Talk:The Sims (video game)/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1



I've deleted "The Sims 3" section, as it was clearly vandalism.

Strange NPOV issue

Of particular interest are reports that the community has degenerated heavily, verging on the anarchistic. Prostitution and other questionable activities are now commonplace. Naturally, this raises into question the ability for games such as this to be properly moderated.

Am I the only one who thinks that reads as an opinion? And a strange one, at that? The game has no government so it was an anarchy to begin with. I suggest, at the very least, a re-wording of this if not just deletion.

--jenlight 15:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I've found some sort of citation, here; I'm going to add it now. Flage 06:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

some sort is right. There is no by-line and that reads like an editorial piece. While I don't argue that that behaviour takes place there, I'd like a little stronger of a source. --Crossmr 15:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


I'm not a regular Wikipedi-er, so I don't really know how to do it myself, but I think this article could really do with a brief discussion of the way users can create original objects, skins, etc. for the game, and the sheer profusion of websites out there offering such downloads, including the official site's exchanges. One of the things that attracts me the most about this game is seeing how creative my fellow users are in creating original objects and skins. And just for the heck of it I'd mention that when I was looking for my apartment, one building had a website posted, and lo and behold they had made up their floorplans in The Sims, complete with furniture and little people, and put up screenshots. It worked - I moved in! 20:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)SW

That's a very good point, we should add this to the article. Anyone up to the job? --Funnykidrian 04:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
talking about creating custom content and a link to the official exchange. yes. Creating a link repository of various sites for download. no. This just creates the same situation we had with the fansites. --Crossmr 04:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Sims 2 section

I have a feeling the part about the release date really needs rewording, but, I don't have the mental capacity to do so right now. Anyone want to have a go? --HawkeVIPER

The Sims 2 section seems a little long for an article on The Sims. Should it be moved to the Sims 2 page? Pnkrockr 21:22, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm for condensing the section, but the complete removal of the section seems out of place in a parent section that is meant to mention Sims' sequels. I'm returning the section, but cutting down the section a bit. ╫ 25 ◀RingADing▶ 15:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC) ╫


Anyone want to take a stab at describing the expansions? -Frecklefoot

Might I also suggest that the idea that it "has more expansion packs than any other game" is not entirely true? Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 has literally hundreds of expansion packs. Maybe it should talk about "legitimate" expansions to be clear. D.

Female gamers?

I doubt the accuracy (and clarity) of this statement:

attracting casual gamers and female gamers (which account for 50% of the market) - unusual in a market traditionally dominated by young males.

I think the market is still dominated by young males. Does the statement mean that casual gamers and female gamers together account for 50% of the market, or female gamers alone? In addition to clarifying this statement, it'd be nice to have a reference for the figure stated. -Frecklefoot

I figured it was talking about sales of the Sims. So I changed it to that. Who knows if its actually true.. Certainly not me, if no one can offer verification, I'll delete the statement entirely. -Reboot
The statement refers to female gamers... gamespot has an article somewhere on their site stating that over 50% of surveyed users were female.
50% of the registered users of The Sims were female - from a Gamespot article about The Sims Online - here Joeldixon66 06:16, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)


This article was linked to in a July 9 Slashdot story. --Eloquence 05:22 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)


On The Sims, babies turn into children in 3 days, i've read that children turn into adolescents and adolescents into adults, is it worth putting this information on the article? I know it's really only something fans would want to know but it does classify as information concerning the game. If it shouldn't go on the article, should it go anywhere else slighty more specific?--JG ROX 05:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


The Sims lets you take screenshots at any point in the game. Does anyone know if there is any legal restriction on posting these images here? The images get stamped with a "The Sims" watermark, so I'm sure it'd be fine. I just don't want to get Wikipedia in trouble. I'm sure they'd be covered under "fair use." Anyone? —Frecklefoot 03:36, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Okay, from Wikipedia:Fair_use it looks like it is okay (legal) to use screenshots. Will take a look at adding some in the near future. —Frecklefoot 21:19, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Just use {{game-screenshot}} when editing the description for the image. Game screenshots are allowed as long as you put that tag in.

• Thorpe • 19:41, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)


"In addition, the game includes a very advanced architecture system. Incidentally, the game was originally designed as an architecture simulation alone, with the Sims only there to evaluate the houses. During development it was decided that the Sims were more interesting than the houses and a legacy was born. The architectural side of Sims was more fully developed in the SimCity series of games."

The part about The Sims is correct. But then it says that the "architectural side" is more developed in the SimCity series...!?!?! When I think "architectural", I think about building houses, and that you only do in The Sims. SimCity has no "architectural side" at all. Dehumanizer 17:07, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

What's more, SimCity as a series predates The Sims by many years. Perhaps it was intended to refer to a particular recent release/expansion for SimCity which added low-level architectural control? - IMSoP 17:18, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I think it was meant to mean that there is more architecture in SimCity in that it has more buildings and types than The Sims does, but I am just guessing—I didn't write it. But you are correct, you can't build structures manually in SimCity; the game does it for you. You can reword it to make it clearer if you like. :-) —Frecklefoot 17:21, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)

Most Successfule computer game of all time?

in regards to the test it is the most successful PC game in history in the 1st section, i am under the impression that Myst is the most successful of all time. comments? Nate | Talk 00:45, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)

Not anymore, see here. Everyking 01:18, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)


