My thread was once called "Sims 4 should compete with Second Life", but I got a lot of negative responses to my initial post.
So now, I still would like the Sims Franchise to evolve into a MMORPG. I'm just not going to hold my breath over it. But I know that the rest of you would rather play offline.
So, without future ado, I present to you this question: If EA were to introduce (read: force) the Sims MMORPG onto us, what features would make you change your mind and buy the stinking, stupid game?
0
Comments
http://forum.thesims3.com/jforum/posts/list/535015.page#8410508
http://forum.thesims3.com/jforum/posts/list/534132.page
It would need to be a totally stand alone effort like Simsonline but having been in SL for a few years...the lag/griefing and money you can spend without really meaning to means I would steer WAY clear. Sorry
Second life does it fine already (on a good day)
If I was you, I would go and check out the other threads asking the same thing and see what others had wrote about it.
http://store.thesims3.com/myWishlist.html?persona=lisasc360
My stories on this site:
https://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/991317/my-sims-stories/p1?new=1
1. Did you ever truly play TSO when it came out back in 2002? If not, can you even remember what issues fans were complaining about back then? Or did you literally have to do some googling to search for favorable reviews on it?
2. If you're so much into social online gaming, why isn't playing SL enough for you?? :?
3. What's so lacking in game features/content in SL which makes you want to mutate the Sims into a full blown (and completely dysfunctional) online social networking game?
4. Why do you think it's so necessary for TS4 to "rival" SL? Especially when a fan base for SL already exists? Don't you think that would be a waste of time (and duplicated effort) on the devs part?
Doing a project of this magnitude would cost EA millions to develop. And even more to make it remain profitable. TS4 would have to use suscriptions to remain profitable. That could turn a lot of people off--especially if the online experience doesn't deliver what people expected. Just like it did with TSO. TS4 would also end up having to steal SL fans and cannibalize the SimsSocial fan base by attracting customers from these games as well. This may not be worth the cost or development effort.
It also definitely wouldn't help EA out with the increased amount of debt it's already wallowing in. Sometimes you just need to step back and think of the big picture first.
My problem with your post and this in particular, is that it's extremely narrow minded and one sided. It leaves exactly zero room for compromise in what amounts to a thinly veiled, and extremely selfish demand. In posting what you did, you excluded a significantly large number of this fan base which DOESN'T CARE TO HAVE SOCIAL MEDIA IMPOSED ON IT.
Haven't you had enough of the joke fest that Simport has been since ST came out? If you think this sort of server reliability is bad now on EA's end, then multiply this problem some 8000 times to achieve the scale of what you're suggesting. Because that is what it would take to run Second Life.
And this http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Server_architecture
If you bothered to look at the Tech forum, you would notice that a significant number of simmers in this fan base either
1) lack high end gaming rigs, and/or
2) don't know how to keep their gaming system maintained with the latest hardware & software updates.
As a result, the game continues to run crappy on their systems. That forum is littered with threads where folks are complaining about how the game screwed up their system. Or how Simport sucks or doesn't work. But their dxdiags also indicate they only have 2-3GB RAM, or software drivers that date back to 2003, or a poor graphics card an/or CPU with computational & graphical abilities inferior to my smartphone :?
If the gaming systems of fans like these have so many hardware (and legitimate software bugs/coding) issues running the base game and the SP/EPs, do you really expect such computer systems to run on a server network? Without any freezing? Lag? CTD? :?
Do you have any idea what kind of problems it would cause?
1. Will your computer be able to run it?
2. How well will the game be managed?
3. What kind of trolls are you prepared to deal with?
Nuff said. We had that discussion countless times.
Do you have any idea of the problems you may have?
1. Is your computer equiped to handle it?
2. How will the game management be dealt with?
3. What kind of trolls are you prepared to deal with?
These were just a few of many questions.
My vote is a resounding no!
Sorry: Double post. I thought Liam ran off with the other one.
