^this exactly.

@other person For those simmers like me who want disablties in the game. We aren't asking for Sims to be born disabled or to have accidents but having the option to create disabled Sims in CAS. And yes the idea was in an EP that way people could ignore it. Even Ray said the same thing.

I've always thought that simmers who laugh manically when their sims die (disabled/fat/whatever or not) are a tad... disturbed, anyways. So, I don't see how murdering a disabled sim would be so much worse.

Except that is something a large company trying to sensitively peddle goods to children and their parents has to be aware of. Despite all of the jerkasses that might play The Sims, woohooing and whatever, The Sims is still firmly in the "kid friendly" and "gender neutral" range of games for EA. I mean it's not marketed or implemented like Call of Duty or Madden, though they could almost certainly throw a team together that could produce bloody snuff Sims and porn if they wanted to and thought it was the right market for the game. But they don't, so The Sims is always going to be a little conservative compared to decapitating aliens and it's going to be a little bland and nonspecific compared to a target niche game like sports. That the franchise has any controversial options at all possible is kind of amazing, really - and the fact that they're not specifically out there trying to vet away people strapping penis morphs and g-strings onto their Sims via modding is also nice.

But the point is that they're going to market this in the safest way possible, especially in regards to new features. Beyond the very real technical challenges of implementing disabilities, they've got to consider that some of those things are fairly sensitive subjects for some people. And as a parent it was a little hard seeing my daughter set up a kill room in Sims 2, or drown the neighbor Sims, the first time... I'm not sure that gets any better when your kid is setting the kids with Down's Syndrome on fire. That's the sort of thing that the media gets a hold of and suddenly project managers get fired over sometimes. And even so, say you do implement disabilities? Which ones make the cut? Which ones are implicitly unworthy of attention by EA? Because that's how it could read, and that sort of thing? It's just not good press and it's not good for selling at Xmas. Think of game play - do you make The Sims universe fantastical where disabilities aren't issues, that some of them don't make things harder? Or do you stick to your guns and make it more like real life, and your Sims neighborhood suddenly takes a darker tone because none of the businesses have wheelchair ramps installed, the bathrooms are too small, or no one in Riverview speaks sign language? Those aren't just game play issues, they're political ones - they're fraught with business peril. Implement it poorly and you're not just screwing up a launch connectivity issue, you've become offensive and a football for lobbyists to toss around like you're 2 Live Crew.

Like I said, I think it's fairly impressive the risks that EA takes already navigating this sort of terrain. That's not to say that I wouldn't applaud them for managing to take artistic steps to improve their product along these lines either, but on the other hand I think this is the sort of thing that people will shit on you for a decade for implementing poorly. That's just not good money management compared to "look! The Sims have solar panels now! They're green!" which really only stands to offend very few people and virtually no one will ever go "how dare they!"

There was a simmer, out there in simblr world, who recently made a sim that resembled a person who had Down's Syndrome. The amount of negative flack this simmer got for this was over the top. And that was for a fan-made sim. Imagine the uproar if EA did it officially. Whether that uproar would be justified or not, that is NOT the kind of publicity that EA is looking for.

As for the OP, you don't seem to understand the technical reasons why this is just not feasible at this time. You keep saying "I want", but do not seem to comprehend how difficult it really is. I would suggest looking into trying to make a CC item, say, a shirt, a brand new mesh. This is something that is possible, but is still not easy for the average person to do. See how much work goes into making just one item that doesn't have a billion social interactions. Once you do that, multiply the amount of work by at least a hundred, if not more, and you will have a good idea of just what you are asking for. It's difficult. It's fraught with possible missteps and misinterpretations. It's a Pandora's Box, with no Hope trapped inside. People have to understand what is possible before they start demanding the moon and stars.

I never said "I want". There are 11 other people besides me who want it disablties in the sims. Plus some who don't care either way.

@other person disablties DO sell-or why else would Wheelchair Barbie 2nd incarnation fly off the shelves back in the mid 90s? Or if disablties didn't say how come a DS doll line sold 1,000 copies and have another 1,000 copies of pre-orders? Why did Mattel make a Bald Barbie for Feb 2013-even if it was only in gift stores and some charities? Why did Mattel have a miniature guide dog, hearing aids, wheelchair and lunch-free allergy kit on their American Girl doll website?