There was a C64 game back in the 1980s called "little computer people" which sounds superficially similar to The Sims. Haven't played the latter so can't compare, but would be interesting to know how much one owes to the other Mmartins 09:06, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have. The game has only a few passing similarities to Little Computer People (LCP). In LCP, the user controlled an animated sprite of a character who lived in a cutaway view of a house. The character could play a few simple games with the user (checkers, Go Fish, etc.) and the user could instruct the character to do certain things (I think take a shower or bath was one thing). But it was all very cutesy and was aimed at young children. The Sims appeals to a much larger demographic. In addition, the user couldn't change the house, the characer interacted with the user, not other characters (there was only the one character) and the character lived out his whole "life" in the house--they never went anywhere (that I recall, it's been a long time).
I don't even think we can say that Will Wright was inspired by LCP. From what I've read, there's no indication that he ever played it. And in the beginning, The Sims was just supposed to be a "toy" where the user could costruct a house. It was only later that Wright thought it'd be more engaging if the house actually had inhabitants. So, we can't say that Wright was trying to create a modern version of LCP--it was only later in development that adding people even occured to him. HTH! :-) Frecklefoot | Talk 14:39, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)


I just saw the comment in The Sims Online section about prostitution. How is this even possible? Frecklefoot | Talk 17:34, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

Although I haven't played it, I've read articles that mention the prostitution before, so I know it's not just BS, but I still don't know what prostitution means in the context of a game where there's no nudity and certainly no sex. Maybe they just lay in bed together. That wouldn't be worth too much to me, but maybe a sim's desires are more easily satisfied. Everyking 18:18, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
There is a Nude Patch for The Sims Online. --Delf 19:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
It is in fact possible to be a prostitute in the game as one can charge other sims to engage in the "Play in Bed" interaction on lovebeds. ( 18:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC))


The Sims is listed in the list of controversial games. Why is it controversial?

I think it is The Sims Online that is more controversial. Read that article for why. Actually, The Sims has also been criticized for its consumerism, mentioned in this article. Frecklefoot | Talk 18:21, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

There is a chance that players could "cybersex" useing the chat function, therefore making it unsutable for children, as there are no moderators.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 21:56, September 10, 2006.

It's unsuitable for me? (Goes there.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


This article is just screaming for a picture! 19:55, 16 February 2005 (UTC)

I agree. However, I canot help much here. Can anyone else see this request?
I am not a vandal but (My IP address is not permanent.) 19:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
This request has been filled a long ago with the addition of two existing screenshots. However, I do encourage at least one more screenshot to provide a little more features (notably children). ╫ 25 ◀RingADing▶ 02:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC) ╫


Expanded Ports section. The firt Sims on consoles is released in 2002. In 2003 released Busting Out. Portable games like GBA and N-Gage received ports to. And Apple Macintosh received a port of first game.

Category:Real-time_strategy_computer_games ?

Do the Sims games really fall into this real-time strategy category? RTS is the opposite of turn-based gameplay and generally has opposing sides competing. Any thoughts?Tertiary7 18:37, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Like most games, The Sims is hard to pigeon-hole into one category/genre. Is it a simulation? Sort of, but not really: it doesn't mirror real life too closely. Is it an RTS? It has aspects of it, but it isn't what most people would consider an RTS. I'd say it does qualify, however, since it's as "real time" as any other RTS and their is an aspect of strategy. Do you take the job as the cop or politician? Do you take a day off or go to work? Do you buy a hot tub to help win friends or add a new room? Not really in-depth decisions, but their is an element of strategy. Others feel free to chime in. Frecklefoot | Talk 21:17, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)


No sooner had Thorpe removed the Cheats section from the article, had Sexy slimgirl (her username, not necessarily a description) come along and added a whole new much much longer Cheats section. Before we get into an edit war, let's resolve this here. Are we going to include a Cheats section or not? Personally, I don't mind having a cheats section (Wikipedia is not paper) as long as the wording is clean and intelligent. Frecklefoot | Talk 18:46, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

  • A link to cheats for The Sims could be put in External links. Come on, people - cheats is clearly for game sites and this is not one of them. The page only needs to deacribe the game and features.

• Thorpe • 19:18, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It seems fine to me to have it, but it should probably be reasonably concise and written in an encyclopedic rather than a game-guide fashion. Everyking 19:22, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Well, would we put in the lyrics for a song title on Wikipedia? I don't think so.

• Thorpe • 19:38, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Commercial lyrics are copyrighted, so it isn't exactly the same thing. I think it would be closer to compare an analysis or explanation of a song's lyrics with a description of game cheats. Definitely I think a case could be made that in depth discussion of cheats is too trivial. If a few are more notable than the rest, they could be described, the rest briefly summarized, and then a link to another source with more detail. Everyking 23:21, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My $.02 (again), we are not paper and cheats are definately informative. They'd have to be described in an encyclopedic manner, however (the previous versions kinda sucked). At the very least, I think they should be summarized.

The problem with only including them as extern links is that they change often and some sites just plain go down. Trying to keep the links current could be burdensome.

Perhaps this discussion should be moved to or mentioned at The computer and video games project? It'd be nice to get their input as to what has been done in other similar articles. Frecklefoot | Talk 14:17, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

Well, I am sure someone will make an edit if the site is no longer available. Also, many top game sites like GameFAQs and GameSpot won't go down at all because of them being owned by CNET.
• Thorpe • 15:46, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Graphic glitching on modern video cards

I've reinstalled The Sims on my computer with an ATi Mobility Radeon 9800 (256 MB) video card, and the game's graphics glitch up during in-game play. Maybe someone who knows exactly what's going on could add a small note or maybe section about how this game cannot run on certain modern video cards? I'm not certain how informative or wanted this would be, but it's at least informative to mention how this game just plain simply can't work properly on modern hardware.

