Why does EA think we want social stuff in our games?

[jthm_nny]

I'm not an anti-social person. I have a lot of friends in real life, all big nerds like me, but I honestly hate how EA thinks I want social stuff in my game. Sims was created to be a little world for you to play god. There is no ROOM for social stuff. It is meant to control everything, set things up a certain way, and watch how things go. I thought about how terrible a social Sims would be, as in if EA adds more social stuff for Sims 4.



My prediction of Sims 4:
Imagine this: you're walking one of your sims to meet a sim your setting him up with, when suddenly a guy from a different part of the country/world -let's say he's from Kentucky- comes up to some of your sims that live in the neighborhood, not the ones you're controlling, just the ones that come and go with all of their free-will. Kentucky Guy makes his sim flirt with Alexandra, a sim you made that day. Alexandra's husband Mark is right in front of her, but Kentucky Guy didn't know those sims were dating. Alexandra falls for him, and their adorable marriage is thrown away like a used kleenex simply because Kentucky Guy wanted to hit on other people's sims.

Meanwhile, a guy from Arkansas enters your game, looking for some trolling and some sims to beat up. He then starts terrorizing all of your sims while you try to sort out Alexandra and Mark's marriage. He beats up the rest of the members of your sims family and will not leave.

At the SAME TIME the sim you were controlling at first before the Alexandra/Mark/Kentucky guy problem is getting hit on my a gothic sim with fishnets controlled by a chick from Pennsylvania. But here's the thing....your sim you were playing-let's call him Donovan- is GAY and has been ever since you created him. Even though you were on your way the get him a boyfriend since he looked lonely, he decides he might as well be bisexual and fall in love with this woman.....when the other guy was supposed to be his boyfriend and you were going to make it a story to put on youtube!!!!!!

On top of all that, once you finally get EVERYTHING sorted, the next sim day you decide to walk your Donovan to work since he lives right in front of his job. Suddenly, a guy from who knows where walks up to Donovan and tries to chat with him about ALIENS of all things. Being a sim, Donovan stops what he was doing and has a long chat with this dude. Eventually Donovan is so late for work, he gets fired from his job. All because of that Alien dude.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure, EA MIGHT decide to keep this from happening....by allowing you to only play one sim the whole way through!!!!!!! Some of these things I said might not be possible, but I wouldn't say that because I have no idea what Sims 4 would be like. So yeah, Social stuff DOES NOT belong in the Sims. How do we convince EA otherwise?

[Mootilda]

They don't. They want an excuse to force people online, to prevent people from pirating games and buying used games. In addition, by making the game online, they can justify charging you a monthly fee, rather than a one-time fee. Plus, they can sell advertising in the game. It's a big win for them and a big lose for us, but it's the direction that game companies are going.

[SmexySims2]

I'm excited for the Elder Scrolls MMO. Even though what you said may be true, I think it might be different for different games! It's fun to go adventuring with people online! so long as people don't slay your monsters....

[lfria]

I agree with what you're saying. The problem though is that if people buy the games (ex:SHT) with social aspects in it, regardless if they like the social parts or not, EA is going to use that as proof to add more and more social aspects to the sims. Which makes me sad :(

[jthm_nny]

The sad thing is, I used to think I wanted to work for EA.....until I realized who I was loving the whole time was MAXIS and NOT EA.

[SmexySims2]

The sad thing is, I used to think I wanted to work for EA.....until I realized who I was loving the whole time was MAXIS and NOT EA.
Maxis is pretty crapping awesome. I wouldn't mind working for EA, though. Maybe I could give them better insight! :bunny:

[CeJaye]

They don't. They want an excuse to force people online, to prevent people from pirating games and buying used games. In addition, by making the game online, they can justify charging you a monthly fee, rather than a one-time fee. Plus, they can sell advertising in the game. It's a big win for them and a big lose for us, but it's the direction that game companies are going.

This, basically. EA hears that Facebook is worth a billion dollars, and all they see is $$$ and try to figure out how to get a piece of that action....they don't care that most simmers would rather play by themselves.

Look at Diablo 3; you must have an active internet connection, and you play on their servers, even if you're playing single player. Their servers go down? Tough, you don't get to play the game you shelled out $60 for until the servers are back up.

I doubt EA would ever go far enough to force you to play on their server with a single player game (well, maybe in 5-10 years if it gets more popular with other game companies and consumers keep buying the games. I love the Diablo series, but I decided not to get #3 because I didn't want to encourage this), but they are totally moving towards online/multi-player stuff.

The next Sim City game, for instance, will require you to be online. However, you won't be playing on their servers or anything, it will just send an occasional check in delayed intervals to make sure you're online, and there's greater multiplayer stuff then in previous Sims City games too. I'm 100% sure Sims 4 will have the same online check (for piracy prevention) and I'm about 45% sure it might have the Sim Social type stuff from the base game too, and maybe even in game ads.

