TSR Sharing your infomation!

[CJane]

A lotta things will have to be rectified before I load Sims 3 on my PC.

I am stoked to see Solander here! As some of you know I came into this late due to my long hiatus from the Sims 2/TSR. I always wonder what has happened to some of my favorite creators, and it's good to see one here whom I admired.

That is all...back to lurking for me, and send more rum. Kthx.

[rum nate]

What I head about how cc for The Sims 3 is going to be is that you will only be able to upload and download from the official Sims 3 exchange. I am kind of leaning towards that because of the instructions on how to get that free style pattern that you could download after buying that Sims 3 preview disk from Target(hey it was only 99 cents, but really it should have been no more then 50 cents).
But anyway the instructions on how to download the pattern is:
1.Type in the website
2.Type in the code and click submit
3.Then open up the Sims 3 game launcher and select the style pattern  in the downloads tab and install.

If you can only get cc from the official site, then that would kind of give us EA's statement on paysites. The message they are basically sending would be "We don't care and don't want to deal with it, so you can only get content from us." On the disk in a section about the online community for The Sims 3 it talks only about the exchange and The Sims 3 store. The reason they are making a store for The Sims 3 is evident in the section about the history of The Sims. It talks about the Sims 2 store and how such a great success it has been.

But that is just my view on what EA is going to do with The Sims 3 CC. And I think The Sims 3 will be like Spore in sales, do good in the first week or two, then become one of the most pirated games ever, but we just have to wait to see.

[calalily]

But the idea of purchasing licences for tools is really scaring.

EA has been trying lately to wring money out of everything - so I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that they would try to wring money out of that. As for tools, I'm not sure about Inge's plans, but I know Wes_H has set up a site devoted to decompiling Sims 3 and making tools.

Personally, I won't be getting Sims 3 like many others because of the SecuRom issues. I'm perfectly content with Sims 2 and am going to stick with it. It's been complex enough to learn Sims 2 creation and I haven't finished yet, so I'm not going to bother with Sims 3. So even if they remove SecuRom I can't see myself creating stuff for the game - better to just please all the Sims 2 peeps and save myself a lot of hassle.

If you can only get cc from the official site, then that would kind of give us EA's statement on paysites. The message they are basically sending would be "We don't care and don't want to deal with it, so you can only get content from us." On the disk in a section about the online community for The Sims 3 it talks only about the exchange and The Sims 3 store.

Sims 2 had an exchange, but that didn't mean content was exclusive - there are other fansites.  Seeing as they are selective about their creator camp to the point of stupid, and it seems that that hinges on paysite friendliness, I daresay they're going to shut out the whole "freesite" idea and just go with paysites.  Since paysites can hardly plead poor mouth to EA (although I've no doubt they will try), they can pay for the privilege, and pass that cost onto the customer through subscription fees. I mean, is it out of the question for EA to believe that they can continually get the fans themselves to chock up more dough?

There may be an alternative tier of freesite though - one where you can download textures for the new objects - and then install and apply them yourself. So a site might offer a flower pattern, and you can turn that into flower pattern dress, flower pattern table - anything you'd like. But in order to make files and pass them on, you'd have to be able to use the file system, and that costs money.

[Pescado]

Of course there is the other possibility that they will endeavour to control this as much as possible. They talked of innovating cc with Spore, and I've yet to see a Spore download site - it's all centralised on the Spore exchange.

That's untrue. There ARE Splotch third-party downloads available offsite. If you want any kind of mod to the game to reduce the annoyance level, you have to get them offsite. There are several on MATY, for instance. The REAL reason there are very few Splotch download sites is simply because Splotch is pretty much unmodifiable and there aren't any actual TRUE custom items, merely what amounts to save files.

[calalily]

Of course there is the other possibility that they will endeavour to control this as much as possible. They talked of innovating cc with Spore, and I've yet to see a Spore download site - it's all centralised on the Spore exchange.

That's untrue. There ARE Splotch third-party downloads available offsite. If you want any kind of mod to the game to reduce the annoyance level, you have to get them offsite. There are several on MATY, for instance. The REAL reason there are very few Splotch download sites is simply because Splotch is pretty much unmodifiable and there aren't any actual TRUE custom items, merely what amounts to save files.

That's why I qualified it with I've yet to see - because while there's stuff at MATY, it's not really a big download centre as such.  There's certainly nothing comparable to what there was when Sims 2 came out. That may be due to the popularity of Spore, but you would think there would be some kind of fansite dealie going on.

As far as mods, I think you'd be able to find hacks and modifications to code for most games, as there are usually people like you, making things better. However most of the cc is dedicated to custom shapes and recolours of shapes - I can put in 50 bedrooms, and barring sucky creation standards, they won't conflict. I can't put in 50 of the same hacks (if I could find 50 varieties) in the same manner without conflict.  That would kill a lot of variety off, which is maybe what EA would like. At the moment they've dispersed their content throughout the community, but they might have decided that perhaps dispersed content isn't in their own interests.

