no one said you cant use old game concepts in a 3d form, but thats not part of the discussion (though i thought from the title).

(i am strictly speaking shareware/freeware stuff, naturally the better the art/content/gameplay the better the expiernce and the worth of the game. unfortunatly shareware developers dont have the time/money/skills to create everything perfectly.

2d games are quite viable provided you can create good artwork. unlike 3d games, 2d games tend to require a "higher level" of artwork. meaning you have to put more work into make animations, actual character design, etc. many 3d games can get away with mediocre artwork, but art on the "same level" would make a 2d game seem difficult to play. choppy animation is EASILY remedied through interpolation of key frames in 3d games. the coder has more options to make bad art look better, heck even sub division techniques can make low poly models look better. simple lighting effects can wow ppl.

you have to make sure you are willing to spend the time to make the 2d artwork good. if so, then its plenty viable assuming you have a good conept, gameplay and story. shooters are loads of fun. plenty of puzzle games are freate as well, and can even be done with minmal artwork. basically ifthe game is good, and it looks inviting graphically, ppl will try it and possibly purchase it.

as for the Sims not having competition. the creators of te game put it quite well. basically the Sims uses technology that is difficult to reproduce. the ai in the Sims may not seem like much to some ppl, but it is exceedingly complex. this complexity actually wards off others from attempting to duplicate the game. why spend tons of cash trying to create fantastic ai algos for a virtual world when you can pushthat money to multiple "simpler" titles for twitch gamers that are almost garunteed to bring in some money.

in order to create a game like the sims it requires risk. when maxis create dthe game they knew it would sell averagly based on how the rest of the "Sim" line (sim city, sim ant, sim world, etc) sold. being that they were in the business of simulation creation they have an edge over other companies. in fact there are other games that are similar to the sims, but are not popular for various reasons. some include the fact that "sim" or "maxis" is not found on the box. anyone play creatures or its various sequals? same concept except with, well creatures. its actually somewhat more advanced since you can actually breed and tweak their dna. in fact they will learn to communicate (ie simple english typed phrases). however being that its done by a british company, has less marketing, is not human looking things doing funny thinsg, etc. what makes the sims interestng to most players is the idea that they can not only create a little virtual world that they can watch. that its also "humans" that do the interacting. that they can build houses which resemble places they have been in, or maybe recreate their neighborhood. possible try to recreate a sitcom they like or show. maybe make their own show. create little games for themselves to play and maybe attempt to run contests between sims. expieriment with the sims with different enviroments.

many ppl get "The Sims" instead of a pet simply because they dont have to feed it like seaman. yet another life simulatopn game (which i believe was out before "the sims" craze). the reason others dont do well is that the marketing potential for such games is limited. its VERY hit or miss in the casual gamer department.

also thinking that games such as morrow wind or never winter nights wont appeal to nay girl is simply niave. many girls play such role playing games, however out society deems it "wrong" for girls to be playing games. they feel that games are meant for guys. in reality such rpg games are equally suited for males and females. i agree its not the best first game for someone who never used a computer, but thats not what the casual gamer genere is about. the games dont have to be simple. casual gamers enjoy complex games as well, however they tend to stray from expensive games. also games where they may be directly competeing with another player. most mmorpg games require a monthly fee so are pretty much not a casual gamer game due to the cost involved.

maxis is quite lucky when they created the sims. however considering teh expierence they have at milking titles through sequals, spin offs, addons, etc. as well as being primary a simulation oriented game company anyway. its natural evolution for them. once you basically made a simulation game on almost ever topic (including towers, earth, ants, safarai, cities, streets, etc) you gotta take a stab at ppl. lucky for maxis they came out when the big psudeo "reality" television shows like survivor were big. this is probably the biggest helper that pushed the sims past the sleeper hit and into the lime light. ppl at that time were leadto believe that watching ppl play a gameshow in which they were told was unscripted with average joes was good tv. thus its natural to assume that sims would get some of that popularity automagically. guilty by association, as they say.

i mean they have 5 expansion packs already out, and sims online in the works. all of these things dont cost much to reproduce since they are on the core sims tech. kinda like mods made for half-life except you gotta pay for them.

anywho, thats quite a rant. i jst thought it ironic that someone would even mention that there are no other similar games to the sims. sure no direct clones, but there are other games in the same genre.

AI is overrated and misunderstood. There are very few games with anything more than various if/then/else conditionals for an AI -- and I suspect most of those very games probably exhibit the most ''fun'' or challenging AI. Maybe it''s just me, but I figured out the Sims AI in like a day or two. After that point, I found myself playing everything based on a couple simple mathematical equations running through my head. Balance this trait with this behavior, etc. Over and over. There really wasn''t a lot of variety or complexity in the Sims, but often times predictability is exactly what a gamer is looking for.

But now it seems that AI is all the craze. Every game reviewer in the world seems to think it his place to judge the ''AI'' of a game anymore. Almost without fail, the most praise seems to go to the games which have obvious and simple AI (I still laugh when I see the words AI and Duke Nukem: Manhatten Project mentioned in the same article). I think AI is an important part of a game, sure. But often times some simple waypoints and scripted events give a lot better gameplay-- and even fool most people into thinking you made the guy smart or something.

- Air