[IzzyBess]

It's just fashionable now to share everything. Some people like to even tell you when they are going to the toilet. But forcing people to do it is just wrong. If I would like to share with you my sims, my stories or some pictures I can always go in eg. here, and post them on forums, upload sims, nhood's etc. But I do not have to do it and thats beautiful - I'm not pushed to use this possibility. Same should be for in game features - you can connect them to net, facebook etc but you don't have to and game shouldn't loose anything. I can understand forcing people to be connected for anti piracy checking, but only for this.


Funny fact - I'm not logged in while playing (mainly because I've got crappy wireless usb connection and limit amount of GB's per month) and still sometimes my magician sim wants to use SimPort.

[morphius1]

I'm not an anti-social person. I have a lot of friends in real life, all big nerds like me, but I honestly hate how EA thinks I want social stuff in my game. Sims was created to be a little world for you to play god. There is no ROOM for social stuff. It is meant to control everything, set things up a certain way, and watch how things go. I thought about how terrible a social Sims would be, as in if EA adds more social stuff for Sims 4.



My prediction of Sims 4:
Imagine this: you're walking one of your sims to meet a sim your setting him up with, when suddenly a guy from a different part of the country/world -let's say he's from Kentucky- comes up to some of your sims that live in the neighborhood, not the ones you're controlling, just the ones that come and go with all of their free-will. Kentucky Guy makes his sim flirt with Alexandra, a sim you made that day. Alexandra's husband Mark is right in front of her, but Kentucky Guy didn't know those sims were dating. Alexandra falls for him, and their adorable marriage is thrown away like a used kleenex simply because Kentucky Guy wanted to hit on other people's sims.

Meanwhile, a guy from Arkansas enters your game, looking for some trolling and some sims to beat up. He then starts terrorizing all of your sims while you try to sort out Alexandra and Mark's marriage. He beats up the rest of the members of your sims family and will not leave.

At the SAME TIME the sim you were controlling at first before the Alexandra/Mark/Kentucky guy problem is getting hit on my a gothic sim with fishnets controlled by a chick from Pennsylvania. But here's the thing....your sim you were playing-let's call him Donovan- is GAY and has been ever since you created him. Even though you were on your way the get him a boyfriend since he looked lonely, he decides he might as well be bisexual and fall in love with this woman.....when the other guy was supposed to be his boyfriend and you were going to make it a story to put on youtube!!!!!!

On top of all that, once you finally get EVERYTHING sorted, the next sim day you decide to walk your Donovan to work since he lives right in front of his job. Suddenly, a guy from who knows where walks up to Donovan and tries to chat with him about ALIENS of all things. Being a sim, Donovan stops what he was doing and has a long chat with this dude. Eventually Donovan is so late for work, he gets fired from his job. All because of that Alien dude.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure, EA MIGHT decide to keep this from happening....by allowing you to only play one sim the whole way through!!!!!!! Some of these things I said might not be possible, but I wouldn't say that because I have no idea what Sims 4 would be like. So yeah, Social stuff DOES NOT belong in the Sims. How do we convince EA otherwise?

Well, first, you can stop using "we" and use "I".
I, for one, do want social and think it's a great idea. And I also think EA would leave that option to the indivdual player, weather to enguage social in their game or not.
It's going to happen, I know that. When? Is the question.

[Ghost sdoj]

I don't want people whom I don't know in my sims game. I don't mind sharing one world with my husband, although that worked better in Sims 1 and 2 where I could come back and not find that I've lost a family because I like Epic lifespans and he doesn't.

I plan to vote against the social aspects with my pocketbook. I'm not buying anything that has them.

[Lenne224]

My prediction of Sims 4:
Imagine this: you're walking one of your sims to meet a sim your setting him up with, when suddenly a guy from a different part of the country/world -let's say he's from Kentucky- comes up to some of your sims that live in the neighborhood, not the ones you're controlling, just the ones that come and go with all of their free-will. Kentucky Guy makes his sim flirt with Alexandra, a sim you made that day. Alexandra's husband Mark is right in front of her, but Kentucky Guy didn't know those sims were dating. Alexandra falls for him, and their adorable marriage is thrown away like a used kleenex simply because Kentucky Guy wanted to hit on other people's sims.

Meanwhile, a guy from Arkansas enters your game, looking for some trolling and some sims to beat up. He then starts terrorizing all of your sims while you try to sort out Alexandra and Mark's marriage. He beats up the rest of the members of your sims family and will not leave.

At the SAME TIME the sim you were controlling at first before the Alexandra/Mark/Kentucky guy problem is getting hit on my a gothic sim with fishnets controlled by a chick from Pennsylvania. But here's the thing....your sim you were playing-let's call him Donovan- is GAY and has been ever since you created him. Even though you were on your way the get him a boyfriend since he looked lonely, he decides he might as well be bisexual and fall in love with this woman.....when the other guy was supposed to be his boyfriend and you were going to make it a story to put on youtube!!!!!!

