Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dogman]

They even made the planet buster worse. How is that even possible? In the 2005 demo is caused the planet to explode, and afterwards there would be a new asteroid belt around the sun in that planets orbit. Now? it removes the planets crust and leaves a ball of magma floating in space. That's all it does.

That just puts the final nail in the coffin for me. Spore is worse now than it was in 2005 in every single way.

[SHAD0Wdump]

This game is a perfect example of why Toady doesn't want to lose control of his project.

On a side note,I wonder if Will could possibly leak out the 2005 version for those who own this version...

[Dogman]

This game is a perfect example of why Toady doesn't want to lose control of his project.

On a side note,I wonder if Will could possibly leak out the 2005 version for those who own this version...

I'd really like to know what Will thinks of his 'game' now. There's no way he can be happy with it. Sure he's putting on the brave face for EA and the public, but behind closed doors he has to be disappointed. If he isn't...

[McDoomhammer]

If he isn't, all is lost.

[MeshGearFox]

In regards to my earlier comment, the game's been a lot cuter since 06, I don't see a problem with removing blood since Maxis has always been more of a family operation, and yes, while there WERE stages, they don't really look like they would've beem better than what the game got. City mode looked like what would've amounted to Another Lite-version RTS. Underwater mode looks like it would've played the same as the creature mode.

And there was never, from what I can tell, any actually biological simulation going on.

[Duke 2.0]

 I'm sure he is at least a bit disappointed. I remember many demo's he showed that had a lot of features he was excited about that were lost in the final version.

 Then again, he was excited about people making their own content.

 Then again, I believe he preferred people to have animation tools instead of some less-than-impressive tools. Where the design does not matter.

[lumin]

Yeah, did anybody else notice how Will Wright kept giving all these exciting speeches at the beginning of development and toward the end he kind of went MIA?  That's gotta say something...

I always see people blaming development companies for their crappy games.  It's not really the developers with the problem, it's the publishers.  The developers have their hands tied behind their backs.

I think Spore would have been a lot more fun if they had kept the same game-play design from Creature-mode onward.  Getting you attached to a creature and then shoving you into an RTS game really ticks me off.  That was the charm of EVO, you got to watch your own creation evolve and improve through the course of the game.  It would have been cool to be able to land my UFO and walk around strange alien planets using my creatures abilities against the rest of the universe.

[Dogman]

In regards to my earlier comment, the game's been a lot cuter since 06, I don't see a problem with removing blood since Maxis has always been more of a family operation, and yes, while there WERE stages, they don't really look like they would've beem better than what the game got. City mode looked like what would've amounted to Another Lite-version RTS. Underwater mode looks like it would've played the same as the creature mode.

And there was never, from what I can tell, any actually biological simulation going on.

Underwater mode would have been the stage between cell stage and creature stage. It didn't strike you as a bit ridiculous that your cellular creature all of a sudden evolves a pair of legs and can live on land, despite having not changed in any other way? If the underwater stage just leads to underwater civs than that's GREAT too. I would kill for underwater civs in the release version.

And as for biological simulation, what about the fact that in the 2005 demo, how you built your creature beyond just sticking on "feet of swift movement +5" determined how fast it moved, or how it attacked, or how it mated and danced? It mattered whether or not your creature had 4 legs or just one.

In the release version I can make a one eyed, one legged, one armed giant balloon animal and so long as I put the +5 feet, hands, mouth, etc on it it will be faster, stronger, and tougher than the most excellently designed apex predator that only has the +3 feet, hands et al. In the 2005 demo version, that mono-monstrosity would never make it out of the water, because the stats were procedurally generated, and mimicked actual biology quite well, based on how you evolved your creature, not what you put on it.

I always see people blaming development companies for their crappy games.  It's not really the developers with the problem, it's the publishers.  The developers have their hands tied behind their backs.

Don't get me wrong, I don't blame Will for this. EA is notorious for pushing games out as fast as possible to make money, and for destroying unique ideas to appeal to huge audiences. I'm certian this was 95% EA's fault in the end.

[Creamcorn]

In regards to my earlier comment, the game's been a lot cuter since 06, I don't see a problem with removing blood since Maxis has always been more of a family operation, and yes, while there WERE stages, they don't really look like they would've beem better than what the game got. City mode looked like what would've amounted to Another Lite-version RTS. Underwater mode looks like it would've played the same as the creature mode.

And there was never, from what I can tell, any actually biological simulation going on.

Underwater mode would have been the stage between cell stage and creature stage. It didn't strike you as a bit ridiculous that your cellular creature all of a sudden evolves a pair of legs and can live on land, despite having not changed in any other way? If the underwater stage just leads to underwater civs than that's GREAT too. I would kill for underwater civs in the release version.