Isn't it possible that they will do the same thing with Sims 3 - make it largely unmodifiable and thus tie you to official sites and expansion packs for new shapes? I mean how many people say "I'm not buying such and such pack because I can download that"? I saw that every time a stuff pack came out in particular, all over the BBS.  EA might 'logically' conclude that they can allow recolouring, but should make sure that you can't make new shapes, and perhaps their download partner TSR or anyone else who wants to pay.

[eternal_darkness]

I looked up some more info on Sims 3 and discovered that it is really just an ego trip for EAxis. There is NOTHING notably different or improved from the gameplay in Sims 2. Nothing. It seems that the only changes that they made could easily be implemented in Sims 2. Sims 3 is going to be the Sarah Palin for EAxis; Huge boost in the beginning, but crash, burn, and fail in the end .

[SoggyFox]

I wouldn't say there is no improvements in sims3 - the engine for -sims- looks much improved - with CC, the doughyness should be easily fixable.  However, with the objects and building?  Looks like there is little improvment at all.

I'll probably aquire a copy and check it out - I expect it will be like the life stories and console version - good for short term play, but lacking in anything long term.

And yes, I'm over at WesH's sims 3 site.  I don't visit a lot, just peek in and see what's up.  I'm hopeful for folks unlocking sims 3 like they have 1 and 2, I'm just mixed on making anything to share for a game I don't want anyone wasting -money- on.

[Pescado]

That's why I qualified it with I've yet to see - because while there's stuff at MATY, it's not really a big download centre as such.  There's certainly nothing comparable to what there was when Sims 2 came out. That may be due to the popularity of Spore, but you would think there would be some kind of fansite dealie going on.

There'd be no point. While such sites exist, the fact of the matter is, Splotch lacks staying power. You want to like the game, but honestly, there's only so much you can do with it.

That would kill a lot of variety off, which is maybe what EA would like. At the moment they've dispersed their content throughout the community, but they might have decided that perhaps dispersed content isn't in their own interests.

I don't think they're quite THAT stupid.

Isn't it possible that they will do the same thing with Sims 3 - make it largely unmodifiable and thus tie you to official sites and expansion packs for new shapes? I mean how many people say "I'm not buying such and such pack because I can download that"? I saw that every time a stuff pack came out in particular, all over the BBS.  EA might 'logically' conclude that they can allow recolouring, but should make sure that you can't make new shapes, and perhaps their download partner TSR or anyone else who wants to pay.

Infeasible. You can't accomplish both goals at once: If you make it POSSIBLE for the game to accept downloaded content, we will rip it apart and figure out how to make our own. The reason this does not happen in Splotch is, quite simply, Splotch is not made to accept downloaded content. What content exists is merely stuff that was already made in Splotch to begin with, which means it's more of a save file than true CONTENT. It is also largely useless. Trying to sell a tool to enable users to create content is almost as meaningless, as Pirate Cat doesn't pay for his downloads.

[TapThatBooty]

Isn't it possible that they will do the same thing with Sims 3 - make it largely unmodifiable and thus tie you to official sites and expansion packs for new shapes? I mean how many people say "I'm not buying such and such pack because I can download that"? I saw that every time a stuff pack came out in particular, all over the BBS.  EA might 'logically' conclude that they can allow recolouring, but should make sure that you can't make new shapes, and perhaps their download partner TSR or anyone else who wants to pay.

Infeasible. You can't accomplish both goals at once: If you make it POSSIBLE for the game to accept downloaded content, we will rip it apart and figure out how to make our own. The reason this does not happen in Splotch is, quite simply, Splotch is not made to accept downloaded content. What content exists is merely stuff that was already made in Splotch to begin with, which means it's more of a save file than true CONTENT. It is also largely useless. Trying to sell a tool to enable users to create content is almost as meaningless, as Pirate Cat doesn't pay for his downloads.

With it being textures for existing objects, I don't think that it will be a downloadable object so much as an image file that you plop into a folder (such as the custom paintings folder now) and it will appear in game.
I either read or saw a video where one of the producers talked about this. I'm pretty sure it was a video.

[karu]

If you make it POSSIBLE for the game to accept downloaded content, we will rip it apart and figure out how to make our own. The reason this does not happen in Splotch is, quite simply, Splotch is not made to accept downloaded content. What content exists is merely stuff that was already made in Splotch to begin with, which means it's more of a save file than true CONTENT. It is also largely useless. Trying to sell a tool to enable users to create content is almost as meaningless, as Pirate Cat doesn't pay for his downloads.

and this is why you are the Pirate KING!

[calalily]

There'd be no point. While such sites exist, the fact of the matter is, Splotch lacks staying power. You want to like the game, but honestly, there's only so much you can do with it.

Fair enough. I haven't bought the game due to SecuRom issues, so I've never played it. It seems a huge disappointment to many.

