Home | Download | Discussion | Help | Site Map | New Posts | Sign in
Replies: 54 (Who?), Viewed: 10226 times.
Page 1 of 3
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#1 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 1:35 AM
Default Why does EA think we want social stuff in our games?
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?
Advertisement
Site Helper
#2 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 1:44 AM
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.
Lab Assistant
#3 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 1:49 AM
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....
Test Subject
#4 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 1:57 AM
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
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#5 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 2:16 AM
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.
Lab Assistant
#6 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 2:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.

Maxis is pretty crapping awesome. I wouldn't mind working for EA, though. Maybe I could give them better insight!
Field Researcher
#7 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 8:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.


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.

Click HERE please, so I can up the sweet sweet page count. Thanks!


"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." -Groucho Marx
Lab Assistant
#8 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 10:00 AM
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.
Scholar
#9 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 11:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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?


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.
Site Helper
#10 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 1:52 PM
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.

I am Ghost. My husband is sidneydoj. I post, he downloads, and I wanted to keep my post count.
Group for Avatar Makers* Funny Stories *Come visit Custom Sims 3!*2013 Yearbook
Lab Assistant
#11 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 2:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jthm_nny



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)

mjau
----------
Known as Elevinia on simscave and GoS
Lab Assistant
#12 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 4:11 PM
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.
Site Helper
#13 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 5:53 PM
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.
Field Researcher
#14 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 6:39 PM
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.

Life Stage: Teen Traits: Hopeless Romantic, Computer Whiz, Couch Potato, Shy Partner: Ted
School: High School Career: Writing; Fan Fiction Drafter Miscellaneous: Rich; Scorpio
Lab Assistant
#15 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 6:57 PM
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.
Test Subject
#16 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 7:14 PM
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.
Top Secret Researcher
#17 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 7:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lenne224
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.

Thanks to ALL free-site creators, admins and mods.
And all the maladies of the world burst forth from Pandora's cooch
#18 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 7:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by morphius1
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.
Lab Assistant
#19 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 8:14 PM
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.
Scholar
#20 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 8:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.


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

This is why we can never have nice things!
Scholar
#21 Old 6th Jun 2012 at 8:59 PM
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.

Life is short, insecurity is a waste of time. ~Diane Von Furstenburg

You don't get out of life alive. ~Jimmy the Hand
Lab Assistant
#22 Old 7th Jun 2012 at 12:16 AM
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.
Scholar
#23 Old 7th Jun 2012 at 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.


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.

Life is short, insecurity is a waste of time. ~Diane Von Furstenburg

You don't get out of life alive. ~Jimmy the Hand
Instructor
#24 Old 7th Jun 2012 at 3:26 AM
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.

♫ She's got sunset on her breath, I inhaled just a little bit now I got no fear of death ♫
Field Researcher
#25 Old 7th Jun 2012 at 3:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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!


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
Page 1 of 3
Back to top

Section jump