Charles London doesn’t mince words. The original director of The Sims 1 and 2 just delivered what amounts to a warning shot to Electronic Arts in the wake of the company’s pending $55 billion acquisition by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund. According to London, if The Sims ever removes its commitment to diversity and inclusion, it will stop being The Sims. And that’s not hyperbole – it’s existential to the entire franchise.
Why Fans Are Worried Right Now
The timing of London’s comments matters. EA is currently being acquired by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund alongside private equity firm Silver Lake and Jared Kushner’s Affinity Partners. For many in the gaming community, this raises serious questions about the future of progressive franchises like The Sims, which has long been known for its inclusive representation of LGBTQ+ relationships, diverse body types, skin tones, and gender expression.
Saudi Arabia has a deeply problematic record on LGBTQ+ rights and women’s rights. While EA’s CEO has insisted that the company’s values “remain unchanged,” that promise rings hollow to people who remember similar corporate assurances before. The fear isn’t paranoia – it’s based on historical precedent of values shifting when ownership changes hands.
London’s Core Argument: Diversity Is Existential
Here’s what London said that matters. He argues that The Sims’ entire appeal comes from its ability to be “a faithful canvas on which the player is free to project the story that, to them, is important and emotionally impactful.” Removing diversity wouldn’t just make the game less inclusive. It would fundamentally break what makes The Sims work as a game. “The Sims must remain agnostic,” London explained. “For it to be successful, it must remain a faithful canvas.”
When you strip away diversity – whether that’s sexuality, body image, race, clothing choices, job structures, or architectural styles – you’re not making the game “neutral.” You’re making a choice to exclude. You’re telling certain players their lives don’t matter enough to simulate. That’s not neutrality. That’s a lie.
The Game Was Never Meant to Be Revolutionary
What’s interesting is that London says the inclusion of same-sex relationships and diversity in The Sims wasn’t a political statement. It wasn’t a “band of fearless social revolutionaries” making a stand. It was simply the team trying to create an honest simulation of human life. “We were modern people making the game in the Bay Area,” London recalls. “And we had done everything we could to be as true to humanity as possible. What, suddenly we were going to tell a lie?”
That’s the genius of London’s argument. He’s not appealing to social justice. He’s appealing to creative integrity and business logic. Removing LGBTQ+ relationships from a simulation game isn’t conservative – it’s dishonest. It’s pretending that entire categories of human love and relationships don’t exist. For a simulation game, that’s a catastrophic failure of the core mission.
The Business Case for Diversity
London also made an economic argument that EA needs to hear. “The only reason why they’re brands is because they appeal to such a wide audience,” he said. The Sims doesn’t dominate the gaming market because it’s safe or narrow. It dominates because it lets millions of people see themselves and their lives reflected in the game. Remove that, and you remove the reason people play.
This is critical as we enter what London calls a “reactionary cycle.” Throughout history, he points out, society goes through periods where progressive values get challenged. “When we are in reactionary periods, to have stalwart, beloved brands that are capable of sending this message is critical to society.” But those brands only stay relevant by holding the line on their values. The moment they capitulate and start excluding, they become just another product.
| Diversity Feature | When Added | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Same-sex relationships | Original Sims (2000) | Baseline inclusion from day one |
| Expanded skin tones | 2020 (100+ tones) | Response to community feedback |
| Gender options/clothing | 2016 update | Decoupled gender from clothing/appearance |
| Pronoun customization | 2022 update | Partnership with It Gets Better Project and GLAAD |
| Sexual orientation system | 2022 update | Allows sexual fluidity and attraction choices |
| Vitiligo representation pack | 2024 | Collaboration with model Winnie Harlow |
The Community Made This Matter
It’s important to note that much of The Sims’ ongoing diversity commitment has come from community feedback and activism. Before The Sims 4 massively expanded its skin tone options in 2020, Black content creators were modding the game to add representation themselves. When EA finally added 100+ skin tones, they explicitly credited the Black modding community for making this happen.
That’s the ecosystem London is defending. A franchise where players who don’t see themselves represented don’t just accept it – they get vocal, they create mods, they demand better, and the developers listen. Remove that dynamic and you get a sterile, lifeless simulation game.
What This Means Going Forward
London’s statement is both a warning and a test. He’s telling EA exactly what will happen if the company tries to compromise on diversity. The Sims will become just another mediocre life sim. It will stop being the cultural touchstone that it’s been for 25 years. And once you lose that status, you don’t get it back just by adding diversity later. Trust broken is trust broken.
But he’s also testing whether EA’s leadership actually believes their own words about “values remaining unchanged.” If they do, then maintaining The Sims’ diversity commitment should be easy. If they don’t, well, then we’ll know exactly what EA’s values really are.
FAQs
Who is Charles London?
Charles London is an original director of The Sims franchise, having worked on The Sims 1 and 2. He’s now speaking out about the importance of diversity to the series in the wake of EA’s acquisition by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund.
Why is EA being acquired by Saudi Arabia?
EA is being purchased in a $55 billion deal involving Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF), private equity firm Silver Lake, and Jared Kushner’s investment firm Affinity Partners. The deal has raised concerns among fans and developers about the future of progressive games.
Is EA actually changing its values?
EA’s CEO has stated that the company’s values “remain unchanged” despite the acquisition. However, many in the gaming community are skeptical given Saudi Arabia’s documented human rights concerns regarding LGBTQ+ rights.
What diversity features does The Sims have?
The Sims 4 includes same-sex relationships, 100+ skin tones, gender-neutral clothing options, customizable pronouns, sexual orientation systems, and has featured content from diverse creators including partnerships around vitiligo representation.
Has The Sims always been diverse?
Yes. The original Sims (2000) included same-sex relationship options from day one. However, representation has expanded significantly over time, particularly in response to community feedback about skin tones and body diversity.
What would happen if The Sims removed diversity?
According to London, removing diversity would fundamentally break The Sims as a game. The franchise’s core appeal is letting players simulate their own lives. Removing representation would make it dishonest and would destroy the reason millions of people play.
Is this statement binding?
London’s statement isn’t legally binding, but it’s a public declaration of what The Sims stands for. It’s putting pressure on EA leadership to maintain the franchise’s values even under new ownership.
Conclusion
Charles London just drew a line in the sand. The Sims’ diversity isn’t a feature that can be toggled on and off based on market pressure. It’s the foundation the entire franchise is built on. Remove it and The Sims stops being The Sims. That’s not a threat – it’s a fact about how the game works and why people love it.
For EA’s new Saudi Arabian ownership, London’s message is clear: you can own the company, but if you compromise on what makes The Sims special, you won’t have a hit game anymore. You’ll have a hollow shell wearing a familiar name. And that’s worse than having nothing at all. The question now is whether EA’s leadership actually believes their own words about unchanged values, or whether they’re about to learn an expensive lesson about what happens when beloved franchises lose their soul.