Talk:The Sims 3/Archive 1

File:Sims 3 House construction.jpg

Why is my house picture being removed? Someone said it messed up the article, but I don't think it did. Sorry if I'm being clueless. --Cmputer 20:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

That someone is me. In journalism, it is OK to push a portion of text of a single paragraph to include a picture, but it must not exceed it. Not only this picture exceeds a paragraph, but it completely exceeds multiple sections. This is what I meant by "screwing up the layout of the article". You'll never see this in a newspaper, book, magazine, etc. because it's visually disturbing.

Still, the picture is too tall. You can't really put it anywhere without using most of the article's height, unless you force it to be like 40 pixels high, but then we couldn't see anything! :) -- Lyverbe (talk) 02:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I understand. --Cmputer 00:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Mac OS X

Somebody has put the Mac OS in the OS area of the infobox as well as the opening paragraph. If I don't see a citation, I am GOING to remove it. I googled, and nothing came up. Johnnywalterboy (talk) 00:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

If you are going to delete the Mac OS of the platform section at least consider this. Aspyr have supported The Sims 1 and 2 in making the game and all of its expansions format for Mac. Why would you think they wouldn't make The Sims 3. A game that has sold 100 million copies. format for mac. The reason the Mac OS hasn't been confirmed is that the producers are only worrying about the Windows version of the game and they pay Aspyr to format the game for the Mac. That is also why the Mac version comes out 2 - 3 months after the Windows version. And a few months ago people didn't have much to go on when they said Windows was a platform for the game. EA never confirmed it. for all we knew it could have only been for linux (lol). But that was not the case because people went with what was strongly believed to be true. And Mac is. Look at the history for the game if you still can't comprehend.--121.220.158.52 (talk) 15:18, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I seconed that because The Sims series are a pretty popular game sequel. It would be more than likely they will have a Mac formated version of the game. If you look at The Sims 2, all of their games (not the stuff packs) have a Mac version for them. Same with The Sims 1. --58.169.218.147 (talk) 04:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Least it's more trusworthy than putting iPhone, Ngage 2.0 & Playstation 3. I can't believe you alowed that to be there in that infobox for months on this article but not accept Mac OS X as being in there.--121.220.139.235 (talk) 14:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Someone just put iPhone back on the platforms infobox. You would think if they are having the game on the iPhone that the there would definately be a Mac version.--139.168.218.71 (talk) 19:33, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I added iPhone to the platforms infobox. I added a press release as a source/citation. I have to agree that unless there is a press release by EA or Aspyr or anyone else that Mac OS X needs to stay out of the platforms. And just because TS3 will be on iPhone doesn't mean it will be on Mac; EA has released Scrabble, Sudoku, and SimCity on iPhone, but they aren't present on Mac OS X. Wakka092 (talk) 00:42, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

It's true, Aspyr has done this in the past versions. And, if it's going to Apple iPhone. But this is Wikipedia! For something like platforms, you NEED acitation. If it's SO likely that The Sims 3 will be for Mac OS X, you should have no problem citing a source! Johnnywalterboy (talk) 08:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Needs

The original Sims 3 article said that only 4 sims needs will be returning. However, this has been proven incorrect by Snooty Sims, who even have a screen shot on it . I am not sure where this information was gathered from? (JoshB (talk) 17:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC))

Snooty Sims is a Fan Site and should not be used as a source whether the information is true or not. Dark verdant (talk) 09:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, in the Sims 2 disscussion it said Snootysims is a reliable source 82.33.125.160 (talk) 15:19, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Even if SnootySims IS reliable, wikipedia has a strict policy on fansites, and that is that they CAN NOT serve as citations. Johnnywalterboy (talk) 00:42, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

That's what I said in the "Snooty Sims" section below, but it seems I was the only one in favor of removing all "Snooty Sims" citations (and related statements). That's why I left it there. -- Lyverbe (talk) 14:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Name of the developer

I have seen the name of the developer changed many times, but they still use the same source, a record from gamestop listing the developer as EA Redwood Shores. Either the name or the source needs to be changed, because they don't match up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.192.28.83 (talk) 13:44, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

It's a constant debate regarding EA workplaces. Same goes for "EA Vancouver" vs. "EA Blackbox". Many EA related pages have this issue between Wikipedian. -- Lyverbe (talk) 13:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Contribute = Deletion

If you ever help The Sims 3 article on Wikipedia , your infomation will get deleted at some stage within a month. I have reserched more information then the users that think they can control wikipedia (the people that delete your information i shall say). you provide a citation, no it will still get deleted. you put infomation in that is confirmed , um no still deleted. even if its something everybody knows about the game? Deleted!

