Jump to content

Talk:The Sims 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by KS929 (talk | contribs) at 23:02, 22 December 2009 (→‎Macintosh Users: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

CAS

Is it possible to make sims different heights to each other? Because that's not mentioned in the article :( --91.105.191.199 (talk) 11:16, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect System Requirements: Needs to be changed!

Please use the following information to accurately update the requirements table.

Source: http://thesims3.ea.com/view/pages/feature6.jsp


The Sims 3 requires at least the following:

FOR WINDOWS XP

  • 2.0 GHz P4 processor or equivalent
  • 1 GB RAM
  • A 128 MB Video Card with support for Pixel Shader 2.0
  • The latest version of DirectX 9.0c
  • Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2
  • At least 6.1 GB of hard drive space with at least 1 GB of additional space for custom content and saved games

FOR WINDOWS VISTA

  • 2.4 GHz P4 processor or equivalent
  • 1.5 GB RAM
  • A 128 MB Video Card with support for Pixel Shader 2.0
  • Microsoft Windows Vista Service Pack 1
  • At least 6.1 GB of hard drive space with at least 1 GB of additional space for custom content and saved games

For computers using built-in graphics chipsets under Windows, the game requires at least:

  • Intel Integrated Chipset, GMA 3-Series or above
  • 2.6 GHz Pentium D CPU, or 1.8 GHz Core 2 Duo, or equivalent
  • 0.5 GB additional RAM

FOR MAC OS X

  • Mac OS X 10.5.7 Leopard or higher
  • Intel Core Duo Processor
  • 2 GB RAM
  • ATI X1600 or Nvidia 7300 GT with 128 MB of Video RAM, or Intel Integrated GMA X3100.
  • At least 6.1 GB of hard drive space, with at least 1 GB additional space for custom content and saved games
  • This game will not run on PowerPC (G3/G4/G5) based Mac systems, or the GMA 950 class of integrated video cards.


Windows Supported Video Cards

NVIDIA GeForce series FX 5900, FX 5950 6200, 6500, 6600, 6800 7200, 7300, 7600, 7800, 7900, 7950 8400, 8500, 8600, 8800 9300, 9400, 9500, 9600, 9800 G100, GT 120, GT 130, GTS 150 GTS 250, GTX 260, GTX 280, GTX 285, GTX 295

ATI Radeon(TM) series 9500, 9600, 9800 X300, X600, X700, X800, X850 X1300, X1600, X1800, X1900, X1950 2400, 2600, 2900 3450, 3650, 3850, 3870 4850, 4870

Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) GMA 3-Series, GMA 4-Series

Laptop versions of these chipsets may work, but may run comparatively slower. Standalone cards that are installed in vanilla PCI slots (not PCIe or PCIx or AGP), such as some GeForce FX variants, will perform poorly.

Integrated chipsets such as the ATI Xpress and the NVIDIA TurboCache variants may default to settings that are higher than what would be optimal for them. Graphics settings can be lowered to improve performance.

The NVIDIA GeForce FX series is unsupported under Vista.


MAC OS X Supported Video Cards

NVIDIA GeForce series 7300, 7600 8600, 8800 9400M, 9600M GT GT 120, GT 130

ATI Radeon(TM) series X1600, X1900 2400, 2600 3870, 4850, 4870

Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) GMA 3-Series —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chelseaem8 (talk • contribs) 13:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added the requirements for Mac. While your link doesn't work, that's probably because EA just changed their entire TS3 site. I'll get a working one to add as a reference when I have the chance tonight, or someone else can if they want to.
ETA: The new link is at http://www.thesims3.com/game/systemreq, but oddly enough, they no longer list the system requirements for Mac... Does anyone know if Amazon.com is verifiable enough to be used as a source for game system requirements? It has the exact same information posted above. -- Amber (talk + contribs) 20:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Prequel? Huh?