And as for biological simulation, what about the fact that in the 2005 demo, how you built your creature beyond just sticking on "feet of swift movement +5" determined how fast it moved, or how it attacked, or how it mated and danced? It mattered whether or not your creature had 4 legs or just one.

In the release version I can make a one eyed, one legged, one armed giant balloon animal and so long as I put the +5 feet, hands, mouth, etc on it it will be faster, stronger, and tougher than the most excellently designed apex predator that only has the +3 feet, hands et al. In the 2005 demo version, that mono-monstrosity would never make it out of the water, because the stats were procedurally generated, and mimicked actual biology quite well, based on how you evolved your creature, not what you put on it.

I always see people blaming development companies for their crappy games.  It's not really the developers with the problem, it's the publishers.  The developers have their hands tied behind their backs.

Don't get me wrong, I don't blame Will for this. EA is notorious for pushing games out as fast as possible to make money, and for destroying unique ideas to appeal to huge audiences. I'm certian this was 95% EA's fault in the end.

I'm guessing the other five percent is just imcompatiple coding, or maybe a girl friend of Wills or wife. Never really cared for his games, EXCEPT! Sim Earth.

[Zemat]

They even made the planet buster worse. How is that even possible? In the 2005 demo is caused the planet to explode, and afterwards there would be a new asteroid belt around the sun in that planets orbit. Now? it removes the planets crust and leaves a ball of magma floating in space. That's all it does.

That just puts the final nail in the coffin for me. Spore is worse now than it was in 2005 in every single way.

Regardless of how less awesome a ball of magma is. That's what would realistically would happen if a planet were to instantaneously blow up. Most of it's original mass would reintegrate by itself due to gravitational forces and turn into a hot ball of magma by the energy of the reintegration. It would take two planets of very similar masses colliding at almost opposite directions to torn both planets apart into fine pieces that would make an asteroid belt. And then the asteroid belt would take centuries to form from the remains.

I guess this is one of the few instances in the game where they preferred to make thinks more realistic than it was instead of the other way around like they did with the rest of the game.

[MeshGearFox]

In the 2005 demo version, that mono-monstrosity would never make it out of the water, because the stats were procedurally generated, and mimicked actual biology quite well, based on how you evolved your creature, not what you put on it.

I seriously do not remember this, at all, although in all honesty the phrase "procedurally generated" got flung around so much that it could've literally meant anything at that point.

[SHAD0Wdump]

They even made the planet buster worse. How is that even possible? In the 2005 demo is caused the planet to explode, and afterwards there would be a new asteroid belt around the sun in that planets orbit. Now? it removes the planets crust and leaves a ball of magma floating in space. That's all it does.

That just puts the final nail in the coffin for me. Spore is worse now than it was in 2005 in every single way.

Regardless of how less awesome a ball of magma is. That's what would realistically would happen if a planet were to instantaneously blow up. Most of it's original mass would reintegrate by itself due to gravitational forces and turn into a hot ball of magma by the energy of the reintegration. It would take two planets of very similar masses colliding at almost opposite directions to torn both planets apart into fine pieces that would make an asteroid belt. And then the asteroid belt would take centuries to form from the remains.

I guess this is one of the few instances in the game where they preferred to make thinks more realistic than it was instead of the other way around like they did with the rest of the game.

But it would'uv been soo cool.

[MeshGearFox]

Also:

Another point with epic strategy games. Why is it always "Conquer, conquer, conquer!" and never "Let's build a culture?" Especially here.

This is why I don't like Master of Orion 2. You're not building a space society. You're building a space empire and the entire point is to subjugate everyone. You don't have to take care of your own citizens. You don't develop a unique history as the game goes on. You can't actually interact with the other races -- just pound the crap out of them or bribe them to leave you alone, basically.

This is not how things work and I REALLY have to applaud Paradox Games' work on Crusader Kings, where your citizens tend to get a bit miffed if wars drag on too long, and where, if your empire gets too huge, it becomes incredibly unmanagable and your underlings take it over, realizing you can't do anything about it. Or the EU games, where in a lot of cases it's better to have allies than additional provinces.

Could someone PLEASE make a 4x game where wiping everyone out -- either militaristically, culturally, or religiously -- isn't really a valid solution?

[Servant Corps]

MeshGearFox: You miss the point of 4X then.

4X stands for: "eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, and eXterminate." Take out the 'eXterminate' part, and we're just left with...well...a game that is not really 4X honestly. I would agree if you can 'eXterminate' your enemies peacefully, but to take it out entirely so the entire point of running an empire is to exploit your natural resources and make tons and tons of money for your retirement fund...well, it's not really what a 4X is about.

You'd enjoy Tropico though.

[Torak]

You'd enjoy Tropico though.

Who doesn't?