Poor design choice for laundry machine

"paradiseplanet;c-16272899" wrote:
Actually funny thing about top-loaders: I've read on an eco-friendly site that you actually save 7,000 gallons of water per year washing your laundry in a front-loader than you would in a top-loader:

7,000 gallons: Amount of water saved per year by a typical front-loading washing machine compared to a top-loading washing machine.

So either by lucky guess or actual research, there's probably an actual reason why we only got front-loaders than top-loaders, bc it's not as eco living to the theme if it was a top-loader. If you want to read yourself here's the link: https://www.treehugger.com/htgg/how-to-go-green-laundry.html

"there's probably an actual reason...." sigh, there's always have to be a reason for something that whoever decides for this game should not produced must be always on their part taken personally as a real life reminded issue. Lack of burglars to not trigger pstd players, lack of vehicles for the sake to not promote global warming when it's not even existen world problem in the game, dog houses where's there such chaining feature existend in game... What other omissions should I name from a game that can be presume was made to not encourage bad behavior or offend sensitive people?

But laundry doesn't effect bills in the virtual game whatsoever. Like with that whole dog house controversy all over again... Yeesh, we know you gurus might be doing this to encourage and teach us how to be good humans in the real world, but that's not the way to go about doing it. Omitting such an item isn't gonna let us know and acknowledge that top loaders waste more water than front loaders. Functional vehicles are the reason why global warning is such a problem? Let me tell you, that's abysmal argument because global warming doesn't exist in a game. Not to mention, why keep it to FX form?

Are people even trying to distinguish a game from real world now?