On top of all that, once you finally get EVERYTHING sorted, the next sim day you decide to walk your Donovan to work since he lives right in front of his job. Suddenly, a guy from who knows where walks up to Donovan and tries to chat with him about ALIENS of all things. Being a sim, Donovan stops what he was doing and has a long chat with this dude. Eventually Donovan is so late for work, he gets fired from his job. All because of that Alien dude.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure, EA MIGHT decide to keep this from happening....by allowing you to only play one sim the whole way through!!!!!!! Some of these things I said might not be possible, but I wouldn't say that because I have no idea what Sims 4 would be like. So yeah, Social stuff DOES NOT belong in the Sims. How do we convince EA otherwise?

If this were to happen, wouldent the person that gets other simmers in their game, have to host a server of some sort? Either hosted by EA or a local person.
I might sound stupid, but I have never ever heard of a game where you can just enter a persons game unless it was chosen by the player itself to host or on a online server.

Even Diablo 3 have the option to turn that of, and you can chose to be in a public game or just alone, or just with friends, inviting them to your game, or them inviting you to theirs. (Used diablo 3 since its a game you can chose to do with more than yourself, or just you alone, but it still has social option)

[ksstrek]

Actually, your scenario sounds like much of what happened in TSO. The Sims Online. I played it and for a while it was lots of fun. made some friends and had some real laughs. Then some folks started making gangs and under the pretense of joining a household, would destroy and disfigure a carefully built and tended group endeavor. There were some immature players who also seemed to take delight in creating drama and causing grief, and disrupting the activities of a household when they went into the lot.

Other aspects that EA added to the game started to make it less fun too. they started adding too many requirements for friendship for example. In the beginnging, you could declare someone your friend and that was the end of it. After a while they added a patch that made continued interaction with that sim for the friendship to continue, and the friendship quality determined what type of simlish interactions you could have. If your online friend was absent from the game for a while, your friendship diminished.

[Mootilda]

Another advantage (to EA) of forced online is that you won't be able to continue to play an outdated version of the game when the next one is released. If Sims 2 was forced online, we wouldn't have the option to continue to play Sims 2 rather than Sims 3.

[SpookyOkyBatGirl]

I'm not anti-social either. My idea is that I will go out and socialize when I damn well please. Otherwise, I want to play my video games in PEACE, alone. Not to mention, most of the people on my Facebook (I don't add people I haven't met before) are actually people that I just don't want to fucking game with. If I want to talk/socialize as I game (whether Sims, Skyrim, or even Neopets), I know how to pick up a phone, start my Skype or sign onto my Xbox Live.

[Generis]

yeuk... if they turn the sims from private personal life simulation game into a online-social game I am definitely going to call it quits with the franchise. I definitely don't want to deal with social networking, online cliques and griefers in a private and personal game.

[Makai447]

I'm pretty annoyed with EA for that reason too. Mostly because I stopped playing TS3 for a few years, just because life got in the way, I come back to the game, and all of a sudden I start getting all these notifications I don't know what to do with. At first the memories thing seemed kind of cute, but it got so annoying so fast! No, every time my sim goes to the park to play guitar and earn some tips I do not need the notification that they're making a memory at the park, and I do NOT always want to share it. I had to turn it off. I prefer to play not logged in just because it's sooooo annoying. And I don't honestly know who would want to read all those random updates anyway. If I have a story I want to share I'll construct it into a story, which at least someone might care about.

I doubt very much any of my facebook friends will ever care that one of my sims got a new job as an organ donor. No, thanks.

Also, I HATE the idea of anything that forces people to be online to play (unless it is something like TSO, which is obviously the point but imho a completely different game than the one I want from normal The Sims games). Partially because my new apartment has absolutely no internet still, and I've been mooching it from public places every time I need to check my e-mail, etc. And even when I do have internet, I often don't have a steady connection.

As far as piracy goes, that is the absolutely worst way to combat it. For me personally, I'd be much more inclined to pirate something if the company was so obnoxious about forcing me not to. I mean, they wanna take my money, and find some way to annoy the crap out of me. Nope! But maybe I'm just anti-authoritarian.

I always hated the idea of the sims 3 store and stuff packs too, though. Not because it's not convenient to download stuff online, just because I hate how it's built to get SO much money from you for stuff that I usually don't like as much as custom content other people have made, anyway. I've preferred simmer-made content ever since The Sims 1, when I was allowed to borrow my friend's subscription to TSR to download some awesome things, and I probably always will prefer to support them, too.

[gazania]

If this were to happen, wouldent the person that gets other simmers in their game, have to host a server of some sort? Either hosted by EA or a local person.
I might sound stupid, but I have never ever heard of a game where you can just enter a persons game unless it was chosen by the player itself to host or on a online server.

Even Diablo 3 have the option to turn that of, and you can chose to be in a public game or just alone, or just with friends, inviting them to your game, or them inviting you to theirs. (Used diablo 3 since its a game you can chose to do with more than yourself, or just you alone, but it still has social option)

My thoughts as well.