Another thing why is half the article gone?? it just disappeared ! well whats the point of contributing to this article then when all the infomation will get deleted?? If those people that think they can control wikipedia know enough about The Sims 3 they can write the whole thing themselves. If it wern't for the people that contributed to this article, there would be hardly a thing on it. Just be cautious , ok, because only 1/5 of what u wrote will still be ther in a month, thats if its even there.

One last thing there is a wikipedian that knows nothing about The Sims 3 yet he has an award for being a good editor. Great another person that can delete information that gives a vague reason to detete the information.

It's not really worth the effort to write anything about The Sims 3 , well the good thing is that it stays there for a couple of hours or days.

Good on you Wikipedia , you encourage people to contribute. Yet the users that have been there for years abuse there privelages and delete your information, even if a citation is provided, even if its true, even if its well known, even if its confirmed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.92.142 (talk) 19:48, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

There are many reasons why this can happen. The main reason is because of Wikipedia rules (is this allowed? is this following the standards? is this a personal opinion? is this really related to the article?). Other reasons are repetitiveness (has it already been mentionned in the article?), source realibility (in my opinion, SnootySims has never been categorized as a reliable source because it's a fanpage), unecessary information (I still hate the 'Game Editions' table), article layout, etc.

We can see your frustration by all the comments you've added to this talk page and hope you can understand why some work you've done may have been reworked or removed. It might be easy to take it personally, but please don't. Wikipedia is a team effort and I'm sure your contributions have helped somewhere at some time. -- Lyverbe (talk) 14:17, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I know! I totally understand. why does this happen even if you still if you follow the rules and everything?--58.170.82.77 (talk) 09:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't now. Could you show me a modification you've made that was removed by giving me the date-time of it? -- Lyverbe (talk) 12:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

False Citations

Someone put that sims could go barefoot, with a citation so people would think it is true. The citation goes the the official site, where it says nothing of this. Please remember that placing these false-citations in order to prove a point is a form of vandalism, and I will report the next user or IP to do this. Johnnywalterboy (talk) 04:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

When the citation was added there was a page on the site which clearly showed a barefooted sim. That page has since been changed when the site was updated. The citation was merely out of date rather than an act of vandalism. 196.209.202.105 (talk) 19:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Someone mentioned that changing Sim height is available, which has not been verified, with a citation to the official site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.117.121 (talk) 21:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Johnnywalterboy, even if information were true and had a citation it would still get deleted, I'm sorry but some people think they can control everything even if the person has done the right thing. so following the rules is just as much of a crime as breaking them? thats what some users do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.92.142 (talk) 20:04, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Spelling and grammar issues

There are some issues with this page. People are putting "gameplay", when gameplay is not a word. Please put game play or game-play.

Gameplay is spelled correctly, or at the very least, it's commonly known and acceptable. -- Lyverbe (talk) 13:38, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Massive lack of sources, Please Delete

... Even though you reverted it, its still going to need sources. Otherwise it's going to be deleted anyway. Carlo V. Sexron 01:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Please fix the references. Baaaaw 14:56 12 March 2008 (GMT)

Well it's users like you I'm sick of. Even if you provide a source its still going to get deleted because users think they can control everything, even if its true and a citation is provided it will get deleted. users abuse there privlages.124.177.186.200 (talk) 22:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Page Crash

Every time I try to get onto this page, my IE window crashes. 80.43.38.108 14:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

IE, lol. 58.165.27.1 (talk) 08:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Whats so funny about IE? IE = Internet Explorer, 58.165.27.1 if you don't know what it means why laugh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.92.142 (talk) 19:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I think he's laughing that someone's using IE, not because he didn't know what it meant. :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.78.69 (talk) 09:36, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Criterion Software?

The article says that Criterion is developing the game. I found several web sites that mentioned this, but their own website is totally silent about this. So it seems unlikely that they are really developing it. Maxis itself is a development studio and The Sims is their flagship product. It seems more likely that they are developing it and Criterion is providing some technical support (if, for example, they are using RenderWare as their graphics engine). Can someone find a verifiable (and accurate) reference for this statement? Otherwise I say it needs to be removed and it should be assumed that Maxis is developing the game. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 14:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I only get ONE real hit for "Criterion" and "The Sims 3" (the rest are for "The Sims 3" and "criteria"). It is a Sims fansite, here, totally unreliable. No press releases, nothing on Criterion's website, nada. Therefore, I'm removing it and changing it to Maxis. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 14:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Some editors keep coming in and adding Criterion and RenderWare back into the article without references. Without verifiable references, it didn't happen. Leave it out until it has a reference. Like I said above, I can't find any reliable reference that supports either RenderWare or Criterion. If you have a reference for either, great. Add it back in, but include the reference. Until then, I will keep reverting the changes. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:38, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Maxis is hard at work on Spore. It's highly unlikely that they will be working on The Sims 3 as well. All "The Sims" games are now made by "The Sims Division", which is a department created within EA and headed by Rod Humble. I'll try and find a source for that... -- JayTee

