Anybody else hyped for the possible upcoming The Sims 3 64bit Version on Windows?

The only definite way we get 64 bit The Sims 3 is if Windows removed a support for 32 bits apps, but will they? considering some of the old business software that unfortunately still used by some company(like tax software) are 32bits.

"Auroraskies;c-17702483" wrote:
There is no requirement of technical knowledge to post in this forum, there is no need to show contempt or to lecture those reading the threads here.

Learning new things and taking the time to educate oneself is never a bad thing. How did we all learn the things we know? It would be such a boring world if we didn't learn from each other and further our knowledge and experiences.

The upcoming compatibility update to the Mac version of the Sims 3 is a current hot potato. If Windows users who are not happy with it took a little time to read up on why it is happening perhaps it would put it into context :) @EA_Leeloo posted a fantastic FAQ here that explains it.

As a member of Answers HQ, where you have been active in tech threads, you surely understand?

"Auroraskies;c-17702483" wrote:
This is by definition a forum adapted to teenagers; I would not expect all to possess that kind of knowledge, and therefore see no reason to post such a comment here; but for flaming.

See my point above regarding educating oneself. Is this a forum adapted to teenagers? I've been posting here for 11 years, oopsie!

Yes, it is a teen-rated forum, and for all ages.

https://forums.thesims.com/en_US/discussion/979770/forum-rules-guidelines#latest

As I cannot explain why you have posted here for 11 years, there is no need to be rude when telling me so.

My point is that it is not a requirement to keep up with the technical aspect that you think is vital, since everyone is allowed to post here, despite not knowing all. And your contemptful lecturing post is made on this forum.

I hope and pray that they will bring out a 64 or 128-bit version for PC.
In its later stages the only fault with Sims 3 was, that it was a bit laggy. Image an upgrade to make it faster!

"HannaZoja;c-17702585" wrote:
I hope and pray that they will bring out a 64 or 128-bit version for PC.
In its later stages the only fault with Sims 3 was, that it was a bit laggy. Image an upgrade to make it faster!

True, and some of it comes from the routing issue and most ea worlds suffered from it.

I have played with custom world and it performs way better

"BluebellFlora;c-17702428" wrote:

"igazor;c-17701998" wrote:
No one who purchases a license to run a program that does work on what is at the time a currently supported operating system should realistically expect it to keep working on all future systems, forever.

People who don't understand this should take some time out and educate themselves on technology.

Thank you for your recommendation, but I'm pretty sure I've seen nearly as many changes in technology over the years as @igazor has. Have yourself a nice day.

@igazor. Yes, I'm very well aware that EA could have removed all support for TS3 and binned the game instead of updating for Mac, however considering the fact that the game that they replaced it with is of considerably lower quality and gaming value, to most of us who stick with TS3; it would probably be a mistake and spell the end of this franchise. The hope is that TS5 will rectify the problems that TS4 is laden with, however my non-technical suggestion at the moment is not to hold your breath or you may need medical help. I won't be holding my breath on TS5 being better than the iteration before it as they seem intent on going down the same road as before.

https://simscommunity.info/2020/01/31/eas-ceo-confirms-a-next-generation-sims-game-might-have-both-single-player-and-multiplayer/

And considering the old insanity quote...well...enough said. If they haven't learned from the debacle that TSO (The Sims Online) was then well...not much else needs to be said. And only those who have bought TS4 who wanted multiplayer will cough up for that. And cue the resultant complaints, frustrations and trolls that frequent such a MMO type game, if they were planning on turning The Sims 5 into that kind of a game.

As someone so eloquently stated, certain individuals...and their money are soon parted.

And as a quick wit on the forum in Franchise Discussion said, "Even PT Barnum ran out of them eventually...."

I can only imagine this is igazors reaction to these threads... :D
https://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lgshoaFabH1qd1aay.gif

All jokes aside... It's easy to see "The Sims 3 64-bit update" and assume Windows. Don't get your hopes up. It would be nice if they could also figure something out for Windows but it's just not a priority understandably when Mac users w/ the Catalina update can't play the game.

This is like a simple and/or dumb question, because I sadly don't know much about tech especially windows, but from reading one of Nikkei_Simmer's posts, does this mean Microsoft is shutting down 64 support? Does this mean if I buy a new computer now or early next year I won't be able to play Sims 3 or other games? Sorry, I'm just confused...

As for Mac, I am happy and grateful we are getting an update. Honestly. However, I haven't been very happy with Apple lately due to the designs of their news macs. For example, mine feels choppy at times and glitchy...

I was surprised when they stopped support for 32 bit games as well. Mac has become a computer not to get if you are a gamer, but I have seen some devs be able to make their games 64 bit, so that's good.

I just can't understand though why Apple can't find ways to have new Macs run older things. I mean, wouldn't that be better? As for Microsoft, I hope they don't get rid of it....Sims 3 is one of the few things I'm getting joy from... and with a certain even that may happen soon with a site I like, I'm gonna need it...

"SimplyJen;c-17702722" wrote:
I can only imagine this is igazors reaction to these threads... :D
https://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lgshoaFabH1qd1aay.gif

Sometimes. But sometimes it's more like this. :p

@elleskyheart - No, that is not what is happening.

Microsoft has historically, since Win XP and up through Win 10, offered separate 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Windows. The 64-bit versions started out as the odd stepchildren in the series but later became the mainstream and MS is now dropping support for the 32-bit versions. The 32-bit versions of Windows can only run 32-bit applications and cannot recognize more than 4 GB of total system RAM. The 64-bit versions of Windows can run either, thanks to backwards compatibility. That is why we have a Program Files folder and a Program Files (x86) folder, to account for both program types with Windows putting our installed programs in the correct place automatically for us.

There are no announced plans from the Microsoft end to drop the ability to run 32-bit programs. What is happening is that support for the 32-bit versions of Windows itself is being phased out. There are far too many mission critical applications in the business world, as well as the home consumer one, that require the 32-bit compatibility to stay in place and in fact MS Office or at least some of its elements, for those who are on still supported but not the latest versions of Office, would be included. I mean it's going to happen someday, no one on currently supported 64-bit systems can run 16-bit apps anymore without some extra assistance like an emulator, but most of us believe that day to be so far away that it would be beyond the lifespan of most systems in use right now.

The macOS, on the other hand, has been 64-bit for much longer and has only just last year with the release of Catalina, and with plenty of warning, dropped the backwards compatibility portion. Users who require 32-bit apps need to stay on or get back onto Mojave, for now, until such time as they no longer require those apps or 64-bit equivalents become available.

I do not find the current lineup of Macs to be choppy and glitchy. But some of that is going to depend where in the product line we are looking and what we are expecting our systems to do; the more economical (by Apple standards) lower-end Macs do not of course perform as well under all circumstances as the mid- and higher-range ones.