Pool ladder accident merged here

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pool ladder accident. Johnleemk | Talk 10:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

i dont understand the process of page deletion, but please delete the pool ladder section. it is so out of place it messes up the entire article.

Fan Sites

I believe this article should adopt the same policy adopted in The Sims 2 article regarding fan site links. viewable here --Crossmr 03:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Insect Death

After spending about 30 minutes on google I've found that this appears to be nothing more than a rumour. The only place it was reported was a sim fansite that no longer exists. No one else seems able to duplicate this death, and as such I don't really think it belongs here. --Crossmr 15:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

This is possible by leaveing lots of dirty plates and rotten food about, the flys will swarm and devour the sim closest to it.

They do actually talk about this death in the Sims2 guidebook by Prima I believe, which I do not have in front of me at the time. Pnkrockr 15:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

This is an article on The Sims, not The Sims 2.--Crossmr 19:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
My mistake. Have them both on my watchlist and wasn't paying attention as to which one I was writing on. Pnkrockr 20:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Soundtrack and music

The Sims has a unique sound. Anyone knows who the composers/performers are? Shawnc 13:45, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The credits fro the music are listed at the back of the manual of the orginal game. --Funnykidrian 04:39, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Well could someone please put it up :/ --Perplextrator 07:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
My two cents. I don't believe full credits are needed, because it's generally not informative to the topic and advices against the inclusion of indiscriminate information. What would be preferable is the mention of key staff members, written in the form of a prose about the music featured in the game. ╫ 25 ◀RingADing▶ 12:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC) ╫
For The Sims, the music was done by several people. I think Mark Mothersbaugh—yes, the guy from Devo—did the music for The Sims 2. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

OFLC Rating with Deluxe Edition

The Australian OFLC rating for The Sims is G8+, but The Sims: Deluxe Edition is rated M15+. Can anyone possibly tell me why that is? I own Deluxe Edition and see no reason why it is M15+ and think it should be G8+ just like the sims. Jam01 08:35, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it's because of the Love Bed?Abby724 21:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Super Nintendo

Its not exactly slang when Super Nintendo [1] has a much higher google prescence than Super NES [2]. By about 66% more.--Crossmr 14:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

SNES produces far more results (although it's obvious the abbreviation may have other uses), and is likely to be a more frequently used term to refer to the machine. Rewording as such and ensuring link the console's article. ╫ 25 ◀RingADing▶ 11:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC) ╫


i wrote some fixes about the sims and the sims 2 so why did you delete it?.however i will write it again but please don't delete it?

Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. See WP:NOT.--Crossmr 18:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

so you will delete the new words that i wrote from the sims -the sims2?

I already reverted your edit of The Sims 2. If someone hasn't reverted it by the time I get to The Sims, it will be. There are a number of things incorrect with your placement of this information. First, at least on The Sims 2, it is placed in the wrong spot. The end of the article is not the correct place for the edit you made. It best belongs in the bug section, but only if it has not been addressed officially by Electronic Arts and Maxis. That said, Crossmr is correct. There is a Wikibook for The Sims and The Sims 2, which is generally used for the "how-to" guide, though I do not feel that it is being used, or even looked at much. --Carl (talk|contribs) 18:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I kept getting prank calls

on the Game you can eather get calls for money or pranks. If you get a call that says We will come for you in a hour, or the package has been made you have been warined. It might be a person that will bust in to your house. All you do is buy a AMT bugler thing. Her is another I always get a prank call saying were coming for you don't go out of your house. Aelita 101 23:06, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Mind translating that into English? — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
That's not the way to treat newbies. :P I believe he/she is referring to phone calls a Sim receives which were completely pointless in the game, such as "Do you canoe?" or "The end is near. Make preparations." The message is also suggesting that a Sim may receive a phone call containing a warning of an impending burglary in the house (or a threat of sorts) if the user doesn't install a burglar alarm; that I have never encountered, though. ╫ 25 ◀RingADing▶ 15:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC) ╫

Origins and development

Looks like an anon user has added a completely new section with full-blown contents on the game's development. As much as I would welcome a section like this (seeing how the concept itself is as old as SimCity 2000), there are a few passages that I have to dispute. Here's one that caught my eye:

Then in 1995 EA who had heard of the idea was convinced that the game would become another prestigous video game from Maxis. EA then told Will that if he had a chance to continue to develop the idea some more so that EA would publish the game. Will agreed and bought upon the idea that EA wanted to publish his so called "un-wanted game" or atleast at the time thats what Maxis thought at time. Soon enough when he proved Maxis wrong about his idea. Production quickly began another a new name "Project X" in 1995.

After production for the game finally began in 1995. Will was interviewed about his idea in a PC Magazine article published some time around 1995 he talked about players getting the chance to controll a computer generated character in there own little world that would give the player the oppurtunity to controll. As production began production also made several changes.

Sometime around 1997 Will changed the name from "Project X" to The Sims as a knock-off title to his Sim Series that had been widley succsessfull in the Early to Mid 1990s. Though Will also realized that the characters were simulated themselves. So it became obvious on the games title.

