Print

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

[Micro102]

Then why was I, a crazed hype-junkie, unable to find anything about that?

[Neonivek]

Then why was I, a crazed hype-junkie, unable to find anything about that?

Because while you were looking at the info you were like: Holy cow that 2005 video was awsome! ohh look! I can watch it AGAIN! lets talk about that 2005 video!

Ohh look another video! Ohhh it must be an early video because it doesn't look like the 2005 video.

Hey does anyone know where I can get info on Spore? Ohh the 2005 video? Awsome!

Honestly I don't know why everyone was hypnotised by the 2005 video, though I think it was mostly that everyone was so sure that the 2005 was what it had to be that any conflicting information meant that they weren't at the 2005 video quality just yet.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Nobody wants to sign on a developer whose game bombed.

Wow, then you really shouldn't have backed up a company that was stressing the community at large.

Harsh but really. We could even speak about the many people who would lose their jobs if EA lost money.

In fact I bet some of those EA employees had a family to raise.

Honestly the Capitalist system written it clear: If you don't want something don't buy it.

The game itself may be good, but the programming is BAD! What could you do to fix that?

Are your games SOOO good that we WON'T want to boycott?

Hi!

Please respond to the point I am making about the game developers working hard and not deserving the collateral damage from a crusade against their publishing company instead of tossing out a confusing hodgepodge of anti-EA one liners. Also, I am not a game developer or publisher, so the pronouns 'you' and 'your' should only be used when you are directly referring to me. I have no personal stake in whether or not an EA franchise bombs because of boycotts (not that it would actually happen, anyways).

I guess at the very least they're a great scapegoat for cases like AC2, which is a game not affiliated with EA at any time but an entirely Ubisoft run venture, yet seems to draw a great deal of criticism towards EA. I'd rather have to pay for extra features than have to log onto the internet every time I play, myself, but if we want to boycott a company and, as you say, ruin the livelihoods of the programmers, I guess there's no better choice than the former.

Grakelin

This is the "Support The Troops" argument.

EA, the boss, does bad things. Developers, the subordinates, are forced to do what they have to to survive. So even though you protest the boss, you should still support the subordinate.

Problem is, the developer chose to go with EA. Sure it might not have been much of a choice - a choice between EA or nothing, basically. But they had the choice. And, the game has a good 40% chance of completely sucking.

And by supporting the developer, you are directly supporting EA, because EA makes its money off them.

There is no moral reason to buy the game just to support the developers, and by doing so you help perpetuate EA. I'm not boycotting EA because of this, only because you can't boycott something twice.

[Micro102]

Then why was I, a crazed hype-junkie, unable to find anything about that?

Because while you were looking at the info you were like: Holy cow that 2005 video was awsome! ohh look! I can watch it AGAIN! lets talk about that 2005 video!

Ohh look another video! Ohhh it must be an early video because it doesn't look like the 2005 video.

Hey does anyone know where I can get info on Spore? Ohh the 2005 video? Awsome!

Honestly I don't know why everyone was hypnotised by the 2005 video, though I think it was mostly that everyone was so sure that the 2005 was what it had to be that any conflicting information meant that they weren't at the 2005 video quality just yet.

You jumped to so many exaggerated conclusions I don't know where to start.

All videos have dates on when they were posted, so I knew the new videos were new, and they did not provide any information other then showing new graphics, not one video had anything mentioning removing stuff. All the new videos were short and didn't go into detail.

In 2005 a video showing spore in it's early phases. That 1 demo alone is probably worth more then the current spore version. No one expected it to be made so horribly after 4 years of production. They obviously scraped the entire old code and remade it. No mention of that either.

I don't see how you got any proof that spore was so downplayed by looking at these short 1-2 min previews of what EA wanted you to look at.

[Neonivek]

You know you just referenced the 2005 SEVERAL times.

Where was my exageration? Heck you even called it "Spore in it's early phases" while the video itself said that it was held up with paperclips and glue. It was staged and barely functional.

As for proof. I also read a lot of articles, I combed videos for info (the one with the insects for example prove ragdoll false).

Hmmm Honestly I am not sure if this is off topic or not.

[Micro102]

"Spore in it's early phases" while the video itself said that it was held up with paperclips and glue. It was staged and barely functional.

Which is usually what a beta is like. Maybe it was even still in alpha stage.

Link to the video please.

Maybe it is off topic, PM the link to me if you think it is.

[Neonivek]

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/735/735340/vids_1.html

The video at the bottom is what I am refering to. Though many others are good for this.

[Micro102]

Soooooo, your referring a video made AFTER the game was released as proof?

I am looking at the video titled "bug if that is what your referring too.

[Neonivek]

Soooooo, your referring a video made AFTER the game was released as proof?

I am looking at the video titled "bug if that is what your referring too.

The video I am refering to was made two years before Spore was released... I don't know what you are talking about. March 2006

[Micro102]

all the videos have separate titles, title please.

Checked the video called "creature development" but I don't see anything regarding ragdoll physics.

[Neonivek]

all the videos have separate titles, title please.

Checked the video called "creature development" but I don't see anything regarding ragdoll physics.

EARLIEST! Keep going! I am starting to find out quite easily why people have trouble researching Spore.

Also Creature Development disproves "Non-Color chosing"

[Micro102]

The earliest video??? That is one of the 2005 videos. It may say 2006 but that was only when it was uploaded. Notice how much stuff is missing from that video in the current game. The creatures don't have pre-designed movements for their limbs, the bird thing grabbed it's "mouth" when using the call action, your had a nest to defend, there were editors that the current game didn't have, there was intelligent design and physics.

And How does it disprove ragdoll physics? Nothing died.

[Neonivek]

The earliest video??? That is one of the 2005 videos. It may say 2006 but that was only when it was uploaded. Notice how much stuff is missing from that video in the current game. The creatures don't have pre-designed movements for their limbs, the bird thing grabbed it's "mouth" when using the call action, your had a nest to defend, there were editors that the current game didn't have, there was intelligent design and physics.

And How does it disprove ragdoll physics? Nothing died.

Keep going. Though I thought that was the one where an attacker died and he made the creature eat it by accident and it got sick and threw up.

Also you would want to read all the articles in Gamespot too. ALL OF THEM!

The fact that you never watched any of these or read any of these articles doesn't surprise me too much. I even had to link to it.

[Grakelin]

Even the creature editor got dumbed down within two or three weeks of release, so I don't see why there's an argument here.

Remember when they were showing us editable ribcages? REMEMBER THAT?

[Neonivek]

Even the creature editor got dumbed down within two or three weeks of release, so I don't see why there's an argument here.

Remember when they were showing us editable ribcages? REMEMBER THAT?

Editable ribcages where did I see that... ohh yes I remember... 2005!

They released a demo of the creature editor. So it being a surprise isn't really an arguement. Not to mention that the changes to the creature editor was revealed many months before those three weeks, the real changes only amounted to layout and a complexity meter.

Ok... I expected a bit of non-research. But I SWEAR people just watched the 2005 video... gone "Well thats it, I am getting that game!" and that was that.