Actually we don't know who is working in The Sims 3, it is better put "TBA" in the developer line. Razor 18:00 Brazilian time, march 22, 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.207.145.101 (talk) 21:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Great, all we need is a reference. Last time I talked to Virg, she said she had transferred from The Sims to Spore, so it's possible they outsourced this product ("outsourced" to another EA studio). But without a ref, it's just a rumor. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 18:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

The Site is Down...

...has anyone noticed? It is down! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.238.88.55 (talk) 14:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

No it's not. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 16:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

There were a lot of technical issues on the first couple days. The site crashed for lots of people. It seems to be fixed for the most part. Phoenix1304 (talk) 18:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

For me, it just wouldn't display, but reloading would fix it. -- Noneofyourbusiness (talk) 22:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Maxis or Redwood Shores?

Yes, i previouslly here Maxis was on the development of The Sims 3, and now i see EA Redwood Shores, i don't understand. who is developing, EA Redwood Shores or Maxis? help me please! (i think it is better put TBA.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.207.145.101 (talk • contribs)

Maxis is the part of EA Redwood Shores. (look here - Maxis) --Monthstay (talk) 12:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

While they were acquired Maxis refers to the team who works with Will Wright, in most cases, rather than an actual developer. The official developer most game sites have is EA Redwood Shores, which is the Sims division of EA. Maxis, the name, is not used at all and is not the developer. Source: http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?type=company&mode=79643&sort=title&letter=T&dlx_type=all&sortdir=asc 71.96.70.197 (talk) 19:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Console release?

Did EA specify if this game will be released for consoles yet or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sage1989 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The best place to check for this type of information is The Sims 3 website linked to in the article. That being said, no. But, FWIW, the site doesn't say anything about what platform the game will be released for, but generally everyone assumes Windows, I guess. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 17:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Engine and Developer?

Wait, TS3 is using RenderWare as the graphics engine? Since when?? Also, has nobody read the Games For Windows article on TS3 and could possibly tell us who is developing TS3? Presumably it would be Maxis but it could be EA redwood or some other studio, unverified report gives it as being Criterion (which makes no sense whatsoever) and rampant speculation has given way to the possibility that TS3 is being developed by a 3rd party. I'm guessing the game magazine coverage of TS3 would clear up who the developer actually is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.215.187.40 (talk) 18:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Umm... the developer is Maxis! and... i think it is really the RenderWare. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.92.89.171 (talk) 19:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Maxis refers to the team who works with Will Wright, in most cases, rather than an actual developer. The official developer most game sites have is EA Redwood Shores, which is the Sims division of EA. Maxis, the name, is not used at all and is not the developer. Source: http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?type=company&mode=79643&sort=title&letter=T&dlx_type=all&sortdir=asc 71.96.70.197 (talk) 19:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Can Maxis really be considered the developer?

This is to add to 74.215.187.40's concern. Maxis.com now only redirects to the Spore website. No articles about this game even mention that Maxis is developing it, including this article's references.[1][2] Not to mention that none of the recent Sim games have the Maxis symbol either. I do not feel that this article should assume that the Maxis subsidiary, specifically, is working on this game. Given the available public information, we only know that some part of EA is working on it, and nothing more. To assume that the same developer who made previous games in the series has been shown incorrect in cases such as SimCity Societies.Therefore, I feel that the Developer box should not specify a subsidiary, whether that means to simply have it say "Electronic Arts" or have it ommitted until more solid evidence of the developer is made publically available. --C. Raleigh (talk) 19:06, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, as I mentioned above. I feel more comfortable leaving it blank until we hear specifically who worked on it. But EA isn't exactly forthcoming about who develops their individual products (for example, do you know who developed Rise of the Witch King and Kane's Wrath? It wasn't EA-Los Angeles, but they take the credit). If you feel obligated to put in a developer, I'm fine with EA Games. I won't touch it, but it would be nice to find out who really developed it. EA is a big entity and just saying "EA Games" is about as specific as saying you live in "America" as opposed to "123 Maple Tree Way, Gable Groves, CA". — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Maxis refers to the team who works with Will Wright, in most cases, rather than an actual developer. The official developer most game sites have is EA Redwood Shores, which is the Sims division of EA. Maxis, the name, is not used at all and is not the developer. Source: http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?type=company&mode=79643&sort=title&letter=T&dlx_type=all&sortdir=asc 71.96.70.197 (talk) 19:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Wrong company infos !