There IS a right way to do this sort of game, and that is to leave it up to the PLAYER whether he or she wants to play alone or with the general public, or with a user-selected group. There. People are happy.

But why do I think that EA is going to go about this bass-ackwards?

What was so beautiful about Sims 1 and 2 was the user-created custom content as much as the game.. I do wish EA got a wake-up call about that. I play Sims Social .... like it, in fact ... but I do miss the ability to download FREE custom content, and haven't been addicted to it nearly as much as the PC Sims 2.

Sad part was that once upon a time, EA "had" me. I bought every expansion (up to Seasons) ... some new, some used ... but there WERE two or three new ones in the lot. I would have bought every expansion since then, if EA didn't do the Suckurom v. 7 route. Then, they lost me. When I saw all the cool custom content for BV, I really did want to buy that expansion.

I was interested in Sims 3, until I read that my video card, which was actually pretty new at the tme (it HAS been a few years), was not playing nicely with it, and STILL haven't read that the problem was ever resolved. And limiting meshing restricted a lot of new content, though I tip my hat to so many creators who worked around it.

EA had a good thing for a while there, but its greed and meddling is taking what was once a fun game and ruining it. I long for the day when we see a PC game that would take on the Sims easily. Unfortunately, PC games are going out of fashion.

[ButchSims]

And I also think EA would leave that option to the indivdual player, weather to enguage social in their game or not. You have more optimism than I do. Most of the social features that are in the current game still impact the game, even when you use mods to completely shut them off. I stopped memories from even forming first thing. My Sims always get wishes to simport (and bribing people into using it by offering unlockable items seems kinda skeevey to me) And even if I had wanted to log in to my account while playing, I couldn't, because of an issue with their server not recognizing my login info. It claims it is invalid, even when it is not. If I needed to be logged in to play, the hundreds of dollars I have spent buying the game and it's expansions would have just went down the toilet. Not to mention the fact that all those files are still in my computer, whether they are being used or ignored.

As for the "trying to stop Piracy" line, I think EA is really selling those who crack the game short. All it would take is someone setting up a server of their own to host pirated games, or even bypass that requirement altogether. I would never play a cracked game myself, but I'm sure plenty of others would.

[DuskTrooper]

Y'know after reading all of these posts, I begin to realize that the quality of video games have greatly decreased in the last 10 years.

[zigersimmer]

Actually, your scenario sounds like much of what happened in TSO. The Sims Online. I played it and for a while it was lots of fun. made some friends and had some real laughs. Then some folks started making gangs and under the pretense of joining a household, would destroy and disfigure a carefully built and tended group endeavor. There were some immature players who also seemed to take delight in creating drama and causing grief, and disrupting the activities of a household when they went into the lot.

Other aspects that EA added to the game started to make it less fun too. they started adding too many requirements for friendship for example. In the beginnging, you could declare someone your friend and that was the end of it. After a while they added a patch that made continued interaction with that sim for the friendship to continue, and the friendship quality determined what type of simlish interactions you could have. If your online friend was absent from the game for a while, your friendship diminished.

And TSO worked out so well that quite naturally it makes a lot of sense to repeat that mistake. Am I right?

[lisfyre]

You're a little late to the party I think. We had this huge debate when SHT was announced with people up in arms over Simport. People swore they would not be buying this piece of tripe - I didn't and won't. I suggested that if EA wanted another TSO, to just go ahead and make that game again so we sandbox players could keep our game and stay offline. Just to clarify, I love MMO's and play 4 of them at the moment but I am opposed to my one and only SANDBOX game going online. When that happens, I'm done with Sims.

[Sunshine021]

I'll stop buying The Sims [insert number here] when the online options are... well, no longer an option and the game forces you to sign online to play it. We are not forced to use Simport or any of the online features (though it's stupid that said features exist in the first place), so I'll probably just continue to not login to anything through my game and just continue to play it, and buy whatever I think would be a good fit for my collection.

That said, I think the entire social networking platform (Facebook, Pintrest, ect.) just needs to hurry up and die, already.

[lisfyre]

I'll stop buying The Sims [insert number here] when the online options are... well, no longer an option and the game forces you to sign online to play it. We are not forced to use Simport or any of the online features (though it's stupid that said features exist in the first place), so I'll probably just continue to not login to anything through my game and just continue to play it, and buy whatever I think would be a good fit for my collection.

That said, I think the entire social networking platform (Facebook, Pintrest, ect.) just needs to hurry up and die, already.

I also pick and choose what Sims games I get. Obviously I didn't get Pets and SHT and I won't be getting EP7. I don't log into Origin or my game unless I need to like when buying stuff off the Store. For some reason, I need to be logged into Origin, The Sims 3 Official Site and my launcher in order to get anything at the store. No, I don't buy store items in-game - I refuse!!!

As far as the entire social networking craze - that's not going to die anytime soon. And to be honest, I don't have a problem with those sites since I use them but not for my Sims game ever.