I don't think they're quite THAT stupid.

ORLY? Rod Humble would like to disprove your theory.  They've taken away key features that encourage a lot of people to play though - like the "one neighbourhood" thing, the born, reproduce, die without micromanagement; while enhancing a lot of pointless stuff like the mashup tool. They're also so stupid as to favour one giant site like TSR over the giant sites that are file share friendly - the pay community is shrinking, and this is the choice they've made.  Meanwhile many fsf sites (not as in they share files but that they are friendly to sharing files) are exploding - wickednouk, gos, MTS2, your own - all of these sites/conglomerates need their own servers, so they're pretty big.  There's also more small freesites out there than you can shake a stick at.  But they chose pay.

Infeasible. You can't accomplish both goals at once: If you make it POSSIBLE for the game to accept downloaded content, we will rip it apart and figure out how to make our own. The reason this does not happen in Splotch is, quite simply, Splotch is not made to accept downloaded content. What content exists is merely stuff that was already made in Splotch to begin with, which means it's more of a save file than true CONTENT. It is also largely useless. Trying to sell a tool to enable users to create content is almost as meaningless, as Pirate Cat doesn't pay for his downloads.

Why wouldn't they do that then? Why wouldn't they allow the recolouring (like you could pick a colour or a swatch that will paint onto clothing) but then you can't create any new shapes?  I mean new shapes are the most sought after download - new hair shapes in particular.  They can put more resources into chasing sites like yours, or leave that up to TSR, and then all of the downloads are that way, which means that EA will need to be a good deal of the source.  Perhaps they'll even include that in the contract - that it is TSR's responsibility to find and prosecute the ones who share content illegally.  

Just because it's infeasible doesn't mean that they wouldn't do it - the community has done things the original Sims 2 didn't allow for in anyway by utilising resources they had.  The community took it far further than EA conceived, and perhaps they hope to reign that in again and make some money.  

[rum nate]

If you can only get cc from the official site, then that would kind of give us EA's statement on paysites. The message they are basically sending would be "We don't care and don't want to deal with it, so you can only get content from us." On the disk in a section about the online community for The Sims 3 it talks only about the exchange and The Sims 3 store.

Sims 2 had an exchange, but that didn't mean content was exclusive - there are other fansites.  Seeing as they are selective about their creator camp to the point of stupid, and it seems that that hinges on paysite friendliness, I daresay they're going to shut out the whole "freesite" idea and just go with paysites.  Since paysites can hardly plead poor mouth to EA (although I've no doubt they will try), they can pay for the privilege, and pass that cost onto the customer through subscription fees. I mean, is it out of the question for EA to believe that they can continually get the fans themselves to chock up more dough?

But didn't the flyer for the creator camp state that all the content they create will be put on the exchange? It wasn't like they were saying they they would create cc and then take it home to post on their own site. And if you have to install the cc through the game launcher, I can see fan sites not being able to host content because they would more then likely need to have a special server that is connected to the game launcher, and I can't see EA just giving sites this server, that is too much of a security risk.

[calalily]

But didn't the flyer for the creator camp state that all the content they create will be put on the exchange? It wasn't like they were saying they they would create cc and then take it home to post on their own site. And if you have to install the cc through the game launcher, I can see fan sites not being able to host content because they would more the likely need to have a special server that is connected to the game launcher, and I can't see EA just giving sites this server, that is too much of a security risk.

Yeah, but you don't need new meshes to put on the exchange - just new clothing - it's not as if it has any competition.  That's a simple recolour.  And you might be right - it might be a game launcher mechanism. Of course, there is a possibility that they intend to cut TSR and all the fansites out of it completely, bar for textures. However that they picked the sites they did (enough tickets for TSR to chuck in a spare atwat for goodness sake) suggests to me that they don't want the freesite values - sharing freely and with quality.

I personally think that EA would do something tremendously stupid like this - they believe they've built their fanbase, and they can now treat them like they wish.  SecuRom, a giant fiscal disaster for them - will they drop it? Not on your nelly.  In fact, they continue going down this road believing that they will get more money, despite all evidence to the contrary.  So stupid enough.  They're trying to wring every last dollar out of the community with the Sims store stuff, and I can see them wanting to stop all those little creators give out new meshes, when they could corner that market for themselves.  Hair meshes in particular could prove quite the money making scheme.  And since I think they do a lot of their market research with BBS mallrats, then whose opinion have they been taking - teens who don't buy anything and quickly lose focus? *Insert hollow laughter here* This will not end well.

[Requip]

Putting this here since the thread is TSR. Have you all seen the new setup today (TSR v7 Beta) They have an area for Sims 3. 

[Jonesi]

The new version is awful, too many pictures!!!  It's like they're trying to squeeze the entire site on one page, not keen.  I noticed the Sims 3 tab too, they just ended my hopes of TSR fucking off and dying in a hole somewhere when Sims 3 was released.