According to Geoff Keighley's Behind The Games, no such collaboration existed between EA and Maxis before the 1997 acquisition (or even the mention of EA prior to the period). In fact, EA's reason for acquiring Maxis was the SimCity franchise; there were no mentions of The Sims or anything of the likes. The duration of development is not made clear either, so I can't confirm if the game was in actual development long before SimCity 3000. The PC Magazine reference is also of questionable reliability; an excerpt from the interview would be useful. From my present knowledge, The Sims was most likely to be developed after EA's acquisition of Maxis.

Interestingly, there are articles mentioning Wright's house burning down. [3] [4]25 ◀RingADing▶ 10:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC) ╫

I say delete the whole thing except for the part that is sourced and only if that source really says what the article says. EA originally thought the game was going to be a total flop--they weren't excited about it when Wright was developing it.
The Sims was developed after the acquisition of Maxis by EA. They already owned it when The Sims went into developemtn. From what I can tell, the whole section is creative writing and Total BS. — Frecklefoot | Talk 01:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
The editor who included the section has notified me that some of the information is sourced from a behind-the-scenes feature of The Sims 2 on a demo disc that accompanied the Makin' Magic expansion. Can we find a duplication or secondary source to the BoS feature? ╫ 25 ◀RingADing▶ 10:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC) ╫
To add to the previous message, the editor has appeared to response swiftly with good faith by modifying the section a bit. However, I was forced to revert and modify portions of the changes for the following reasons:
  • The current revision is still not satisfactory when adapting to new information, placing EA's skepticism and thought of the game's concept being a flop before the acquisition (in 1995), when it is still not known if the company was ever interested with Maxis' or Wright's projects before 1997.
  • Another added passage states that "EA and Maxis skeptical views soon changed as they joined Will on the project" in 1997; while I'm not sure about Maxis, EA (if Frecklefoot is right) would still be unconvinced that the game will sell, at least until the game's success in 2000.
  • There is also the issue of readability. One paragraph's writing is (no offense, really) poorly structured that it fails to clarify which company (Maxis and EA) is convinced with Wright's idea and which is not. This could confuse readers a lot. Apparently the structure is the result of edits by me and the anon editor. A party was omitted by mistake by me, and the sentence was later restructured with a different meaning by the anon editor.
  • I also undone the removal of the verification tags, as there is no substitute, and I doubt the amount of material in the section that is actually sourced from the "behind-the-scenes feature." Seeing the anon editor has the actual BoS feature, it would be a good start for him/her to tag citations on each passage that originated from the BoS feature him/herself. Placing a "<ref>[Place reference here]</ref>" tag after each of the said sentences is a good start.
Hope that helps. ╫ 25 ◀RingADing▶ 15:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC) ╫

Some Changes to the Expansion packs and Compilations sections

I removed the original game from the list of expansion packs since it is not an expansion pack. I also reworded and shortened the descriptions for some of the releases in the Compilations section. I didn't remove any content other than the prices. I removed the prices so the writing is consistent (there is no mention of prices for other Sims-related products, and since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a marketplace, I felt the mention of prices is unnecessary unless it is needed to explain or clarify the topic). --Funnykidrian 03:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

The Sims for Wii? (Animal Crossing style?)

Does anyone who reads Japanese know if and how this upcoming Japanese-only EA people-sim game for Wii relates to "The Sims" franchise?


It's being referenced to in the English language game press as The Sims for Wii, and I remember EA announcing a Wii-exclusive version of the game, but is this it? (or perhaps this is what it morphed into?) -- stewacide 06:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

This talk page is for discussion of the article, not discussion of the sims franchise in general. Try a fansite or official forums.--Crossmr 14:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I fully realize that. I pointed it out because if it is a "Sims" game it should be included in the article along with the other sequels and spin-offs mentioned. -- stewacide
Try the Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance) You might be able to find someone who speaks japanese and english, or they might be able to direct you to a user group that does translations.--Crossmr 20:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Demographics of players

This page mentions that over 60% of The Sims players are female. Shawnc 10:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Sims 3

The Sims 3 was officially announced in November of last year. Here is the source and confirmation Please remove the "citation needed" request in the article for the Sims in regards to this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 17:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC).

I fixed the incorrect attempt at citation (it's tricky, it took me a while to get it at first too). So considered it done. Next time, post your comments at the bottom of the page. This ensures that they'll get noticed. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, kind sir. There seems to be alot of confusion in regards to the Sims 3, there really shouldn't be, as one of the chief executives of EA has announced the title, slated for a late 2008/early 2009 release. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 20:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC).
To who it may concern, stop editing the section on the Sims 3. It is officially in development, end of story. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 03:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC).
Please see WP:OWN you do not own this article and do not tell other editors that they shouldn't touch what you've added.--Crossmr 08:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Excuse me but I was stating the facts, if your gonna tell me not tell other editors what to do, then you shouldn't be telling me what to do editing the article, it's self defeating on your part
Wikipedia is about the facts of the matter, not the opinions of views of its editors, thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 23:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC).

