order to accomplish whatever goal the opportunity presented the player with. And that is *all* I have been saying. As far as "If I turn it off"...on the one hand you say that you understand that Simport can't be turned off, but on the other, you sound like you believe it *can* be turned off. But, as you say, let's agree to disagree on this point and wait and see what happens.
"We Don't Care If You LIKE The Game, Just As Long As You BUY The Game!"
I Disapprove (Naturally)
I Took The Pledge!
I'm sorry you feel that way. If I'm misunderstanding I assure you it isn't deliberate. Here is what I am gathering from the posts:
-It doesn't matter that simport can be opted out of, because it will still bother you to complete tasks- that is what I mean by a lot of notifications. Is this accurate? If it only asks you once or twice it would not be bothersome, so it wouldn't matter if you couldn't turn it off, because opting out would accomplish the same goal as turning it off. Perhaps you didn't say this yourself, but it has been said and that's why I included it because I thought it was the issue, but maybe I am misunderstanding.
If people are not worried about what I described above, I have to say I really don't understand what the big issue with simport is.
I was just thinking well a lot of people may say forget it EA. Surprise - Surprise, the other Giant Activision/Blizzard is building it own version only they are charging a 50 dollar fee to subscribe - the catch is you won't be able to play the games with out it and it will incorporate it's Battle.net MMO system into their version of the Steam/EA system. Those playing Skyrim - heads up they are in talks with Activism to get on Board possibly with their system as a partner. Apparently they like the though of extra 50 bucks every 6 months and the fact these things identify problems wuith out their engineers scrambling in labs, so I guess they cut time away from making more games. But there was nothing definite yet they are still in talks and of course Valve wants to keep them there, but they are looking someone down at Valve right now for pretty much the same reason EA is pulling their games from Valve as I guess Valve won't let them use DLC or tools off the parent sites - for one, so it does sound like they are leaning elsewhere.
The guess on one site of engineers thinks the smaller companies who are already seeing the positive (I can't imagine how without these in full operation yet) and will either form an alliance and build their own system or they will be begging the big boys for space as they all agree this is the best direction and the only systems that will die out are those that can't use the internet.
But I started my search on goggle using
EA's New Simport
as the search, eventually changed that to
EA's new Origin System
and EA Games and Origin.
"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.....
I won't be buying Showtime or anything TS3-related regardless, but Origin won't stop me from buying TS4. It sounds a lot like Ubisoft's Uplay, which I have experience with from playing Assassin's Creed (single-player mode only), and it hasn't caused me any problems yet.
What bothers me and will stop me from buying TS4 are the socializing and multi-player aspects. I am only interested in playing The Sims as a single-player game. If I need to interact with other simmers to advance or I miss out on a lot of content by not socializing, I am gone.
As popular as skyrim is i haven't found anything other than
http://forums.gametrailers.com/thread/should-bethesda-release-skyrim/1261233 This was something made up by some dumb former, because i haven't heard or read anything like this in any gaming news. So im going to say whay you said just isn't true unless you have an article that shows Bethesda is considering this.
I'd like to see the article and proof Writing that Skyrim V. Elder Scrolls is moving from single player game to mmo. And charging fans who have already purchased the game 50 dollars to subscribe which is an absurd accusation to make.
From my understanding Bethesda was in talks about a new project that has nothing to do with their current version of elder scrolls. They were looking to make an online game. It wasn't really bethesda.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/296453/bethesda-explains-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-multiplayer-omission/ this is their vision for their skyrim game they have no intentions making this version online
However what fans seem to be getting confused is the parent company of bethesda is making the mmo. ZeniMax. It certainly is not something that has anything to do with skyrim
http://gamerant.com/elder-scrolls-5-skyrum-no-mmo-rory-57616/
http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701984/more-rumors-about-bethesdas-mmo-even-though-its-nothing-really-new/
There is a mod out that offers online player feature but again bethesda rejected it saying they only want to focus on singleplayer features of the game. However they aren't stopping people from modding their game and using that mod.
I haven't even seen any talks about them even teaming up with Activision at all. From what iv'e seen they've been pretty much rival companies. The onlything i've seen them agree on is they want to market their games on nintendo wii but it had nothing to do with together.
As far as Blizzard/Activision they specialize in mmo's most of their games have a subscription fee. Frankily 50 dollars for 6 months is pretty cheap considering a regular sub fee is 15.99 a month. Even for them i haven't seen them wanting to charge for a service like origins. Lol especially since wow has been losing their fanbase like crazy to other games, they've even offered diablos 3 for free. I don't see them charging more for anything in the future.