And what's stopping them from doing it now? I could create a sim with Downs Syndrome and set it on fire just with the tools in the base game. If your kid wanted to, there's no reason they can't already do it.

For that matter, racial tolerance is also a sensitive topic. Does that mean that we should take black people out of the game, because setting someone on fire might offend someone? Should we prevent people from creating a sim version of the KKK by taking out all their targets? Or how about LGBT sims? Should we make them all straight and cisgendered to prevent people from setting them on fire? As a pansexual, I don't care if someone decides to messily kill their LGBT sims. I do care if I'm not allowed to play pansexual sims because someone else is setting them on fire. I also have Aspergers. I would love to play sims on the autism scale. I also don't care if people set them on fire. It doesn't affect me. I'd rather see representation of who I am than never have it because people are too scared of the consequences.



I totally agree that Electronic Asshattery isn't the right company to do this. They would do it terribly and without proper representation. I'm mainly arguing against refusing to represent a group because some people are going to be jerks about it.

I do think it should be done like real life, with all the dark turns. Or maybe a blend. I want to see people look at how hard it is for their sims with wheelchairs to get into a small stall. Or how hard it is to go through life without being understood. Or unable to get into a building because there aren't any stairs. And I want to see that little lightbulb pop into existence when someone thinks "hey, is this what it's like for people in real life with these problems?"

And I want to see the mental disabilities represented accurately. Play a sim with depression; see them struggle with it. See them getting worse and worse. And then see all the negative moodlets disappear when the sim decides to commit suicide, how they get a sense of peace. Then maybe people will realize that when their loved one has been struggling and suddenly seems to get better, that it's really not a good sign. Play a sim with Aspergers, see how it struggles with the basic rules of society and socializing. Then maybe people will stop using Aspergers as an excuse for being an asshole on the internet.

We've been hiding from these things because we're scared of the consequences of talking about them. Let it become common to see these things, and maybe we'll lose the fear. Maybe we'll start to identify more with other people when we see them in our fantasy worlds and realize that they aren't Other. And if a million disabled sims get toasted to allow one real life person to wake up, I'd consider that a fair trade.

Such a huge untapped marketing pool. I wonder why.
And since you still do not seem to understand the technical reasons why we don't have them, I don't think anything else I have to say about it will penetrate.

It might be difficult to create disabilities but it's not that difficult for them to create props that the players could use to make their sims appear disabled or sick if they so wish. A cast, a walking stick, crutches, or a wheelchair could be used by children through elders lifestages without them being different lifestates. Or they could have tattoos that look like bandaids and scars.

And if one of us does it on our own time then we're still not committing the public to scrutinizing EA's hand in this.



But that's exactly what a vast amount of corporate conservatism is all about... Look around you, all of those "warning labels" about not shoving knifes up people's anuses, because injuries could result?* That's a company playing cover their ass because somewhere out there they've decided that enough people suck that they've got to do something about it so some other asshole doesn't go "Knife manufacture creates ass daggers! Are your children safe?"



I'm sure a lot of people will download your mod.**


* Yes, I realize this particular warning label does not exist, but the sentiment and principle is sound. Ass daggers is not something you get to write about every day though, and I am easily amused.

** EDIT: That really wasn't meant snarky. I'm sure people will. I'm also sure that I think EA's philosophy is to let someone else make mods for things like this instead of doing it themselves, right along with those disease mods, g-strings, and erectile penises. I don't think they're exactly unaware of the potential for such things, but the project managers for The Sims don't feel it's worth getting fired for any of it by putting people from EA to work on such things and have them blow up in their faces.

I saw something like this before on the Sims 3 discussion forum, I would not like to have it in sims as I think that some people who have those disabilities do not want sims that share the same problem. Also EA may not represent in a correct way for example if people with autism are portrayed as idiots that would offend someone. Something that EA should not do if they still want a fan base.

Pfft. Let EA get scrutinized. If they do it well, it could save their reputation. If not, maybe they'll realize that half-assing features of their games is not a good idea.



...I don't quite follow your reasoning. Guess you'll just have to go into more detail with the ass daggers.