"Within the series' chronology, it is a prequel to both The Sims and The Sims 2, as well as spin-offs such as The Sims: Bustin' Out." I think the statement is supposed to be sequel. Since I'm not sure I'm leaving this for someone else to fix. or it is supposed to read, its prequels are... Please clarify.--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 21:34, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What the editor meant that to mean, I believe, is that TS3 is a prequel in regards to the actual in-game storyline. I have read an interview confirming this, so when I get a chance I'll add in a citation. That phrase could use better wording, though, as I see why you were confused.
ETA: Added 'in-game' to the sentence for clarification. Will get it cited ASAP, or someone else can if they get a chance first. -- Amber (talk + contribs) 22:40, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And cited! -- Amber (talk + contribs) 22:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The word "prequel" is a portmanteau of pre and sequel. It means a sequel that is set chronologically before the original work. It does not mean a work to which some other work is a sequel. The Sims 3 is just about to be released; it could not have any sequels yet, pre- or otherwise. 4.245.110.231 (talk) 14:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this sentence, since the cited source tied to it specifically contains the words "I wouldn't read it as a prequel." A better way to put this would be something along the lines of "There are younger versions of the Maxis-made sims from other Sims titles." I don't think it would be reasonable to use either of the words prequel or sequel to refer to The Sims titles, since the real story is the one the player creates, and may be set before, after, simultaneously with, or unrelated to any story said player may have created with previous titles. Dansiman (talk|Contribs) 04:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have put the phrase back in, reworded for brevity. The TS3 storyline starts a half-generation prior to TS1, and a whole generation prior to TS2. According to the definition of prequel, that makes TS3 is a prequel; that's a fact. Do we really need to cite a source for this readily verifiable fact? And yes, technically storyline in The Sims series is ultimately player-created, but it is undeniable that there is nevertheless a strong continuity in the setting. Ben Bell, the producer of TS3 cited by Amber, is not an authority on English language and cannot redefine words to suite his vision; just because he "wouldn't read it as a prequel" doesn't mean it isn't one. And yes, I agree that "There are younger versions of the Maxis-made sims from other Sims titles" would be the most precise and neutral way to put it, but it is awkward and convoluted for anyone not familiar with TS. o (talk) 09:49, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ben Bell, the producer of TS3 cited by Amber, is not an authority on English language and cannot redefine words to suite his vision; just because he "wouldn't read it as a prequel" doesn't mean it isn't one.
I meant to say something like this, but you got to it ahead of me. :) That it isn't a prequel is Mr. Bell's opinion, but that doesn't mean that it's fact. The fact is that the series does have a continuous storyline, however in the background it might be (depending on how you play, since you can choose whether or not to incorporate it into the lives of your own created Sims), and I think it would be a bit remiss not to acknowledge it.
Also, I added that source because I wasn't sure whether one was needed, and I always like to provide one when the information in an article is not self-evident. Whether or not the fact that younger versions of the characters are present in the game counts as self-evident, I'm not sure. Without a reliable source for this information, you would have to have played the game to be aware of it, and I'm always confused as to whether or not this counts as self-evidence. If you or someone else could clarify this for me, that would be great. -- Amber (talk + contribs) 23:34, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting since there is at least one reference to Bella being absent, she was a notable starting sim in the Original... DanzerMan (talk) 02:37, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

gameplay info

that bit in the neighborhood exploration article that reads "There will also be a setting that restricts their actions to minor things like showering, eating, and going to the bathroom." doesn't really need to be in that particular section does it? it seems like that should be under gameplay. im not changing it because im not really sure why the editor put it there... corazón del fuego 14:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Disciple of God (talk • contribs)

IGN Review error

The video review gives The Sims 3 an 'Outstanding' 9.0 score, whereas the text review gives it 8.9... anyone else seeing this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishistheice (talk • contribs) 18:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lost features?