[piggypeach]

You have a great point, all of you.

At first, EA was probably like, "won't everyone think it's cool to be able to travel to other people's worlds?" and THEN they were probably like, "hey, it'll make us money! lets do it!"
Because I mean, when I heard about the idea of simport, I was like, woah that sounds cool!

But, everything social about the game so far SUCKS.

[clay4kelly]

You have a great point, all of you.

At first, EA was probably like, "won't everyone think it's cool to be able to travel to other people's worlds?" and THEN they were probably like, "hey, it'll make us money! lets do it!"
Because I mean, when I heard about the idea of simport, I was like, woah that sounds cool!

I think it was the other way round. At first EA thought "hey, it'll make us money! lets do it!" and then they justified it by "won't everyone think it's cool to be able to travel to other people's worlds?"

That'd be the correct order in my opinion.
$ > fun

[Ive]

I flipped because of the social integration in SHT and the likes. But as long as they are optional to use, I am semi ok with it for now.

If EA made TS4 so that it was TSO with one sim and the rest is out of your control with no sandbox, instead of a regular sims game, then I would be laughing so hard. I know it's cool to hate on EA and all, but they are not that stupid.

[Tasselcat]

In addition to the '$$$ = progress > fun gaming' that everyone has theorized already, methinks that EA is trying to shmooze their younger demographics. Kids and teens love the games, they live on social networking, and they have very little reservation in showing the whole world what they do every minute of every day. (Granted, there are adults like this, too, but they're probably just as likely to buy Katy Perry merchandise as the kids.)

I, however, have things in my game that I'd rather not share with my parents, acquaintances, and future bosses. If 'Share this!' was a real button, it would be shrapnel by now. I do not 'Share!' well.

I don't think it will be as bad as all you explained, though. EA is many things and one of them is idiotic about their fans, but probably not idiotic enough to do away with the sandbox base of the Sims.
That would be like the Final Fantasy franchise suddenly coming out with a gritty first-person shooter game. Ridiculous, not what is expected of the series, and ultimately a franchise killer.

[SuicidiaParasidia]

I flipped because of the social integration in SHT and the likes. But as long as they are optional to use, I am semi ok with it for now.

If EA made TS4 so that it was TSO with one sim and the rest is out of your control with no sandbox, instead of a regular sims game, then I would be laughing so hard. I know it's cool to hate on EA and all, but they are not that stupid.

my only problem with it, being as it is entirely optional at this point in time, is that for the players who dont want to use it and never do...its just a waste of CPU space. could be better filled with mods. :C

[Ive]

I don't use it either. I constantly end up typing 1333124213211 in the box by accident.

[jthm_nny]

In addition to the '$$$ = progress > fun gaming' that everyone has theorized already, methinks that EA is trying to shmooze their younger demographics. Kids and teens love the games, they live on social networking, and they have very little reservation in showing the whole world what they do every minute of every day. (Granted, there are adults like this, too, but they're probably just as likely to buy Katy Perry merchandise as the kids.)

I, however, have things in my game that I'd rather not share with my parents, acquaintances, and future bosses. If 'Share this!' was a real button, it would be shrapnel by now. I do not 'Share!' well.

I don't think it will be as bad as all you explained, though. EA is many things and one of them is idiotic about their fans, but probably not idiotic enough to do away with the sandbox base of the Sims.
That would be like the Final Fantasy franchise suddenly coming out with a gritty first-person shooter game. Ridiculous, not what is expected of the series, and ultimately a franchise killer.

If EA things their doing what their younger fans want they are horribly mistaken. I wonder how many of my fellow 14/15 year olds HATE this...I obviously do.

[crocobaura]

They don't. They want an excuse to force people online, to prevent people from pirating games and buying used games. In addition, by making the game online, they can justify charging you a monthly fee, rather than a one-time fee. Plus, they can sell advertising in the game. It's a big win for them and a big lose for us, but it's the direction that game companies are going.

Didn't they have Sims Online and it flopped? Personally, I think it's a conspiracy set up by the internet providers. They want traffic, more traffic.

[zigersimmer]

I flipped because of the social integration in SHT and the likes. But as long as they are optional to use, I am semi ok with it for now.

If EA made TS4 so that it was TSO with one sim and the rest is out of your control with no sandbox, instead of a regular sims game, then I would be laughing so hard. I know it's cool to hate on EA and all, but they are not that stupid.

I disagree.

[SommarBlomma]

I may be wrong, but sometimes it seems to me that EA don't really have a clue to what their customers really want. They probably thought that it would be cool to introduce those social features because of 2 reasons:
1) too many people now share all kinds of crap in social networks,
2) there are a lot of simsgames communities where players share their stories, pics, content, etc., and discuss the game

So they probably thought, hey, they'd be crazy about the possibility to travel to other ppl's worlds, share memories, etc, we'll get a lot ofmoney out of it. But even if the idea itself is not bad, it didn't work out so well. Simport causes a lot of issues if you and the person whom you sent your sims to, or who sends sims to you, uses CC, plus those sims are stored in the sim bin, etc. However, as long as social features are optional, I don't complain, I just don't log into my sims3 community account, and turn off the store content ads, and play like I used to, before the social crap was introduced.