Maxis is dead since they are in EA, since 2007 the Maxis logo was removed from The Sims franchise ! It's no longer Maxis but it's EA Games only. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.52.208.241 (talk) 13:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I am completely aware of this, as pointed out in my comment below. If EA themselves no longer consider Maxis as the developer, so should this article. I am not certain why Frecklefoot is insistant on reverting the developer entry, as there is clearly not enough evidence supporting the current implication that Maxis is being credited as its own entity. I may discuss this issue with Frecklefoot or the Sims WikiProject later on. --C. Raleigh (talk) 03:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Pssh. Okay, I guess I miss the idea of Maxis getting credit for their own products, even though they are now a wholly-owned subsidiary of EA (and have been for a long time). I thought they still got separate development credit for the Sim products (and MobyGames says they do too). But go ahead and put the EA Games stuff back in, I won't touch it. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand what Frecklefoot is saying. I myself wish the original Maxis was still the one responsible for the Sims series, but now the Sims team is completely assimilated with EA. At least we still have Will Wright's Spore team, which does still have some degree of autonomous control from EA. I also think EA is now crediting the Spore team as the new Maxis (since Wright is in it), though I cannot say for sure. --C. Raleigh (talk) 17:16, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

So you wrote wrong infos, why you don't put the name all the companies bought by EA ;) ? Actually the original Maxis team doesn't completely work on the Sims series, I think most of them works on Spore so it's mainly the EA team who works on the Sims franchise, it's more logical to put the EA Games name instead of Maxis, don't you think ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.247.125.69 (talk) 22:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Maxis refers to the team who works with Will Wright, in most cases, rather than an actual developer. The official developer most game sites have is EA Redwood Shores, which is the Sims division of EA. Maxis, the name, is not used at all and is not the developer. Source: http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?type=company&mode=79643&sort=title&letter=T&dlx_type=all&sortdir=asc 71.96.70.197 (talk) 19:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The Sims 3 on PS3

An anonymous user keeps on adding PlayStation 3 to the platforms that the game will be released on. I've been reverting the edits because the user doesn't provide a proper source for this information (well, no source at all) but has anyone actually heard any specific info about this? All I've heard is that the "franchise" is being released on Wii and PS3 though didn't specifically state "The Sims 3". Swanny92 (talk) 12:09, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I remember reading an interview of the game concerning multiple platforms, and the interviewee stated that at this point the developer is focusing on making the game "the best it can be," so that implies that they are only concerned with the PC version at the moment. --C. Raleigh (talk) 20:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I doubt the game can be ported verbatim to any game consoles. The game is really designed for use with a mouse. As can be seen with the current console titles, they use the same brand, but are different games. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 16:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Now there's a proof the game will also be Released on PS3 and X360.
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/strategy/thesims3/index.html and http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/strategy/thesims3/index.html. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.68.8.165 (talk) 16:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I hardly call that "proof", but rather assumptions on GameSpot's part. There is no reliable evidence that it is slated for either platform. I'd wait for a press release or some other official announcement by EA. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 16:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. I just removed it from the platform list, as further information and less assumption is needed.Sage1989 (talk) 16:59, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Good external source

Lots of juicy info here: http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/sims-3/307400-latest-sims-3-news.htmlAutonova (talk) 13:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Release date

December 15th, 2009 is the release date for The Sims 3, you can found it here: http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?pager.offset=3&cId=3168651 -- Iblis Trigger (talk) 11:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I rather have an official statement from EA than something coming out of some unknown editor. -- Lyverbe (talk) 11:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. There is far too much speculation with these kinds of articles. Gamesites and shops like gamestop, etc generally don't get that much of a heads up that a game is coming, not before it is announced by the company. Let's not forget how many times amazon and the rest revised their release date of TS2 before it was out.--221.143.25.19 (talk) 07:08, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Just a bit of Stuff

When I say a bit, I mean a lot... :D http://www.snootysims.com/thesims3index.php?id=info Look at it - it has tons of information... :) 21:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC) Also, Here is some news on the "TRAIT" system... Adverserial Artistic Athletic Brave Charismatic

Childish  Clumsy  Commitment Issues  Conversationalist  Creative 
Cursed  Daredevil  Dreamer  Easily Bored  EVIL 
Excitable  Family-Oriented  Flirty  Fortunate  Friendly 
Frugal  Genius  Gloomy  Good Sense of Humor  Good  
Green Thumbs   Gourmet  Grumpy  Handy  Hot-Headed 
Hydrophobic  Idealistic
 Inappropriate  Insensitive  Kleptomaniac 
Light Sleeper  Loner  Lucky  Mooch  Natural Cook 
Neat  Nice  Nosy  Outdoorsperson  Over-Emotional 
Paranoid  Partier  Perfectionist  Pizza Lover  Playful 
Romantic  Rude  Schmoozer  Shy  Slob 
Socialite  Tramp  Unforgiving  Unlucky  Vegeterian 
Whiney
 Workaholic  Worrywart 