I never liked Second Life and only played it for a short time. IMHO Second Life is a glorified chat room (no offense to people who like it) whereas the Sims is a full on life simulation. I would rather play a life simulation game by myself than run around and chat with other people's avatars. I've said this in another post, but I'll say it again here. The sims is probably the best life simulation game out there right now. They basically have no competition in that genre. I don't think they should stop doing something that they do so well only to try to do something else where they would have tons of competition and end up losing loyal fans.
I'm tempted to ask what your job title with EA is and what it pays. If the money's right, I'm sure I could push their "everything must be an MMO because we're terrified of software piracy" agenda on internet forums. Any job you can do in your PJ's sounds like a nice gig.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s217TcAGDJ0
Yes it's 2012 and SL's graphic eye candy has long since evolved to being far better than this.
But First Life is far better, with superlative graphics any game could have.
The best part: your AVATAR actually gets to FEEL and experience an unlimited number of animations and real emotions too--for free!
Yes, I have a question. Why didn't you search this forum before you posted this? It would certainly have spared you a lot of grief.
As for the Sims Online, have you actually played it? I have, and as one of the founders who bought the game when it first came out, I can unashamedly say that The Sims Online sucked swampwater. The gameplay or lack of it was so bad and so boring that when it came time for me to decide whether to keep subscribing to Ultima Online and The Sims Online, I had no problem deciding to stay with UO and drop TSO like a hot potato.
So, I find it ironic that you think The Sims Online was a great start. It really wasn't. If Maxis had used Origin's template for USO and simply translated it into modern terms where Sims could actually travel from town to town, I daresay it would still be running today. I won't point out the many flaws of TSO; suffice it to say that it really did suck swampwater.
Besides, EA can't make The Sims 4 a clone of Second Life. Not, at least, without being sued by Linden Labs for copyright infringement.
"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 sims isn't the game for you if you want to go online. The sims is your own little world and its a personal, and I am VERY hostile when someone tries poking at my personal world where I make the rules and what I see as good and bad apply, where as someone else might not agree, well that is fantastic because they can apply it in the sims and we can both be happy
But let's face it I'm already a little bit hostile towards people so trying to stick other people in my world and play around, you can bet I am going to be EXTREMELY hostile. Sorry to say this but if you want online, don't you dare ruin the sims with your want for online! It has always been a single player game, sims online is different. It wasn't the game itself like sims 2, I would care less if sims 4 was normal than they had an online version but if you try to mess with my game, I will be very hostile and expect me to give you hell
this ^^ :!:
I can tell you now if sims 4 even thinks of being remotely like second life consider the series done. There is no way you're going to get casual gamers locked into playing sims like that let alone hardcore.
Let alone destroying the very ideals the game was based on. No longer would you be in god mode controlling what your sims does. You would be the actual avatar never aging looped into a repetitive game that now trippled in costs. Not only that but let's not forget the financial risks that users had with second life. Or the non teen environment that game creates, that bars a lot of children from playing the game EA can just forget about the teen rating that's for sure.
Also consider this, it puts sims game in competition with a game it never had competition with to begin with. Marketing would be crazy to sink the series like this, no i don't think they should make the mistake of making sims like another game. Sims should stay to what is unique about sims.
Is this your new way EA to get the response from us ? Then let me tell you, it's a BIG FAT NO :!:
The recent announcement of Simcity 5 included the online aspect. It was traditionally a single player game. The new one will require co-op between gamers. Too bad, that was a really fun game at one time.
I won't be buying that one, and apparently neither will many of the old city builders, from what I've been seeing and hearing.
If the sims 4 is like Second Life, then I won't be buying that either. If it is more like Spore, where it's online, but acts like a single player, then I will consider it.
I am not at all interested in meeting up with other simmers in the game. I can't even login now to our game, b/c I can't play and chat at the same time. It's too distracting. When I get a request to host someone's sims, I feel like I can't say no, b/c I'm being rude. So I stop what I'm doing and accept. I suppose it's my problem if I can't say no, but that's how I feel. I wish this concept was never introduced in the game. All my friends are very nice, and they are all fun, so I don't want them to feel bad reading this. I'm just not good at multitasking.