However, if social features, all those travels to other players' games, become necessary to achieve, let's say, some goals in the game (like accomplishing LTWs or getting some career promotions), now, that will be a reason to worry. Hope EA won't come up with such lame ideas.

[Purplepaws]

Seems like everything is moving towards "social" nowadays. EA sees this as an opportunity to increase traffic to their site, thereby reaching more customers through advertising and generating more sales. The Sims IS NOT a social game at its heart, nor does it need to be, but EA simply doesn't care about preserving the integrity of the series, and will willingly whore it out for the highest potential profit.

I'm just glad it's an optional feature, something I don't envision for TS4, which is probably why I'll stick to TS3 until newer technology can no longer play it.

[Shalom]

I've been a longtime SimCity player, and I was extremely disappointed to read about the new one having to always be online. It also made me very pessimistic that Sims 4 will require you to be online, too. I don't mind the online features, but I DO mind having to be online. Sims and SimCity are single player games, and I really don't have much interest in what other people are doing. I play logged out because the spam from other people sharing memories and Simporting gets really annoying - the popup spam from my own Sims is bad enough!

I agree that they want to limit pirating, reduce the resale/preowned market, and of course they want to get in on the social network thing. I don't mind the social features as long as they can be turned off and do not hurt the "heart" of the game, the sandbox type play, but I resent being forced to be online. The main problem I have with forced online is that when EA pulls the plug, you can't play your game anymore. And they will, sooner or later. I'm sure that with a game as popular as The Sims it wouldn't be for many years, but eventually. I like playing old games for nostalgia (I have Sims 1 and SC3K on my laptop) and honestly, I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on a game, EPs, and SPs that will eventually be unplayable. That's why I'm not getting this new SimCity even though it looks like it's going to be a good game.

I don't think they'll go the route of online fees for games like The Sims and SimCity; I think it's more likely that they're going to push the store/downloadable content instead. I don't like the idea of paying $16 for a casino and even stuff packs are overpriced in my opinion, so I stay away from all that. I could maybe see them putting in some sort of optional monthly recurring fee that allows you to download all the store content that's released each month (or something along those lines), but I don't see them ever putting in a monthly fee just to play. Sims Online was a pretty big failure, I think. I played it when it first came out and it was fun for awhile, but like many others I got bored before very long. Part of the problem was that since it was online, you couldn't ever speed up time, so when your Sim was sitting there reading a skill book, you had to sit there and just watch. Of course, the idea was that players would chat while that was going on, but the reality was that people more often just went afk or minimized the game. I think they eventually added jobs that you could go to and other stuff to make the game more fun, but I had quit playing by that point. I did get Showtime and I used Simport a little bit; the novelty was fun for awhile but it got boring very quickly.

This is a little off topic but personally, I kind of resent the whole "Facebookization" of the internet and even the real world. Sometimes I want to shut off my cell phone and my internet connection and play Sims and just be left the frick alone, but you always have people getting their knickers in a twist if you don't answer a text message within 5 minutes or if you don't check your email/facebook for a couple days. I have absolutely no interest in having people nag me in my Sims game, too. I also think that having the option to upload memories to facebook is 100% ridiculous. I seriously can't imagine posting to your whole friends list that your Sim just reached level one in mechanical skill from unclogging a toilet, or even that your Sim reached level 10 in a career track.

I'm not opposed to all social games though, I play an MMO and love it, but for me Sims has always been single player with no NEED to connect to the internet. An OPTION that can be disabled, sure, but I shouldn't be FORCED to have an internet connection. But EA has said that the new SimCity is designed "from the ground-up for multiplayer" and that “In this day and age everyone’s connected all the time, so we felt like it was the perfect time and it would be fine to do that," so I'm afraid they're going to go that direction for Sims 4, too. (Source: http://www.vg247.coma/2012/05/09/maxis-simcity-built-from-the-ground-up-for-multiplayer/ )

[ButchSims]

But EA has said that the new SimCity is designed "from the ground-up for multiplayer" and that “In this day and age everyone’s connected all the time, so we felt like it was the perfect time and it would be fine to do that," so I'm afraid they're going to go that direction for Sims 4, too. (Source: http://www.vg247.coma/2012/05/09/maxis-simcity-built-from-the-ground-up-for-multiplayer/ ) Typical EA spin at work. Not everyone is connected all the time, and certainly not on a desktop computer. Even a laptop can be forced offline with spotty wi-fi. They have their own reasons for making Simcity the way it is, but they are forced to put a positive spin on it. What is worse is that some people will fall for it, hook, line, and sinker.