However, EA already has that covered. The game license explicitly states that they aren't responsible for any actions the users may take.



I'd love to make a mod about that. Unfortunately, my programming literacy is so low that I once mistook a program for a souffle recipe (or the other way around?). The souffle turned out great, but the program crashed my computer. Not really in a position to learn, either, since I'm pretty busy. I doubt I'd be able to make anything that big without help, as in making someone else do the majority of the work.

People only think EA's reputation is in the gutter compared to what it could possibly be if they screwed things up with something like this and became "the company that mocks disabled kids" or anything resembling that. Just the notion should be enough to make any middle manager at the company tremble with fear.



Corporate conservatism generally follows the path of assuming that the public are all sociopathic idiots determined to do things with any given product that are offensive, immature, dangerous, stupid, etc. Every warning label basically involves this premise. Most people don't stick knives up their butts, but on any given day regarding any given product, people will do something suspiciously similar in theme. Sometimes companies are given a pass for this sort of behavior, but companies who design products for children or products that the public has some presumption of being for children have to operate in a more risk averse environment - whether or not it makes sense, like when people got upset about the "Hot Coffee" mod for GTA as if banging prostitutes was somehow worse than any other GTA gameplay activity. The Sims qualifies for that sort of distinction, whether we like it or not. Even if the issue is that sociopathic idiot children might reveal themselves by demonstrating horrifying gameplay options regarding disabled sims, provoking unwanted conversations between parents and children - "You do your homework, why are you still evil?" there's a distinct risk that the corporate entity who made the parenting option possibly might take the blame. You know, because parents and children are always blameless. Whether that's rational or right is regardless, it's enough of a fact of marketing liability that it means Barbie and Ken have existed without genitals for decades in a world where other kids are sometimes practicing to become murder hobos via their PS3s.



Right. I think EA would love it if someone made a mod for this that they could use to prop up sales between selling people expansions. It's not like they're going to sell people on multiplayer and deathmatch maps. Modding is an important part of their sales strategy I think, because it allows them to have their cake and eat it too.

As someone who cannot hear out of my right ear, I just don't want to play a caricature of myself. You say it would be more than a pop up, but what's the guarantee? Only EA could make that claim. I mean you can have props/accessories, but how are you going to implement what it feels like? Most of the issues aren't that I have to remember to check that my alarm is on the right side of my bed in case I roll over in my sleep and can't hear it go off and must rely on the light in my face. It's more when someone yells at you because you didn't hear them when they were talking to you from the right side. Or when people give you that "are you stupid or something?" look because you need them to repeat themselves or speak way up. I simply can't filter out the background noise in my left ear and it all sounds like its the same volume. And I probably do appear to be a bit dumb, but I don't want my sim to look like that and I don't want a sim getting those kinds of looks or anger or even the guilt someone else feels when they realize "yeah. I really am hard of hearing." I can deal with myself, but watching someone else, even if its not real, breaks my heart. The Sims is over-the-top in how sims are and the way their lives play out, I don't want to see an over-the-top deaf or blind person. And if they go the "realistic" route without being able to get into someones head and heart (on both sides), it'll miss the point. I mean, I've never thought about my sims hearing or not hearing while playing the game. I admire your passion for wanting to raise awareness. But I'd rather not see this. It's too easy to do too much or too little. I'd be fine with props/accessories to imply it rather than it being acted out.

I'm fairly certain that these organizations have much better things to do with their time (and especially money) than to pressure a multi-national gaming corporation to make one of its titles more palatable to a, relatively speaking, microscopic segment of their target audience. You can be the most well-intentioned person with this idea, but it just isn't going to happen. The organizations you listed are focused on medical research and treatment, not gaming preferences.

^This


^this

Think of this: Harry Potter has two good disabled characters in it. Remus Lupin and Alstor "Mad-Eye" Moody (peg leg which is usually a staple of villains, and a glass eye). Then there's are a couple of fairytales which has disablties in some sense or other: The Girl with No Hands and also the two "Little People" fairy-tales Thumblna and Tom Thumb.