Split Article?

i think this article should be split into The Sims (Series) and The Sims (Video Game), the former being this article, and the later referring in detail to The Sims 1 - without mention of sequels 15:31, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

The sequels section isn't terribly long at this point. 2 paragraphs and a small number of very short descriptors. There is already a "complete list of sims games" article.--Crossmr 16:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Merge from List of famous people in The Sims series

Please merge relevant content, if any, from List of famous people in The Sims series per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of famous people in The Sims series. (If there is nothing to merge, just leave it as a redirect.) Thanks. Quarl (talk) 2007-03-08 13:13Z

I've gone through and everything that was on it was covered in the relevant articles.--Crossmr 14:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Okay, thanks! Quarl (talk) 2007-03-08 14:06Z


If a Wikipedia user views the article on 'the Sims' it states "First released on February 4, 2000, the base game has sold more than 6.3 million copies, making it the best-selling PC game in history." However, the Best Selling Games article states that the Sims sold 16 million copies. Why is this, and could someone please correct the data? 23:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)Joshua

I'm glad this is being corrected, thanks guys. 12:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)Joshua

Alternate Names

It should be added that certain add-ons had different names in the UK (and possibly other territories): Livin' large -> Livin' it up; Vacation -> On holiday 20:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

unneccesary. 18:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)Joshua

Military school

Not sure why the information about about Sim children being sent to military school keeps getting removed from the article, so I figured I'd bring it up here. Any consensus on if it should be kept or taken out? Pnkrockr 16:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead and restore it. Random IP removing stuff with no explanation isn't really a reason to concern yourself. Unless they want to start leaving edit summaries explaining why or visit the talk page, I wouldn't worry.--Crossmr 02:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Sims 3 Release Date

I have changed the section on the Sims 3 to reflect that it will most likely be released in late 2008 or early 2009 according to Warren Jenson. He stated it's release will MOST likely be releative to the '09 fiscal year, which ends April 2009. For some reason, someone interpreted this incorrectly to mean late 2009 or early 2010.

Citations, NPOV Sims Online

I'm not sure if I should start a new section or just make several comments in the other sections on this talk page, so forgive me if this isn't standard etiquette.

Firstly, I've changed some citations, not in terms of content but stylistic changes according to WP:CITE/ES. There are probably more that could be made, but I edited the ones that jumped out at me -- this is a very long article, so there is much to comb over!

One thing I did remove is the citation for military school (I replaced it with a citation-needed tag). The reason for this is that the URL given at Mall of the Sims does not actually say why Sim children are sent to Military school, only that you cannot have them come back, and the phrase the citation was for was about why they're sent in the first place. I'm not sure of the intention -- was the citation simply an attempt to prove that Military school existed in The Sims (I say this because of the section discussing Military school above)? I feel there must be better sources for that. However, of course, I am recording the page originally used.

Secondly, I attempted to modify the Sims Online section to be less NPOV (as dicussed at the top of this page). I removed the line "Naturally, this brings into question the scope for games such as this to be properly moderated." entirely as I believe it's ... I don't know how to say it, but it seems opionated and chatty instead of encyclopedic. I also replaced the word "questionable" with the word "sexual". It's not Wikipedia's job to judge what is questionable in Sims Online, of course. If there's a source with some phrasing to quote about questionableness, then that's should be used instead.

Lastly, I also moved the article is missing citations and/or footnotes template to the top, as I feel quite a few sections, not just the Overview one, could use more citations. --Melissa Della 10:47, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


20th Century Fox has just bought the rights to a Sims movie. Here are the details: Anyone want to add this? 08:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Here's another site about it, from Fox Brings 'SIMS' to Bigscreen Pnkrockr 12:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
one more source [6] Oidia 03:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
I've added this in. There is also a page at The Sims (film). --Theloon 06:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Request to merge

There is not sufficient information about this film to warrant its own article at this point, considering that it has only been announced. I would suggest merging and redirecting the information here until the film enters actual production (meaning an established director, cast, and production start date). Studios often pick up feature film rights to materials and begin development, but they do not necessarily become produced. See the concept of development hell. If this film has evidence of actual production, then it can have its own article. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 16:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

This film is already notable, whether or not it is ever released. Therefore, I think we need to treat it as independent from the game, and so it should be kept as a seperate article. J Milburn 21:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


The film should stay in this article until enough information is present to warrant its own article. --C. Raleigh 01:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

And just to clear things up, the Film section can be moved to its own article once the movie is officially announced, but not before then. --C. Raleigh 04:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The Sims (Series)

This article is more about the series; than the game "The Sims" some of this article should be moved to The Sims (Series) what do you think discuss - Turk brown 14:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

No. In all reality the series doesn't need that much independent coverage. there is extensive coverage of the individual parts, people can read up on them in full detail.--Crossmr 22:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah but if you move Expansion packs, Complitations, Sequels, Ports, Film (for example) to The Sims (Series). This article could be just about the Base Game and would make this article compact, cleaner and easier to read. - Turk brown 17:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Most of those sections could be shrunk and turned in to see also lists anyway or removed entirely since we have the template at the bottom which contains links to all of those items.--Crossmr 18:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


does the sims complete collection contain the sims 2 and is the sims 2 an expansion pack if the original is already in computer.

Three things, im trying not to bite here, one, The sims complete collection does not contain the sims 2, the sims and the sims 2 are 2 different game. so you dont need sims 1 for sims 2 or vice versa, two please do not ask that kind of question here, we are an encyclopedia not a gameguide, and three please sign your comments with four tidals (~)sorry if i appear rude please assume good faith . Blacksmith talkEditor Review 05:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Photo with visual reality simualtor

RE: the photo of 'A Sim enjoys playing with a virtual reality simulator on The Sims: Deluxe Edition.' may i note that the sims deluxe edition was mearly a colllaboeration of all expansion packs and the sims. i beileve that this object came with livin'large. Blacksmith talkEditor Review 05:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, this object came with the base game. The Sims Deluxe Edition, as explained in the article itself, is a compilation of only The Sims (base game), Livin' Large, and exclusive Deluxe Edition content. --Funnykidrian 22:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

More Vandalisms

Some idiot(s) keep tampering with the Sims 3 section, removing the citation for the Sims 3 article, removing punctuation and altering the release date. Ugh, could someone please lock the article or something. 07:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC) Joshua

Yet again this article is vandalised. Same section, the Sims 3. 11:00, 28 September 2007 (UTC) Joshua

This article has been repeatedly vandalized over and over, now the Sims 3 section has been completely removed. 05:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Joshua

Would someone please do something?!