[J. M. Pescado]

The problem with online games is that if they're online and multiplayer, you have to deal with people like me, who are determined to crush you like a bug beneath our shiny black boots. Even, and especially if, it involves destroying any semblance of fun from the game. Because I'm Pescado, and I hate fun. When I'm just crushing the AI beneath my shiny black boot, you don't feel this pain. When I'm crushing YOU, you'll like me a hell of a lot less. Of the "Killer" archetypes, I am probably your least favorite: The kind that will come up with entirely new, unheard of ways of killing you that will blow your game paradigm out of the sky much like I blow YOU out of the sky. Not only will I kill you, I will do SCIENCE to you.

[alisha99]

Its a joke ain't it:!::!: :rolleyes: :| :faceslap:

[Nvenya]

Reminds me of the hacker problems with Diablo 3.

[zigersimmer]

Because I'm Pescado, and I hate fun.
In Soviet Russia, fun hates you.

[lovevslust]

That's another thing. They want to 'stop' piracy. Well I'm sorry to be the damper on their shiny money day, but nothing in this world is 'un'hackable. The world would be no fun if people followed the rules all the time.
So, in light of saying that, I cannot actually wait for them to release a totally online sims 4 game. Mainly, because I can't wait to see someone totally crash their servers with the old classic threat of, "turn off the social interactions you mofos." From one pissed off sims 2/3 player.
It's bound to happen. Then EA will have to come up with a motto that doesn't pertain to their greedy palms to stop the riots outside their sunny California base.

[SuicidiaParasidia]

I may be wrong, but sometimes it seems to me that EA don't really have a clue to what their customers really want.

why exactly would they be willing to listen to what their customers want when they can simply send out a poll with pigeonholing options and base their future screw-ups on that information alone? (youll notice that last poll about what we wanted simply didnt include an option for whatever it was that EA didn't want to hear us say.) their attitude is not one of "so what is it you want from us?", its one of "how can we make you dance to our tune?", because quite frankly, consumers lack the backbone to say "youve got it backwards".
ive seen plenty of people rage and throw fits about how much sims 3 sucks and how EA sucks for making it suck, only to have it added at the end of their rant that they're still going to keep buying the latest additions to the game.

money talks.
if people want EA to listen, wallets need to close, first.

[lovevslust]

Yes, if they don't get a weather ep and stop the social interactions with stupid facebook. I'm done with them, I didn't even look twice at Showtime. Because I knew it sucked.
Godsdamnit EA! I just want an isolated, epic game to play while I think about doing what I should be doing. That's it...I'm going back to my Skyrim and elderscrolls....at least that game and others for that system don't ask for online sh*t...and try to weasle me in...as much.

[Elphiron]

To be honest, I started out gaming exclusively on my gameboy as a wee kiddo, and literally none of my friends had one. They just didn't do 'that' kind of thing. So every game had multiplayer options back then, I could never even complete a pokemon game, so I've come to expect and tolerate it. I wasn't surprised about it featuring in the sims 3, but the extent that it does, irritates me. I mean how much am I paying for in showtime, stuff that I will NEVER use. I literally don't know anyone who plays the sims 3 at all.
When I'm sitting cross legged in front of my computer, mug of tea in hand, that is my special gaming time. Whether it's Skyrim, battlefield, oblivion, morrowind, or the sims, it's my time. Why would I want a load of people all joining in?!

[DigitalSympathies]

For me, I'm antisocial as well. I hated the DS (oh, punny, ain't I) because I couldn't play any of the games I liked without getting prompts to fill out my sheets (I believe it was Pokemon that I was playing) by connecting to other people, so I went and stuck with my GBA all the way through up until even today. (And yes, I lost my connector cord for it. Sigh.) I'm on vacation right now, village hopping, and I even brought it with me. I get a few looks, but hey.

Main point being here is that I don't want other people invading my own personal me time. I get very little (I spend most of my simming time also doing software installations and answering the phone, or playing with my boyfriend's son) and honestly, I don't want other people keeping me down. That's why I quit WoW. I might get D3 because it's pretty much social without being too intense, but for now, I'm content with TS2 and Pokemon Red, tvym.

[Issie]

Sims online was horrible really. I never finished my first month of play (actually I think I bought it back then with a special of 3 months free?) and it flopped bigtime anyways.

Any single player games out there that require you to be online to play them wont be getting a single cent out of me.

Oh and Pescado, I knew we could rely on you.

[DigitalSympathies]

Funny, I loved TSO . . . I only got to it when it was EA Land, but that was one of the few online games I truly enjoyed.

[Petchy]

There is no denying that games are getting more socially swayed - lots of the shoot-em-up games that were the best sellers of the previous years have all had a firm hand in being "social", that's why you get "Gamer Speak", it's why the tools in your school all talk about COD and WOW and all talk about it together and Zombie mode and nuking some noobs.. all that fun. EA's trying to ease its way into that market, it's not ridiculous for them to try. Heck, WE'RE being sociable aren't we? There has always been an Exchange/BBS board, the creators are just tying to make it easier /for that sort of player/.