All other storybook stories the disabled version is either the villain (ie. Treasure Island and Peter Pan) or is temporary disabled (-like Colin from The Secret Garden and also Clara from Hedi) which for some disabled people is frown upon because its means that they are all looking for a cure)

But there are disabled people who want disablties in the game.

As my dear sweet grandma says... Wish in one hand, shit in the other, see which fills up first.

As I am now (hopefully) temporarily disabled, I'd have to say I am almost comically bad at driving the weird scooter-cart things at stores. It was really embarrassing how I dragged whole racks with me at Target...
The point is, I did get some angry eyes from some of the shoppers and employees. I wonder if they assumed I was just an able-bodied teen goofing off with the scooters. My nervous laughter every time I did something disastrous probably didn't help.
Of course, if EA made all of these events happen in the sims, you'd probably get some protesters. I'm kind of a dork, whether or not I'm able to walk properly. It's one thing to have a singular dork sim that can't handle not walking without destroying whole stores, but it's another if all disabled sims did that. My experience is probably exactly what the light-hearted, EA-take on disability would look like.

You know, the two most common problems with getting EA to put disabled sims in seem to be "EA will get sued if they do" and "EA will do it poorly". Celo, if you're really interested in making this a reality, you're going about it the wrong way. Telling random simmers that some disabled people want this and need it isn't a good plan. The biggest problem is EA. Simmers can't help you all that much, since I don't think you want a mod. If you want to do this, you'll need to try a new approach.

Get groups for the people you're representing to partner with EA. Not only will this give EA some credibility and some measure of help in the inevitable case someone sues (i.e. The Ultra Important Deaf Peoples' Special Interests Group says this is okay), but they can get the programmers the tools they need to make something that doesn't suck. It should also increase awareness of those groups and the disabilities they represent, so both sides win.

Find game programmers - or even talented modders - who have experience with a disability, whether first-hand or through a close friend or relative, and get them to sign up for the project. Again, this will both defend against allegations and give EA something to work with.

Hire consulting lawyers - or get someone else to - experienced in this field to look over the finished project to minimize chances of a successful lawsuit against EA. Also hire a PR agent to make sure everything turns out well.

You need to minimize the problems EA will face if they do what you want, and at the same time, make sure they do it well. That's the only thing that will satisfy everyone.

As a side project, you'll need some more political/social leverage. Start your own group to increase awareness of disabilities through video games or other media and get more people on board. The more people you have on your side, the more others will listen to you. Eleven people...just isn't that impressive in a country of 300 million and a planet of seven billion. And once you have a large group of people all aiming for the same goal, you can do large projects and get the word out faster. For instance, you could fund indie video games or movies portraying disabled people in a good or balanced light. Encourage larger publishers and companies to accept that kind of project. You could help new authors afford to put out their books. Anything that increases the representation of good disabled characters in the mass media. EA is just one small part of it; with everything you could be doing to help, arguing with simmers is small potatoes. Maybe the people on this forum just aren't the right audience for your message, but someone else could be. I already suggested La Vida, which is still being built from the group up. Instead of going after a large publisher with a history of screwing up, start with that. In fact, the message of La Vida is supposed to be 'accept yourself for who you are'. What better place to start a campaign of accepting disabled people for who they are?

You could do a lot out there. But what you're doing right now obviously isn't working. Take some time to think of something new. I've given you suggestions already. I definitely hope you succeed - and might be willing to help you - but your focus is a little too small and your approach is rather repetitive.

Pressure is all very well, hugbug, but EA is a company. They are not going to do something incredibly expensive if it's not going to either A) make them lots of money or B) save them from losing lots of money.

I know. I just think it would be a better idea for Celoptra to focus on things other than making polls on MTS, don't you?

But theoretically, if after a group approaches them and asks for disabled sims to be put in they say no, said group could always inform the press and spin it to make EA the bad guys. EA is already hated by quite a few people - I mean, it got a prize for being hated two years in a row - so an example of them acting in a possibly non-tolerant way might pander to the crowd. The press always loves getting the dirt on public targets. So refusing could lose them money through bad press and scrambling to smooth things over.