I can see from the edit history that many people (generally anonymous IPs) are vandalising this article on a regular basis. Would someone please block IP edits? 06:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC) (we anonymous IPs aren't all bad.. just most)

Split the Article?

I think things pertaining to the entire series should be separated into a different article then the actual first game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Sims Logo.svg

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:The Sims Logo.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Unclear text

"In addition, the game includes a very advanced architecture system. The game was originally designed as an architecture simulation alone, with the Sims there only to evaluate the houses.[5] During development it was decided that the Sims were more interesting than the houses. This is a common trait in Maxis games."

What is "a common trait in Maxis games." ? --Rajah 13:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I would presume it means that the people being more interesting than the houses (or the live mode being more interesting than the Build/Buy mode) is a common trait in Maxis games. However, this is POV (certainly not one a simfanatic might share after having spent 100+ hours going through every possible interaction and career) and so I took it out and altered the paragraph a bit. See if you like the new and improved (?) version.--Clicketyclick 18:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

To Crossmr -

Text from cited article: With Alexander on the brain, Wright conceived of a game in which the player would first design and build a house, then invite digital people to come and live in it. Initially, the people were to be little more than an animated scoring system: They'd walk around and "let you know whether your house was good or not." But as the design got farther along, the human figures got more and more interesting, and "we developed this simulation system that ended up being much more robust than I was expecting."

Text in this wiki entry: "In addition, the game includes a very advanced architecture system. The game was originally designed as an architecture simulation alone, with the Sims there only to evaluate the houses, but during development it was decided that the Sims were more interesting than originally anticipated and their initially limited role in the game was developed further."

How are those claims not supported in the citation?--clicketyclickyaketyyak 10:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Where is it described as a "very advanced architecture system"?--Crossmr 20:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

So it was because of the very first sentence in the paragraph that you were removing the entire paragraph? Let me reiterate: don't throw out the baby with the bath-water. In any case, not every single phrase in an article here must be direct quotation or rewording. It is reasonable to assume that a game created with the "Berkeley architect named Christopher Alexander [...] on the brain" because Wright's "inspiration came from a dense, contrarian, 1,171-page tome on architectural theory" would have a serious focus on an architectural system, especially considering The Sims was only intended to be "a game in which the player would first design and build a house" and then have their design's functionality graded. And if assumption isn't enough, a few minutes of game-play would assure anyone that it has an advanced architectural design system, or at least an advanced one for its time, as many games once considered ground-breaking don't always appear as impressive nowadays (i.e. Tomb Raider's 3D graphics and polygon-pushing). But just because a modern perspective may make these game systems seem less impressive doesn't mean that these games should not be called "very advanced". After all, these games were necessary in the evolution of the systems they were built with/upon and its arguably only because of the older games that more impressive newer games came about, meaning that it is only because the old games were made that we have come to a point where we can look back and, by comparison, say those old games are not impressive.

Wright has been developing architectural design systems for a while now, with the recently released MySims allowing complete customisation of objects and exteriors (instead of choosing from a catalog) by using and manipulating basic building blocks, which is a system that will also be in place in the upcoming Spore. And Spore also features a similar system that allows for creature design customisation by manipulating pre-made shapes. It seems to me that Wright/Maxis have been pursuing a structural design system that is simple and easy-to-use but also allows for a high level of customisation. TS1 was either easy without a high degree of customisation (in-game) or it had a high level of customisation (using third party programs) but it wasn't very easy. TS2 improved on that, and TS3 will prove on TS2, and MySims/Spore improve on it in other directions. But I think it is undeniable that TS1 provided gamers with a level of easy customisation of buildings that they hadn't seen before. Any game which is easy enough that it has a pick-up-and-play style yet is complex enough that it sustains interest by allowing for a high degree of customisation has, by any measure, a very advanced design system.</simfanaticism>--clicketyclickyaketyyak 22:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like original research. In fact yes all phrases must be sourced, especially when they create point of view or put forth a theory or opinion about the subject like the advanced nature of a product. Also remember this article is about The Sims and not his future products. Its well within norm for future products to be more advanced than its predecessor, that isn't any grounds for calling the original game advanced. You can't draw the conclusion about how advanced you feel something is unless a reliable source draws that conclusion for you. In fact many people would argue that the building system is in fact not really that advanced especially when you consider that fans basically had to beg for 45 degree walls in TS2 and only then most objects don't function correctly when used at that angle. But that is neither here nor there and the talk page isn't the place for the discussion. i've done so only to point out that its arguable either way and unless a reliable source says it for you, you can't draw a subjective conclusion.--Crossmr 04:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The Sims 3 infobox

People keep insisting on adding an infobox for The Sims 3. There is no official information to go in the box, so the box itself is automatically original research. Also, it would seem to me that only one infobox per article would be ideal, so as not to confuse people. At any rate, until something is announced, please refrain from adding an infobox for The Sims 3. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 05:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thats right, we should not add an infobox for The Sims 3. Mythdon (talk) 08:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)