Those are all the currently confirmed Traits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eurotom1234567890 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I can easily create a similar page saying "They will have the ability to kidnap you and eat you". My point is: If it's not official from EA, it can only be rumours. Anyone can build such a "trait" list. -- Lyverbe (talk) 02:21, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh... Sorry... :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eurotom1234567890 (talk • contribs) 10:54, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I heard that Vain or vanity would be one of them. In an interview with one of the creators, he said his wife was helping him create him, and she picked a whole bunch of nice stuff and then 'vain'. I was laughing. We know EVIL, klepto, workaholic, over-emotional for sure right? Like in videos and interviews and such. There's that same sorta list here too: http://www.thesims3.fangree.co.uk/articles.php?article_id=7 Pretty much the same. Thanks for the site btw! (LadyCakeage (talk) 02:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC))

I heard that the Sims have to learn how to read. Is that relevent? http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/sims-3/307400-latest-sims-3-news.html (LadyCakeage (talk) 00:56, 21 September 2008 (UTC))

Music

People who are adding songs to the list along with "Citation needed" don't understand what it means. "Citation needed" = "Where did you get that info?". Don't add the song *WITH* "Citation needed", but specify where you got the info. If you don't, your addition to the article will be considered unsourced and removed. -- Lyverbe (talk) 21:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I've removed it entirely. It's pure drivel when every song has the tag next to it. I'll watchlist it and remove any more additions. hbdragon88 (talk) 04:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Multiplayer and Blu-ray format?

The article on The Sims 3 says that their might be online multiplayer and also says TS3 may be released on Blu-ray. Yet neither are given a citation. Where's the citation or source for this information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.215.120.106 (talk) 22:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I think someone's being a little cheeky.--121.220.139.235 (talk) 14:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

C-Class

Theres a discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sims/The_Sims_3#C-Class to move this article to C-Class.HereFord 01:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

World wide release

The release date has indeed been confirmed, but this releasedate is not really a world wide release. North America gets the game on February 20th, whereas (some countries in) Europe will get it 1 day earlier, on the 19th. This is confirmed on the official Dutch EA Sims 2 site. This is because game releases in The Netherlands generally happen on a Thursday! -Jort227 (talk) 19:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, one is an official press release from EA stating "worldwide" release and the other one from an official EA website. Hard to say who's right and who's wrong, but still, we're talking about a possible 1 day difference. No need to sound the alarm :) -- Lyverbe (talk) 01:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The Sims 2 local sites says February 19, 2009 for : Netherlands, Sweden, Finland & Norway ! -- Iblis Trigger (talk) 03:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

About Australia, just there is the EB Games Australia announcement which said February 12, 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iblis Trigger (talk • contribs) 20:07, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is true that this article said the game was coming out Feb 12 in Australia but, it turns out the speculation was just that.--121.220.139.235 (talk) 14:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Game editions

First, I hate that table :) Second, it's confusing. It now says the release date is Feb 19 at Netherlands, Sweden, Finland and Norway... "Except: Netherlands, Sweden, Finland & Norway". Huh? -- Lyverbe (talk) 12:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

With this table getting more confusing than anything else, I decided to clean it up by sorting out the release dates. This made me realize that the two set of dates were the same, so I put them in a single column instead of two. I then realize that the dates were identical to the already mentionned dates in the infobox, so I removed the "Windows Release Date" column completely to be left out with almost nothing. I converted the table to text. -- Lyverbe (talk) 16:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, maybe it's too early to use a table, but it looks good on the TS2 wiki page -- Iblis Trigger (talk) 20:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for discussing about this Hereford *sigh* The first row is regarding the standard version which is already defined in the article's infobox, and that leaves the second row by itself. I'd say this table is useless and should be removed. -- Lyverbe (talk) 19:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

That section needs cleaned up or put in quote tags, it reads like a marketing release which isn't appropriate for here.--Crossmr (talk) 12:34, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, that section needs to be removed :) But if it has to stay, it does need to be redone. It was a lot worse yesterday before I edit it when it was clearly ripped text from some ad. -- Lyverbe (talk) 14:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3?

Well for one Sims 3 for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 were TBA, and for two, when will there releace date be annouced because it was confirmed that it would be on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 alot earlier in the year at it's annoucement on March 19th 2008, and that has been taken down, just needs more info on console versions. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 15:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

The Sims 3 on Wii?