Are we sure that the basic things such as hot tubs and diving boards are gone, or is this just "verified" through the leak version? 99.141.204.79 (talk) 20:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC) (Interrobang^2)[reply]

I dunno who wrote that but I don't see a reference for it so it's an unverified claim. Jozal (talk) 22:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Upon reflection, I've removed the Lost Features section all together because we're trying to not add too much detail and also because it's unsourced. Jozal (talk) 11:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In case anyone's interested, yes there are no hot tubs or diving boards in the game, at least not yet. You can use the game itself as a source I suppose, if you think it's notable to include. I would vote that it's not; while major game features are certaintly worthy of inclusion (to a point, don't want to get too detailed) I can't see how it's notable to mention what's not in the game. For example, there are no ballistic missiles in the game either, are we going to mention that? As for mentioning what used to be in the game and now is not, I wouldn't call diving boards and hot tubs that major. The lack of sliders for comfort and environment, sure. 67.176.101.205 (talk) 04:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It can be considered "lost feature" when if to TS2. It makes sense since the game otherwise inherits all of its predecessors' features. But yes I don't think this is very notable either way. o (talk) 07:39, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it can be agreed that this topic is not notable and should therefore not be in the article. Jozal (talk) 16:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and Paste?

It seems that most of the fourth paragraph ("On March 23...") in the Release section was copied directly from here. Shouldn't it be rewritten? 67.162.250.53 (talk) 01:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a complete copy, though it could be rewritten to sound less like the source. When I have time I'll rewrite it, but if someone else wants to then go ahead. Jozal (talk) 11:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Minimum Requirements

Can you still install and play the game with only 512mb ram I know it doesn't meet the miniumu requirements but I have another game like that (The final heroes of might and magic 5 expansion pack) and it still runs perfectly with graphic levels up to the max.I need to know this so I can play the game.Darkside2000 (talk) 07:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this isn't a forum, it's a place to discuss improvements to the article. I'd suggest asking on a proper Sims forum such as this one. Jozal (talk) 12:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know that rule but I only asked here as my system has a website blocker that stops me from accessing the forums needed for the info. If anyone can, please send the answer on my talk page and delete this question from the talk page.Darkside2000 (talk) 15:49, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look under the minimum requirements on the article page or on this very talk page. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ② talk 15:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

European Release

In Europe (at least in Spain) the get released on June 4th, not in June 5th —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.54.137.81 (talk) 20:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

USK Germany Rating

"Freigegeben ab 6. Jahren" -> 6 Years --91.19.241.28 (talk) 22:08, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Realese Europe!

It's the 4th June! Not the 5th!! --91.19.241.28 (talk) 22:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Die Sims 3

Hej de:Die Sims 3 is the right german Wikipage... Not de:Die Sims#Die Sims 3.. Please anybody edit that.. ||| Greetings, 213.162.66.140 (talk) 23:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed, thank you. –xenotalk 23:19, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speed bug

  • A major bug in the game is that the 3- and 4-speed play don't work - they are both the same as 2-speed. There has been much discussion on the web about when a patch for this might be released - does anyone have any real info about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marthiemoo (talk • contribs) 16:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a bug. This only occurs when the preformance options are too high. 82.46.73.110 (talk) 18:46, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Therefore, it is a bug. 65.175.193.146 (talk) 20:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think that's strictly true - if you read the forum posts there's a lot of people with high-end gaming machines who have the same problem, even when performance options are at their lowest. Marthiemoo (talk) 13:19, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that this should be included. The facts are that:

a) This fits the definition of a software bug, such that it is a fault in the programming which causes an "incorrect or unexpected result" b) A number of reviewers (I'll do some research as to exactly who) have noted this bug, and we have to assume that as game reviewers their hardware is designed to gain optimal performance from the game, and that they have tried ways of attempting to solve this issue (i.e. setting their graphics settings lower)

Given that we have people to source who have experienced this, and that it fits the above definition, that it should be included. If no one staunchly objects, I'll add it to the article later tonight. MrCrawford (talk) 00:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent version does not have this bug (v1.3.24), use either your EA download manager (requires registration) to update or search for it online. The patch really does fix a tremendous amount of bugs... poor quality release, some of these are as easy as pie to spot (like actually trying to increase the speed...) 80.0.210.142 (talk) 17:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Production budget

It would be interesting to see what EA's production budget for this game was. Is this information available anywhere? A quick Google search turns up nothing relevant. --63.70.164.200 (talk) 22:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If that information has been released, it is the sort of information that is released in Electronic Arts' statements to stockholders. Check the corporate website. -Verdatum (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism?