I think there should be mention of the characters of The Sims, you know the pre made Sims on The Sims and The Sims 2 games. Mythdon (talk) 08:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC) There used to be one, but it was deleted. --Kuriza (talk) 08:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Article for the series of games

I suggest splitting the "Sequels" section into an article called The Sims (video game series) and also have information on the series of The Sims games without having to put all the information on individual articles. Other video game series have articles on them, so can we?. Mythdon (talk) 22:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Fansite Newsletter

I noticed someone keeps changing what that Guest wrote up for that fansite producer Email. I'm having a hard time believing we're reverting that because an email went to a fansite. Plus an employee from Maxis has verified (,item.43,item.61,item.104,item.41,item.127,item.23#d7ab1c37bb834cd2252e1e66af6cbd10) it as a legitimate email. Let's avoid reverting again as it would probably trigger a page lock. (ManagerJosh (talk) 19:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC))

What bugged me is that the email was linked to inline, when it should have been used as a reference (<ref>). I was just going to fix it, but then I saw it had been reverted before, so I just reverted it again. Are fansites considered reliable sources? How can we verify the reliability of a "Maxis employee"? Is the EA BBS a reliable source? If this is so gosh-danged important, why did EA email a fansite instead of making a press release? These are all questions that need to be addressed before I think it can be re-added to the article. (NOTE: ManagerJosh has about 8 edits, hardly an experienced editor). — Frecklefσσt | Talk 20:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Fansites generally can be a good source of information. Maxis makes it a point to keep fansites in the loop. Especially with The Sims 3. They've requested fansites get involved last week through this posting and news piece on February 29. Historically Maxis and EA has been inviting Sims fans from around the globe to take a sneak peak at titles. I wouldn't consider all fansites can provide verifyable evidence, but there are some that do make the effort to verify the content and legitimacy of emails. All Maxis employees or Sims Team Employees in the Sims 2 BBS have their text highlighted in a green box. I may have only 8 edits because I don't edit much on Wikipedia since of time. (ManagerJosh (talk) 20:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)).
I took a look at what the letter contains and noticed that you are the operator of the BBS. I therefore conclude that the post is spam. Despite what EA and Maxis do with them, according to Wikipedia policies, fansite BBSes are not a reliable source of information. It's also apparent that Maxis is going to make some big announcement on the 19th. We can wait until then. We don't have to be on the bleeding edge here. Still, this is just MHO. Wait for other editors to chime in. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 21:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
ManagerJosh owns WorldSims, a large fansite which has been running for quite some time. If he's campaigning for fansites to be used as references, then he obviously will have a vested interest in seeing them put on here. Fansites are generally NOT considered a good third-party source. SMC (talk) 23:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
It also disappoints me that only a few (two? three?) of his eight edits have been doing something other than pushing fansite external links into articles. SMC (talk) 23:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The Sims 3

Hey I just saw some loser edited the Sims 3 section and it has no info relating to TS3. Could somebody fix that because I'm not in to the editing thing and don't know what to say about TS3.Bizub4 17:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

All I have to say is..... 'Great Job!'

What?!?!?!?!?!?Bizub4 18:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Please not that the Sims 3 IS NOT rumored to be in development. It was officially anounced in November of 2006 during a financial report of EA.
I'm an idiot, I just mispelled note. Pssh. Sorry, guys.
The current article says the Sims 3 is scheduled for a 2008 release in the U.S. and 2009 in all other regions. No citation is given, where does this information come from, it's a new one on me? Last thing I know EA said, which was last year, is that TS3 would be a fiscal 09 title. 21:44, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Joshua

The Sims 3 site up at nothing yet though —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

i know there isnt much information about the game YET,but i think sims 3 should have its own page...this page is for "the sims 1" only,and sims 3 should have nothing to do with it....more info about the game will be available march 19....sims 3 will have its own page eventually,so why delay something thats going to happen anyway...Mimibianca (talk) 08:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The Sims (video game series)

Back in like January/February, i created an article on The Sims video game series. Do any of you approve of this?. Mythdon (talk) 21:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary. This article serves the same purpose. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 18:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
We should take all series information from this article and put it into The Sims (video game series) so it would make more sense. Other video game articles have a series article. I cant believe The Sims (video game series) was not created years ago. Mythdon (talk) 19:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Be that as it may, you'll have to get other editors to buy in on it before you do it. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 21:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I've just stumbled upon this debate. I was expecting a The Sims (Series) article and was a bit surprised to find this article in it's present form. Given that The Sims will soon be on version 3 and that it already has bucket loads of expansion packs it really should have a Series article.
Anyway the reason I came here, I saw this article on Eurogamer and thought it might be of use to the History section of the The Sims (Series) article I was expecting to find.. - X201 (talk) 14:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I see someone nominated the article for deletion. I added my vote to keep it. I also added a little more info that I thought an overview on the series ought to have. I suspect we'll start using it soon, as soon as it passes the AfD. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The Sims Movie section removal?

I just created a seperate page on The Sims Movie with all the basic info on what people would want to know, but I would like to request/ask these things. 1. Since it is my first article, can someone please take a look at it and improve it please. Thank youK-man-1 (talk) 16:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

First, I think this has been discussed before, but I think the decision was to not create an article until there is more verifiable information on the film. Second, you didn't wikilink to your article so others can look at it. Third, you only asked one thing. What else did you want to ask? — Frecklefσσt | Talk 16:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake I only wanted to ask the one thing. And there is no longer much point in anyone going to the page anyways, it might as well be deleted. K-man-1 (talk) 20:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Best Selling PC Game?