Will The Sims 3 be released for Wii? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theface102 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Does it say "Wii" in the infobox next to "Platforms"? :P No, there's no plan to release it for the Wii. Maybe it's due to the complexity of the game. -- Lyverbe (talk) 00:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Snooty Sims

Whats up with the red Snooty Sims wikilink in the bottom? 212.59.23.166 (talk) 11:25, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm?.--SkyWalker (talk) 11:49, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

It was there. I removed it. Look in the change history. -- Lyverbe (talk) 16:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I've had enough of this "Snooty Sims" site. It's being used as a reference everywhere, but correct me if I'm wrong: It's a fansite. Fansites are NOT considered valid sources in Wikipedia. I was about to consolidate the dozen "Snooty Sims Sim 3 Preview" references and wondered if all of them (and related info) should instead be removed to follow Wikipedia rules. -- Lyverbe (talk) 00:06, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Agreed for a removal, I would rather see accurate or no information rather than heresay. Dark verdant (talk) 10:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I've already said this above, in the Sims 2 disscussion, they say, and I quote, 'SnootySims has been a well-known site in the Sims Community for more than five years. It has been a reliable source for the new flyers in the past. There's always a risk that a source is inaccurate, but the same can be said about any non-fiction book and those are usually accepted as excellent sources. If we're at a reasonable level of certainty that the flyer is real, then it is a publication by EA of an upcoming expansion and therefore a valid reference.'for proof go here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Sims_2#The_Sims_2:_Apartments —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.33.125.160 (talk) 15:24, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Such a comment signed by an inactive account doesn't look interesting. But hey, I'm just expressing my opinion on Snooty Sims to see how the majority feels about it. I'm not in favor of using it as some official source of information, but if I'm alone in this, we'll keep using it. -- Lyverbe (talk) 19:36, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Snooty Sims is a fan site due to fans acess it but it is mosty a referance site which adds updated news.(i.e. read the Q&A from ign.com <click here> or 2 new screenshots added from the sims3.ea.com). Wikipedians in general think this web site is not an appropriate soure but what about the sources the information comes from? and what if they have information proved by pictures and such? (i.e. Snooty Sims proved The Sims 3 will have six mood metors with a picture of the interface)--121.220.139.235 (talk) 14:32, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Sims 3 producer day

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/sims-3/354695-sims-3-producer-day-report-pictures-pg-2-a-2.html (Taken from a Sims 3 Producer Day ALL FACTUAL)Alex250P (talk) 00:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I first thought of undoing this change since it looks like forum stuff, but I suppose it could be used to improve the article. -- Lyverbe (talk) 02:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Producer walkthrough

Walkthrough - has gameplay info. JAF1970 (talk) 07:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I added information to this article(after watching producer walkthroughs), mentioning all the things in the game but most of the information still got deleted, i even cited it. Well users think they can delete my information and give a vague reason for doing so. I contribute to wikipedia, do the right thing and still get punished. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.92.142 (talk) 20:10, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Box art and caption

Don't go into a revert war over this. This is one of the reasons why talk pages exist. Describe why you prefer a box rather than the other. -- Lyverbe (talk) 20:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it is necessary to pull down the current picture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Thesims3cover.jpg of and away from the article. It has not been confirmed by EA (or any operative associated with The Sims 3). In fact EA or any others of thats sort haven't even published a box art cover. At www.ea.com > http://findgames.ea.com/?search=the+sims+3&skin=ea it reads "Box art coming soon". Okay so why is there a cover art on this wikipedia article? It's not the real deal. I thought wikipedia had a strict policy against speculation? I don't care if amazon.com had a box art on The Sims 3 that was there for a while; So what? It's not a reliable source. ---- Untill it has been confirmed I think the picture should be taken down and hopefully (Much Appreciated if) a user can upload the lettering of The Sims 3 (the title I mean with the diamond behind it).--121.220.200.243 (talk) 17:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I second that. Any objections? -- Lyverbe (talk) 17:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Same here. People are starting to believe that the cover posted in the article is the real thing, When it hasn't even been confirmed in any way that's reliable. --124.182.210.216 (talk) 19:45, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

What about using this? [[3]] I reckon thats the sort of thing that should be on the article if there is no confirmed Box Art. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.214.217.187 (talk) 09:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

"if you have a reason [to remove the box art], state it in your edit" - No, no, no. The edit is not a place to chat. The box art has been removed and we'll be going into a revert war again. I started this discussion 2 months ago, discuss it here and not in the edit. -- Lyverbe (talk) 11:40, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