This whole article reads a little too much like an EA press release. Where is the objectivity? Wikipedia is asleep on this one.

The article as it stands makes the Sims 3 out to be the best game ever, when it is far from. The article does not mention any bugs or any features hyped about but then left out. The game is filled with bugs and gameplay issues that need to be addressed so that this article is not just a long advertisement for the game. 209.40.210.222 (talk) 01:03, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now THAT is on-topic. However, remember: No original research. Find some reliable, independent, third-party sources that say what you're saying, and you're good to go. Vicenarian (T · C) 02:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
http://gameolosophy.com/games/simulation/sims/a-review-of-the-sims-3-an-empty-experience/

"One of the draw backs in a Sims 3 neighborhood is that you can only have one active family at a time. Without the option to turn story progression off, users with multiple families will find the families who are not “active” are growing old, moving, and dying. And this is frustrating to many users, who take pride in growing their many families. After all, they’ve spent hours (sometimes days and months) building up these Sims – having them move away at the drop of the hat is frustrating, to say the least." 209.40.210.222 (talk) 03:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that site passes the verifiability test. Blogs are usually not considered acceptable sources. See the linked page for more info. Vicenarian (T · C) 21:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, Amazon.com has the average user rating of 2.5 of 5. Finally a source to point to in criticism of the game. 209.40.210.222 (talk) 04:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to keep being picky about this, but Amazon.com's user ratings would be considered a kind of Internet forum, again a source strongly discouraged by policy.
If you're having to stretch this much to find sources, the criticism may not yet have risen to the level of verifiability required for inclusion on Wikipedia. My advice: Head over to Wikia and create your own "Sims 3 Criticism" Wiki - and go for it. Vicenarian (T · C) 04:27, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree that there does not yet (as far as I know) appear to be appropriate critisism published by reliable sources, I must point out that "Sims 3 Criticism" Wikia would get rejected. It would appropriately belong in the already existing Sims wikia ( http://sims.wikia.com ).
I would not be the least bit surprised to see such reliable sources created in the future, because these forum criticisms are pretty scathing, and from my personal experience, distressingly accurate. -Verdatum (talk) 15:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are right about Wikia, thanks for the correction; I was being slightly flip, and for that I apologize. :) And yes, if the game really does have problems, there are bound to be reports in reliable sources before long. I guess it's a matter of patience. And hoping for a patch? Vicenarian (T · C) 15:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And wouldn't you know it, there is one! http://www.moreawesomethanyou.com/smf/index.php/topic,15185.0.html It's called the Shiny - Awesomemod, from what I gather. What suprises me is that I fixes a bunch of the problems with the game and it seems to have been made by modders and not EA. I know this might not seem verifiable or notable, but it might become notable since it does seem like a pretty big mod from outside modders. 209.40.210.222 (talk) 06:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fairly sure MATY doesn't pass notability, unless it's been discussed in third-party reliable source publications and I'm not aware. -- Amber (talk + contribs) 20:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Amazon.com is about as reliable a source for criticism as IMDb; that is to say, not at all. -- Amber (talk + contribs) 20:55, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon has often been the only accurate source for critical response. Their reviews require purchase, and rationalize a user average. Frequently, users enjoy weeks of play before submitting a review. Do the print sources have such a luxury? Gaming magazines do, however, maintain a relationship with EA and its partners. Rarely do their releases score low. To have potential sources invalidated because of a lack of affiliation with purchasable (and corruptible) media is to kill the first amendment. The claim of public insufficiency, especially when drawn from a large average, is particularly ironic when viable data for the "people's" largest free encyclopedia. The strength of qualitative accuracy increases with the number of contributions, as wikipedia has historically proven. The Sims 3 has respondents numbering in the tens of thousands presently, on the various forums suited for its discussion. What we are saying here is that Wikipedia values the input of a handful of journalists because of the strength of gaming industry integrity and the value of copyright -- MORE than the average opinion of the vocal public. It is foolish to imagine that newspapers will always faithfully represent widespread opinion. It is indefensible that a large and marketable source of said opinion cannot be appended to the criticism section of a video game's article on because it is solely that of the voices of the larger public whom do not receive paychecks for their input (but whom are the relevant consumers to the property and the only group in position to play the game over time). The system seems to be working in reverse. Come on people. Since when were we at war with the truth? Actually why does that sound familiar... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.173.167.70 (talk) 04:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon.com reviews do not require a purchase. They merely require you to have an account. As for the rest of your comment, I understand what you're saying, but the argument still stands that Amazon is not a reliable source. Unverifiable public opinion is called original research and not allowed on Wikipedia. -- Amber (talk + contribs) 22:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I concede that commerical feedback sections are not generally reliable sources because they function as public forums. However, the holding site Amazon does not have a bias, state opinion, or profess interest in any direction but sales. Its forums are public opinion wedged within an intermediate platform. They are limitedly tamperable, because product response DOES require at least one initial purchase from a user. So, floods of unidirectional opinion are not likely. This is important to watch for, because the game feedback may be worth considering as valid enough if the responses are varied, and high in number. The sheer volume of those found for The Sims 3 should be counted as weight of public opinion. It is the source exclusivity to professional media that may be the most harmful to the veracity of critical opinion. Gaming columnists and reviewers shake hands, make friends, and maybe even get references from EA. The people's encyclopedia should admit the public's average assessment of quality when the respondent base is sufficiently large. Otherwise we're not posting accurately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.224.63.188 (talk) 07:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Given the degree of the feedback (359 on Amazon) and the amount posted in blogs (I've been sat here listening to my gf reeling them off, and she wasn't searching for criticism...), I'd say actually the official sources in this article are woefully inaccurate and this certainly harms Wikipedias' image: Call this a case of WP:BOLD but sticking so closely to the rules here makes this article only half relevant, this definitely needs at least a mention. 80.0.210.142 (talk) 18:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand verifiability test succeeds if it is clearly indicated as the opinion of the author in non fact incidences. What is it your right to say who is right or wrong? The pertinence of the statements will easily be determined by the reader. As to say that each person has preferences that would require a tailored review to provide the required information. This is a encyclopedia a wide field of views must be included as long as the source is indicated. Further more the argument of the expert test fails because the sophistication is not significant to exclude a portion of the population from publishing their opinion. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Self-published source 67.70.45.234 (talk) 01:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see something on how people reacted rather negatively to the Sims 3 Store on its release. Specifically how there was a large amount of material available for sale at release, and complaints that the game feels a bit light in terms of items included in the game. The claim was that rather than including this material in the game, they decided to try to sell it online. Any thoughts there? Similarly something on the lack of a sci-fi or gothic neighborhood or similar content in contrast to Sims 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.16.179.231 (talk) 15:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

EA Needs Success Story

"The success of 'Sims' is crucial for EA's quarter because 'Godfather 2' sales are looking like they will be embarrassing," says Perry Rod, a money manager who focuses on digital-media investments.

"PC sales provide publishers with the best margins, so there will be considerable upside for the stock if it were to outperform expectations," he adds.

Colin Sebastian of Lazard Capital Markets, who rates EA stock a "hold," notes that "Sims 3" plays a key part in EA's turnaround plan. "It's probably fair to say that a lot is riding on the launch as EA seeks to build back credibility among gamers and investors," he says.

That lost credibility, brought about by a recent inability to control expenses while releasing unimpressive game titles, has led to the stock price being cut in half the past eight months.

" 'Sims' is the most profitable video game that EA owns," Sebastian says. "The third installment is not only important for the bottom line but also in maintaining and hopefully building on the popularity of the franchise."

No wonder EA's "Sims" marketing team is working overtime.