Is this actually true? Including expansion packs and spinoffs it's clearly the best selling PC game of all time, but does anyone have an actual number for units sold of only The Sims excluding expansion packs? The only quoted number on the page 6.3 million units, which is nowhere near the best selling PC game. On the selling list, The Sims is claimed to have sold 50 million units, but following the citation that claim seems very tenuous at best. shadowlessClick (talk) 05:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I've added the 16 million figure from a EA press release. [7] Concerning the 50 million figure in List of best-selling video games, see Talk:List of best-selling video games#The Sims. --Silver Edge (talk) 07:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


Even if they don't each deserve a page of their own, shouldn't they be given a compilation page similiar to The Sims 2 Stuff Packs? The information given on this page is not sufficient. --Kuriza (talk) 01:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

But what can be added that's of any relevance? Most of the stuff, while important to Sims fans, is not important to readers. Much of it is fairly minor. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:50, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
As are the articles on The Sims 2's EPs. If these pages on The Sims' expansions are merged, do the same for The Sims 2. The mergists look like friggin Sims-2-loving hypocrites if they don't. - Two hundred percent (talk) 01:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Plumbob (The Sims kind!)

Hi, are there any pages describing the plumbob - not the type used in diy but the one used in sims, iknow that its for but because im a new member i don't know hoiw to make new pages, could anyone tell me if there is/was a page or how to make them. thanks Ĵâĸε (talk) 17:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The Sims Hot Date

Designing the article and will be finished soon.Darkside2000 (talk) 12:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The Sims 3 needs its own wikipedia page.

Developers of the game have all hinted that they are about to release loads of information. (March 19) There also have been some interviews and e-mails from these developers. There is also an article in the PC Gamer magazine about the Sims 3 that is coming on the 13th. I don't have time to do it though... Moldy912 (talk) 02:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

oh yeah definitely im surprised that there wasnt one made ages ago when the sims 3 was confirmed! Msman (talk) 09:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

i know there isnt much information about the game YET,but i think sims 3 should have its own page...this page is for "the sims 1" only,and sims 3 should have nothing to do with it....more info about the game will be available march 19....sims 3 will have its own page eventually,so why delay something thats going to happen anyway.....well,since we all agree..and there are no other users discussing..then what are we waiting for..ill create it now.....;)........Mimibianca (talk) 15:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Apparently i cant create the page all by myself.........its protected temporarily..and only administrators can create/edit it........:(.....someone tell the administrators to create it.......ASAP....Mimibianca (talk) 15:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, but I think it can wait until the announcement to see if it is anything other than marketing fluff. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
The Sims 3 needs its own page, I agree. Half-Life 2 Episode Three has its own page yet a mere 3 or 4 sentences in length because nothing is known of the game. Many details are known about the Sims 3, from AI, multiplayer, to towns and such. Even more will become apparent in the March 19th release of information from EA and the already released Games For Windows exclusive coverage of it. Yeah, give Sims 3 its own page. 'nuff said. (talk) 21:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC) J.

Yeah it's time for TS3 to get it's own page. Heck it was probably time for it to get one back in 2006.Bizub4 (talk) 23:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

When The Sims3 came out it should have already gottten It's own page because lots of people probley hear about at school and want to know about it so I think it should get it's own page.Also people really like that game. So Ishould thanks!!! (Twilight578 (talk) 15:53, 12 April 2009 (UTC)) ~Edward and Bella~

The Sims Development

A number of the Sims related articles incorrectly attribute The Sims Expansion pack work to EA Black Box or Visceral Games. Though the expansion packs have been developed in Redwood City since 2004, they have always been developed by "The Sims Studio" (previously called The Sims Division) The Sims Studio is located at the Redwood City Campus. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghrentin (talkcontribs) 20:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


I do not think a WineX/Cedega port of the game really counts as a proper port of the game to Linux, nowhere else on Wikipedia is this considered the case. It can still be mentioned on the article, but I think it should not be considered a Linux game. Comrade Hamish Wilson (talk) 00:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Plans to add iphone edition of Sims?

Plans to add iphone edition of Sims? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:05, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

PS2 version

The PS2 version is listed as DVD-ROM, when it is actually a blue disk (CD-ROM).

N1fffan (talk) 08:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

GameCube PAL+EU Release

The GameCube data under release date lists both a PAL and EU releases, but provides no info on what would be different between them. Seems strange. Kolano (talk) 17:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: pages moved. Andrewa (talk) 04:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

– Per prescient of Talk:SimCity (1989 video game)#Requested move 3. I would think the same reasons for moving that page would apply here. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 13:48, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Move to The Sims (video game) as per WP:NCVG("the series page should reside at the primary name if the series possesses a minimum of 3 video game articles as well as at least one other unrelated video game or related media item.") - X201 (talk) 14:04, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Its normal, we only use a disambiguation suffix when its necessary. - X201 (talk) 15:09, 9 November 2012 (UTC) Additional: In fact the year isn't needed in this proposal, only video game, The Sims (video game) - X201 (talk) 15:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
X201's right, and Final Fantasy (video game) doesn't have a year, so I'll remove the year from the proposed new title. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 15:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Okay that's good.--Krystaleen 15:32, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Move per discussion above.--Krystaleen 15:32, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Support per Krystaleen. ApprenticeFan work 22:49, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.