The person still made a good point. "Box Art Removed. Because its not the box art for the central product. The Sims 3 Lettering is more apporpriate. It doesn't need to be a cover of something, unless it is the official cover." The collection edition box was the one posted and got taken down. Anyway i coppied this because this is were it belongs. doesn't it?--121.215.175.135 (talk) 20:14, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

The collectors edition is the only box-art available at this time. Hereford 23:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah Hereford again. "See talk page" - now that's what I call a team effort. So you have decided for us all that the change you made is THE solution. No discussion, no consensus, no agreement. *sigh*

I don't think you understood what I meant by going into a revert war. Let me explain the problem: You think you have THE solution, but someone else thinks he also has THE solution... but it's not the same as yours. Why do you think your solution is better? "See talk page" while imposing a change is not how Wikipedia works, it is how a revert war works.

Stupid box art. Can't we just leave it blank until the game is released in 6 weeks?! Of couse, I could apply that as a comment in the article and title my change "See talk page". -- Lyverbe (talk) 00:31, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

There is no confirmed box art! I feal like stoping on a box right now. The game is still in development. When there is a game in development it sholdn't be apropriate to post an unconfirmed box art untill the developer or producer has confirm it. Because box art can leak onto the web easy.

All a game site has to do is go by that as the cover and "bam" it ends up on wikipedia. eg --"I'm going to Pre-Order the game. Look at that I have stumbled across the official cover art. All I had to do is go to a gaming site. Well time to put that on wikipedia." No! Just because there is a cover doesn't mean it's the cover. (Hopefully that will be avoided by the semi-Protection act.)

(must read this paragraph) Nevertheless forget about putting a cover art there till time comes to. Put the logo The Sims 3 there instead. Cities XL is a game in development. On wikipedia it has the logo of the game there instead due to the fact that there is no confirmed box art. The Sims 3 has no confirmed box art. Why does this have to differ!? (by the way that question was more of a statement than a question)--58.170.93.131 (talk) 21:28, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Characters?

I am not sure if we have an article on characters from this franchise, but a reference I recommend if we do is “The Sims 3: The Rise and Fall of Arnie the Sim,” Game Informer 187 (November 2008): 106-107. As the title of the article suggests, this preview of the game focuses on that character. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 16:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Producer Walktroughs Count As Reliable Information?

Do information from Producer Walkthrough Videoes (Gameplay Videoes) count and information that can be added to this article? since it is very likely to be in the final product of The Sims 3 game.

There are things here and there that could be mentioned in the article but i'm affraid that the information might possibly get deleted. So do they count as information that could be added toward The Sims 3 article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.231.215.153 (talk) 16:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Videos are as valid as any other source, just as long as it's from official people. A statement from some unknown fan on YouTube is not a reliable source, but it is from an offical producer of the game. -- Lyverbe (talk) 17:04, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

So if the information is coming from the producers mouth and you see it moving then it's a reliable source??--58.170.82.77 (talk) 09:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Actually, it's even better than anything else because websites can be made by anyone compared to a video of official people themselves. If the timestamps can be added to the ref comment (ie. "Mentionned at 8h32s in the clip"), it would help too. -- Lyverbe (talk) 11:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Developer Solution

How about this:

Since there is so much fuss about who's making the game would it be resonable to just say "EA" is developing the game? Maxis is part of EA and Redwood Shores, Blackbox ect. are different studios all operated by EA. So EA seems like a trueful and perfect compromise to put. Bizub4 (talk) 00:53, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The idea is to discuss about it and, once a consensus has been reached, then we make the change. You made the change then proposed a solution. That's not how it works. Also, you didn't provide some ref to support your claim. -- Lyverbe (talk) 14:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

As expected, the fight is starting again (thanks Bizub4). Do NOT change the developer field until a consensus has been reached in the talk page. At the very least, provide a reference to your statement. -- Lyverbe (talk) 11:47, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

EA is above Maxis Studios, it's just which one do you put as the developer. EA or Maxis? Electronic Arts for this game is the video game publisher and Maxis Studios at Redwood Shores is the video game developer. Maybe people keep changing it because they don't know how to differentiate between the two.

I admit I got confused what they ment by the two at first but i just looked them up in wikipedia and now I know. I'm almost complelely certain that Maxis Studios or just plain Maxis is the game developer and it may be likely to you too if you read these internal articles. "Discuss on Talk Page before you make any changes." Look here: video game publisher; video game developer . 124.177.186.200 (talk) 22:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

It says here > The Sims Series < "The Sims series is developed by Maxis and published by Electronic Arts". Doesn't that answer everything?--121.214.217.15 (talk) 05:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. First of all, the source is from Wikipedia and it's not considered a reliable source since it's written by people like you and me who have the freedom to write anything they want. Second, it's possible that development team changes in the middle of a serie (for example, mid-90's game "Descent" completely changed the team from Parallax to Volition between "Descent II" and "Descent III").