EA needs 'Sims' to be virtual lock Big marketing push backing game firm's top franchise By Paul Bond

May 26, 2009 http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/features/columns/street-talk/e3i4fb04ccd3a536c4110de0ebeed7a4729

Obviously the argument could be made that this has more to do with EA than this article, but still. Thought it was interesting just how important this game is to EA's future. KamikazeHighland (talk) 02:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request input on potential edit

I've got a minor Conflict of Interest here, since the issue seriously aggravated me, so I'm asking here first. Would it be appropriate to mention in the article the issue currently acknowledged on the official forums about the game not working with Toshiba Laptops for reasons they do not yet understand? It would've been extremely nice to have known that before I purchased a game I can't even play, thanks to their flawed copy protection. -Verdatum (talk) 20:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be appropriate to mention, if it was backed up by a reliable source. Obviously, forums aren't reliable, so I would say wait for someone/thing reliable to comment on this and then add it. Jozal (talk) 20:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Official statements released via forums are reliable. Such is this case here, it is contained in an admin authored locked sticky post. It is also listed under EA's knowledgebase. (However, one possible issue is that these are primary sources.) -Verdatum (talk) 20:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I didn't know it was an official statement. Still, as you have said, it may count as WP:PRIMARY. Could you provide a link? Jozal (talk) 21:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it is http://forum.thesims3.com/jforum/posts/list/7210.page but can't confirm, as I'm behind a webfilter at present. -Verdatum (talk) 15:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PC?

Is it for the Pc too?--Senkris (talk) 19:31, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure it is!! You COULD have googled, of course :P Dr. F.C. Turner - [USERPAGE|USERTALK] - 19:38, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I'm buying it!--Senkris ([[User

talk:Senkris|talk]]) 19:43, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, only if your "PC" runs Microsoft Windows. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 02:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Riverview

Guys,

Is it time to mention the fabled 'missing half' of the pirated version, an extra city which can be downloaded at thesims3.com for registrated users?? It is called Riverview. A trailer of this extra city, (which so can only be downloaded by buyers of the original game):
Template:Nl The Sims Riverview Trailer. It is from a Dutch site, where I found the trailer. Should also be on English sites, for sure.

Dr. F.C. Turner - [USERPAGE|USERTALK] - 19:38, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I noticed this earlier today when playing the game. Here is all I can find on it in English for now. Jozal (talk) 21:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Multiplayer

Why is there no online multiplayer or lan capabilities for this game? Sure, the Sims online wasn't really amazing, but on a small scale of players (such as lan) the game would be amazing. I will probably buy this game because pirating it would take a while on this internet. Seriously, when will Maxis learn? First they make Spore... and then they don't even have multiplayer capabilities in the third freaking installment of the game. I'm hoping this will be fixed in an expansion or community modification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.235.227 (talk)

Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. -- Amber (talk + contribs) 20:48, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sim 3 website features

I figured the site features (The Store: purchase objects with SimPoints- how do you acquire them, etc) was an important part of the game, since it allows almost anybody to download anything from anybody, including objects, patterns, full sims and lots, etc, and should be put onto the main page.

in depth about the careers and skills

So I wanted to talk about what specific careers and skills there are in the game and what they need to accomplish their careers or what objects they can use to increase their skill level. What do you guys think? Kimsolis (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Going too in-depth risks turning the article into a game guide which wikipedia is not, looking at the section on careers at the moment, it seems to have enough information to get the point across. The skills section might be worth expanding slightly though, as I dont think it states how to increase skills, it just states some of the skills that are in the game. Dark verdant (talk) 08:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added a brief sentence describing how Sims can increase their skills. -- Amber (talk + contribs) 21:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was a box enumerating 11 careers and several part time jobs. It´s gone now. Why? That is just the kind of information for which people come to this page. 195.46.247.79 (talk) 08:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If people are coming to this page to find out what all the skills are then it would make it more game guidey rather than encyclopedic. The page is here to inform people who may/may not have heard of the game and inform them as to what it is; only general information should be added, not an in depth look at every feature. Dark verdant (talk) 12:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality?

