EA Says It's Not Making The Sims 5 to Be "Player-Friendly." Should We Believe Them?
I had to read the headline three times to make sure I wasn’t having a stroke. EA, the company that has sold us more than $1,000 worth of piecemeal content for The Sims 4, has suddenly developed a conscience. In a recent interview, EA president Laura Miele announced that The Sims 5 isn't happening anytime soon, and the reason, apparently, is that forcing players to abandon their massive DLC libraries just wouldn't be "player-friendly." This comes on the heels of the company pushing back against $80 games and promising grounded skins in Battlefield. I don't know who this new, seemingly benevolent EA is, but I have to admit, I'm morbidly curious.
The Official Story (Try Not to Laugh)
Let’s break down the official reasoning, which is a masterclass in corporate spin. Speaking to Variety, Miele laid out the company's supposedly altruistic position on the future of their life-simulation cash cow.
Protecting Your "Investment"
The core of the argument is that after a decade and over 85 content packs for The Sims 4, resetting the clock would be a disservice to the community. “Resetting that is not player-friendly and not a good idea for our community,” Miele explained. She argued that EA doesn’t want players to “start from day zero and start from scratch and give up all of the things that you have created, give up all of the content that you’ve purchased over the years.” It’s a noble sentiment, conveniently ignoring that this is the exact model the franchise has followed for its entire history.
"Technologically" Sound
Miele also claimed that The Sims 4 is in a great place "technologically" and doesn't need to be abandoned for a new engine. This is a bold statement for a game that is famously a step backwards from The Sims 3's ambitious open world, a game built on the notoriously buggy and restrictive codebase of what was originally supposed to be a multiplayer game.
The Unspoken Truth
Now, for the part EA doesn't say out loud. The real reason we're not getting The Sims 5 is almost certainly less about protecting our feelings and more about protecting their revenue.
The sunk Cost Fallacy Cash Cow
The Sims 4, with its endless stream of Stuff Packs, Game Packs, and Expansion Packs, is a money-printing machine. EA is leveraging the sunk cost fallacy perfectly. Players who have already spent hundreds of dollars are more likely to spend more to keep their collection complete. Why risk that guaranteed, steady income on a brand-new, expensive-to-develop sequel that might not capture the same audience? Continuing to sell DLC for a decade-old game is simply a safer bet.
What Players Actually Want
The irony is that a huge portion of the fanbase has been begging for a proper sequel for years. Many of us long for a return to the open-world freedom of The Sims 3, but built on an engine that doesn't implode if you look at it wrong. The Sims 4, with its endless loading screens just to visit a neighbor, has always felt like a downgrade in scope. A true Sims 5 that combines the best features of The Sims 2 and 3 on a stable, modern foundation is the dream, but it seems that dream is on hold.
So, what's the sliver of optimism here? Well, EA isn't just letting the franchise stagnate. We are getting a new, free-to-play multiplayer spin-off (codenamed Project Rene), and The Sims 4 will continue to get support. It's not the sequel we wanted, but it's something.
Look, I don't believe for a second that this decision is about being "player-friendly." But between this new multiplayer project and their recent good behavior with other franchises, I'm willing to be cautiously, very cautiously, optimistic, but it will truely depend on how they will continue from here. Don't make me regret this, EA. I'm giving you one more (tiny) chance. We're watching.