Those who strongly believe it's Maxis need to provide solid refs that it's Maxis, and those who think it's EA must do the same. People have been changing this thing for weeks without giving any proof of what they're saying, and that's the cause of the revert war.

If what 124.177.186.200 said above is true (again, no solid source to support what is said), then Maxis is the developer. -- Lyverbe (talk) 13:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I know the part about where it is located is true because before the French visited the studio they did quick video scenes around San Fransisco. And Redwood City is nearby. So the part about it being in Redwood Shores is true. A sign out the front reads Electronic Arts 250 Shoreline Drive. In The Sims 3 recording studio a sign also says Electronic Arts. This is the actual place where they develop and produce The Sims 3 because the developing floor matched the one seen months ago on the official Sims 3 Website when there was a video called 'Behind The Scenes'. I'm only telling you what I saw and I didn't see Maxis writen anyware that doesn't automaticly mean that Maxis is out of the picture, but it could. http://www.jeuxvideo.com/reportages-videos-jeux/0000/00000171/les-sims-3-le-rendez-vous.htm --58.170.116.215 (talk) 03:38, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I second that. Also, according to Gamespot at http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/thesims3/tech_info.html?tag=tabs;summary, it clearly says that the developer is "EA Redwood Shores". I'd go for these sources. Lets wait until friday for any objections. -- Lyverbe (talk) 15:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Sims 3 preview video

There's a kind of preview of The Sims 3 available on The Times Online website and features one of its producers. I haven't contributed to this article (haven't even read it yet) so I'd rather add the link here than in the article itself. It just discusses main features etc. :) londonsista ^Prod 02:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image caption.

File:NewUPCTheSims3.jpg

A predicted Sims 3 screen including a new style UPC. The UPC is split up. Note the time is in the top-left corner. Also note the time interface is back at the bottom in its usual place, game displayed at a recent press coverence, also some of the interface has changed since this picture was taken

I read this image caption and wonder, WTF is a UPC? - 218.111.48.86 (talk) 19:39, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I've decided to bring this up again because it demonstrates how much Wikifag bureaucracy has affect logic on what course of action to take. This comment was originally posted in a harsh manner to find out if someone would actually add an explanation of an abbreviation that is obviously not known to a lot of people into the image caption. Instead, this topic was removed not long after (having been cited as forum spam) [4] and its question was left unresolved, while the image was deleted altogether due to fair use guidelines a week or two later [5]. Thanks, fellow Wikifaggots. You have demonstrated once again that Wikipedia is muddled in too much rules and guidelines that it couldn't figure out what to actually do. - 60.50.251.21 (talk) 07:01, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

The Article

Just so everyone knows; Internet Explorer 6 users can't view or click the "hide/show" link. For instance I go to view the System Requirements on this article. Well I can't because the "hide/show" doesn't come up.--60.231.219.21 (talk) 08:21, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

...and you are still using IE because...? :) It's time to move forward and switch to Firefox! But your point is interesting thought. Since the "System Requirements" is pretty big and has its place in the infobox, I don't believe it should be repeated in the article. Perhaps we could add something in the "Development" section saying "The game is set to run on average PC settings" with a ref to the system requirements page? -- Lyverbe (talk) 16:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

ESRB description

From ESRB: Rating summary: This is a life simulation game in which players can customize and control avatars (Sims) through several stages of life and its daily activities. Players are free to pursue a variety of goals as they observe and attempt to influence and nurture families of Sims. These avatars often interact socially, which can sometimes lead to mild flirtation or more intimate encounters. Players can choose to "try for a baby" or "WooHoo" with another Sim – the later option being available to both heterosexual and same-sex couples. These two actions cause the selected avatars to jump into bed and go under the covers, where they wriggle, giggle, and moan until confetti bursts over the bed. Sims characters need to maintain their health and hygiene and do so by eating, exercising, bathing, and using the toilet, which is depicted by a blurred, pixilated effect and trickling sounds. Avatars can also vomit, emit flatulence, and wet themselves if no toilet is available or offered. As in real life, Sim characters can die of old age; they can also die as a result of neglect or starvation. Certain animations depict the avatars dying in fires, drowning in pools, and getting electrocuted by household appliances.

There's some info there not in the article (ie. same sex marriage and sex return in The Sims 3, etc.) JAF1970 (talk) 23:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

It does not actually state same sex marriage, it does whoever state same sex sex. 86.89.102.98 (talk) 21:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)