[Lunar Eclipse]

The world is into that sort of social online thing ATM. I have played the franchise since "The Sims 1" launched. I understand what EA is trying to do, but you don't have to do it! The game is still a solo game. You do not need to talk or chat with people, or use the official website. You can choose to play offline. :3 It's just an extra feature to encourage younger/newer players.

I would not worry too much. Your "online" prediction was tried and failed already. They tried to make a fully online version of "The Sims" in 2002. It was "The Sims Online" and it was a MASSIVE failure! (LOL I bought it because I was a tardo and was mad). It lasted barely a year before the servers shut down. Everyone was so upset that they could not bring their game mods online (Game rating would be increased to 18+ crazy with all the nudity, foul language on t-shits, and the adult mods people used). Yes, having the little chat features and stuff is an extra to make money for greedy EA, but you don't need to use it. EA understands that the modding community is of huge importance to their sales. They cannot make a fully online game without sacrificing the modders, just like Elder Scrolls. Modding has been a huge part of "The Sims" franchise since day one! So I don't think you really need to worry. :) Just don't click the "go online" button when you play. :)

[LaylaRox]

In addition to the '$$$ = progress > fun gaming' that everyone has theorized already, methinks that EA is trying to shmooze their younger demographics. Kids and teens love the games, they live on social networking, and they have very little reservation in showing the whole world what they do every minute of every day.

I'm not one of those teenagers. I do have social networking, like every other teenager, yet I hardly ever update my Facebook status. I do not give a cr*p about Katy Perry or whatever. So I'm one of those who hates the social aspect that EA's turning to.

With games which require you to be online are somewhat troubling. What if you're playing a PC game in a hotel room which requires you to pay for WiFi? What if your internet is down? I will be disappointed if Sims goes into the 'requires active internet connection' thing, my internet can be fussy and not work some days so I play Sims to pass time.

[crocobaura]

Heck, WE'RE being sociable aren't we? There has always been an Exchange/BBS board, the creators are just tying to make it easier /for that sort of player/.

And yet, you don't do on the Exchange/BBS board to socialize, do you?
Anyway, I think it's a bad move on their part because with this kind of online games you don't really play but grind to achieve skill points and money to buy whatever, whereas most people who play offline tend to pay attention to details like sim expressions, their relationships, unexpected behaviours and usually speed up through the skilling parts. In the end it will just lose favour with a lots of players.

[Honeywell]

With games which require you to be online are somewhat troubling. What if you're playing a PC game in a hotel room which requires you to pay for WiFi? What if your internet is down? I will be disappointed if Sims goes into the 'requires active internet connection' thing, my internet can be fussy and not work some days so I play Sims to pass time.They don't care if you can play the games just that you buy them. It's why their customer support is so terrible and I'd guess it's part of the reason why features from one pack don't work with another. They're only interested in putting enough in the game to get you to buy it, how the game actually plays when you get it is inconsequential at that point and any time and money spent on fixing bugs and improving the game is seen as an expense that eats into the profits and has no value.

Purely conjecture on my part but that's the way they act. Every "cost effective" decision they've made over the years is the equivalent of them taking a dump on their brand name--at some point enough people will stop buying their shit until they're forced to polish up the old EA turd. One can hope anyway.

[alyzabeth1990]

Look at Diablo 3; you must have an active internet connection, and you play on their servers, even if you're playing single player. Their servers go down? Tough, you don't get to play the game you shelled out $60 for until the servers are back up.

I

You know how you fix that? BUY the game (or maybe not to show them DRM does NOT work) and go on a site and download another version of the EXE to start the game. I wasn't too specific on the terms just in case what I would say would be 'bad' on this site.

I have similar problems with Skyrim. I bought the game but I am UNABLE to download the 100 mb patches since the only option of Internet access at home is dial-up. :( Since Bethesda will not release manual versions of patches for the losers like me, when I'm at school, I have to download the patch through alternative methods.

[virgalibabe]

Not buying is always the best way to go. I would advice people to send a nice snail-mail letter telling them why you didn't buy it as well. Because they are ready to blame pirating for their low sales instead of taking any responsibility for their actions. It can't possibly be that they are making shitty products that nobody wants to buy, oh no, it's never THEIR fault. So you need to rub their noses in it until it's so far up their nostrils it'll tickle their brains. SALES ARE DOWN BECAUSE YOU MAKE SHITTY OVERPRICED STUFF!

It's not as if it's anything you need like food and a roof above you head. The gaming industry will go in the shitter because gamers buy games like other people buy food or worse like crack. Things aren't going to get better because no matter what they do, people are still buying the games.

[Roomie]

I wouldn't mind having other players come to my as long as i got to have a say. Also if their was a way to allow me to talk with this new player entering my game that would be cool. That way i could tell them what sims were off limits, which ones he/she could have, etc. There are pros and cons with the idea of allowing players to enter each other's games.