I changed the opening line of this article, which claimed the franchise to be "popular and critically acclaimed". Wikipedia is not an advertising service. It has indeed sold well, I didn't remove that, but if you want to write about public opinion of it (which is, in fact, mixed - please don't claim otherwise) put it under the 'reception' chapter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.192.11 (talk) 20:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense

'There is one known feature from The Sims 1 Expansion, (Superstar) and how they have the feature were you're a celebrity (from reaching the top of a acting or music career or so then by people noticing you in the neighborhood.'
Huh? This needs cleanup. --Flashflash; 07:51, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. Too detailed. Few people would care about what gameplay mechanic comes from what EP. hbdragon88 (talk) 18:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have just removd a list of what new feature comes from what EP. This is unnecessary. Let's summarize and not do a blow-by-blow lists. hbdragon88 (talk) 00:49, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prooth of Sims 3 on PS3 (and Wii)

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6214915.html?tag=latestheadlines;title; —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.183.237.52 (talk) 23:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Console ports

When will Sims 3 be releaced on home consoles, e.g Xbox 360 and PS3? mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 18:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. You may want to try asking on the offical forum or a fan one, however. VI talk 17:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
User VI, may I thank you for your advice/help. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 09:42, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PrequeL?

Why is this in category video game prequels? 86.153.96.77 (talk) 18:17, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is set 25 years (from what I remember) prior to The Sims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.169.64.110 (talk) 17:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

people are saying its 20 years before the simes and 45 years before the sims 2.--98.117.101.29 (talk) 06:15, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Um

The Sims 3 actually killed my brothers computer. I mean it had an error which the hard drive. It is a computer that has dealt with bigger games, so is he entitled to a refund, since the game is now unplayable. If that's a word. I just think, i doubt i'm the only one who has this problem, so maybe it could be somehow incorporated into the article. Thanks 82.39.116.172 (talk) 00:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to the problems which the latest nvidia drivers cause when running The Sims 3 on WIndows XP? If so, it should definitely be mentioned in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.236.114 (talk) 11:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WTF That Neighbourhood Picture?

The neighbourhood picture under the section "Neighborhood exploration" looks nothing like the Sunset Valley I have played several version of in my game. Where does it come from and is it even Sunset Valley? --MimiSard (talk) 17:28, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You will notice that many things have changed about the game since it's orginal announcement; the UI, the Motives and, as in this case, the neighbourhood. The image is merely old, a new image would probably be appropriate however not necessarily needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.169.64.110 (talk) 17:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Worlds

Unlike previous games in "The Sims" series, The Sims 3 uses the concept of Worlds, or towns. This new form of gameplay is entirely self-dependant, whereas The Sims and The Sims 2 relied on a mysterious working location and school that could not be seen from the neighborhood view. This improves player experience since now you can really make friends with Sims and visit them during the game.

Story Progression Mode

Story Progression Mode, or SPM, is what is unique about the Sims 3. It creates a living, breathing and ever-changing town for your Sims to live in. It allows other Sims to get married, age, have children, fail/achieve new goals, get fired...etc. Also it means that, unlike its predessors, The Sims 3 allows your Sims to still be in animation even when you are not playing with them, and not leave them frozen in one spot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Here2helping (talk • contribs) 20:30, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Macintosh Users

Since the 1.5/1.6 update for The Sims 3, Mac users have been mistreated by EA. First, the 1.5/1.6 update with the new basement creation tool never came out the same as for PC users. Now for the 1.8/2.3 update, The Sims 3 promised a shop mode WITH the update, but when installed, no shop mode. Some people, when the update is installed, disk authorization fails which makes the game unplayable. Others has their sim bald and others with no roofs. Many people in the forum complained about this issue, and also complained in the "Help" page for The Sims 3. No SimGuru has yet to answer these complaints, and the answer given in the "Help" page was not helpful at all.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Sims_3&oldid=333388424"