Nobody is denying that. But you're missing the point here. Sure, there are disabled people who want disabilities in The Sims, but those people are few and far between. EA makes games that appeal to broad customer bases. For better or for worse, EA does not market its games to niche markets. And a game that focuses so heavily on disabilities would absolutely be a "niche market" type of game.

There is a very simple reason as to why the game, mod, or option you want doesn't exist: There is no market for it. A company will only make a game that it thinks will sell. And clearly no company thinks that a game that focuses on disabled avatars will sell well. Supply and demand. Economics 101. Adam Smith, etc.

I'm not on alot of simming forums. So I need to get it out to a lot of forums. One forum I am on wouldn't allow it. Well another might. SO that only leaves EA Sims 4 forum. Here and Neoseeker forum. Other then that I have no other simming forums to poll on. Because one which 'died' wouldn't have wanted it either. Until my internet is hooked up on my new computer (and whose knows when that will be) I have nothing to do. Somebody else said I needed to get my polls out into the wider (simming) world

Yeah, well what you'd actually need for this to happen in the way you're suggesting it happen (not a mod, EA does this) is absolutely nothing to do with forums and the internet really and everything to do with community organizing and political activity. So go find out how the pros do it (lobbying) and learn from them. I've only been on the receiving end and tried to look responsive and interested when some of my friends tried to explain it, but it's a specialized skill, there's a right way and a wrong way to do things. Bear in mind: The kind of changes you're trying to enact on the gaming industry (and once you politicized it that's essentially what you're going to be going for I think) won't happen overnight... or even next year probably. If you're serious about this you need to think about committing a decade of your life making it happen, because that's often how long it takes unless you strike oil and you're suddenly a major news cycle issue. If you can't imagine making that sort of commitment then consider the commitment you're asking other people (whether individuals or a corporate entity) to do. You don't just need to change EA's mind, but you need to change the minds of EA's customers and stockholders. Here? We're not your audience unless you're asking for someone to make your major mod.

Best of luck.

I hope I haven't just created a politician.

I believe for every one pro there is for adding disabilities, there's at least five cons. I could make an elaborate list, but I'm not a (heartless) bitch. To make things simple, EA won't (and shouldn't) include disabilities because so very few people want it compared to those who are opposed to it, such as myself. I'm not saying I don't want it because EA would botch it up, which they probably will, but simply because it's an aspect of life, I would rather they didn't include at all. You can call me immature, intolerant, etc. as you may, but, knowing people who have disabilities in real life, it just would be difficult for me to handle playing an avatar in the game with said disability.

I disagreed with this, simply because EA wouldn't just say "No" and leave it at that. They would explain WHY as well, which is something a lot of people here are also doing. Ignoring the technical aspects in favor of simply painting EA with an "intolerant" scarlet letter won't make it happen any faster. It is the equivalent to a toddler throwing a loud tantrum until they get their way. This isn't like people complaining about CASt being removed, or why wasn't weather included, this is something else entirely.

Let's say, someone does exactly what you say, and "forces" EA to include disabilities. How fleshed out would they be? Would it be a fully developed game mechanic, or would it be the bare minimum required to say "There, we did it, now move along"? Most likely, the latter.

Believe me, I can fully understand people wanting to be able to create more accurate portrayals of themselves. I remember when I first played The Sims, and was able to make same sex couples. That was a big deal in a game, and it meant a lot to me, because I could see myself and others like me being represented. But the difference with that example is, that is a fairly easy thing to do, coding-wise. (in fact, it's probably easier to do, since you don't have to write code preventing behaviours towards other sims). Disabilities would require major work to even do the bare minimum. It's time, money, and resources that could be spent on other things, like making a stable game.

Understand, this is not a new discussion, or concept. The idea crops up from time to time, and has already been discussed back and forth for years. And the general consensus, from what I have read over the years, (and this is by no means a scientific or accurate poll) is that people, even those who have disabilities in real life, generally do not want it in their games, for a wide variety of reasons. There is no way to please everyone, and no matter what route EA would take, there will always be naysayers.

Perhaps the time could be better spent focusing on real issues affecting people's lives, like making sure that sidewalks have ramps for easier access, or that businesses have handicapped-accessible restrooms, or basically anything that would actually make a difference in a person's lives. Those things will help all disabled people, not just the ones who play a game on their PC.