Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Fumanchu

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
Spore: General / Re: Is Spore Dead?
« on: April 07, 2010, 08:25:58 am »
I think Spore was intended to be Will Wright's swan song, something he could be proud of, and go out with a bang.  Instead, it's kind of been a whimper.

Hype really floated the game when it first came out.  No matter if you had your hopes dashed (like me) or you were satisfied with the end product, Spore still managed to do well initially.  But it was hobbled right out of the gate due to the simplistic gameplay.  EA/Maxis was't sure who their target demographic was and thus botched marketing opportunities everywhere they could, resulting in more disgruntlement from the few hangers-on left.

Even Will Wright pulled a Pontius Pilate and figuratively washed his hands of the whole Spore product (except with receiving royalty payments, no doubt).  He seemingly wanted to distance himself so much from Spore (which was his last videogame) that he's decided to pursue development of TV shows instead.

It seems to be a common complaint (with legs) that whenever a promising developer pairs up with EA, you can rest assured Quality will take a nosedive.  Instead, the end goal is Quantity (read: micro-transactions or endless expansion packs).  These aren't bad ideas, but you need to have that solid foundation and that core group of gamers you know will pimp the product to their friends.  Without that, you run the risk of driving sales right into the ground.

I remember right before Spore came out there was a post by someone that said something like: "Spore will be a game I will play for 20 years and then I will pass it on to my children, since by WW's estimate you could play your entire lifetime and still not see all there is to see."  He was flamed for basically saying the equivalent of having his own father tell him about a fascinating game called Pacman he should play.  Of course, then I played Spore and realized I'd really have to dislike my kids to want to foist it upon them even a year later (which is incredibly generous).

Long-winded, but this forum is dead anyway, so there you go.

Spore: General / Re: Grain of Salt
« on: May 14, 2009, 07:49:45 am »
We all saw what happened last time some one took us [to] the promised land (Spore).
Truer words were never spoken.

Yesterday someone (not you) pissed in my wheaties, so I was feeling a bit provocative and wanted to rile at least someone up with this post.

Great replies from everyone. I also forgot that people would do the RP stuff in the Creation Corner, which I rarely looked at. I guess I wanted to create my stories when Spore came out.

As Lippy has said, the evidence was plain to see as newer videos came trickling out over the years, but it just boggled my mind that a team like Maxis / EA could put out something like Spore (dev time=5 years?) while MediaMolecule could put out something like LBG (dev time=2 years?) which looked & felt honestly more polished. Or even Mario Galaxy with its many different spheroid worlds with crazy contraptions, jumping between planets, etc. I suppose I just didn't want to believe what I was seeing.

Also, I agree, no need to shut down this site (again, me just being pissy). I still come here pretty much every weekday just to see what's going on.

Spore: General / Re: Grain of Salt
« on: May 13, 2009, 01:55:31 pm »
Shadowgander, you made it clear, no need to slap yourself tomorrow. It's a valid point--I'm being egocentric and I forget that the other forums have ... steady ... posts / threads. Point taken.

Skyward, the promised land is thattaway. Way to miss the boat, pal.

Spore: General / Grain of Salt
« on: May 13, 2009, 12:38:09 pm »
Hey there lurkers and fellow members who have followed Spore at least since 2006 (if not earlier for some).

Remember when this place was a'bustling with activity, even during the agonizingly long dry spells when the dev teams were more interested in missing deadlines than making any kind of updates to a (then) non-existent newsletter?

Remember the comraderie that took place amongst a great many posters / readers, where there were frequent threads back and forth and people eagerly answered each other's questions?

Remember the anticipation built up after scouring the net trying to find the latest tidbit about Spore and how awesome we all thought it was going to be?

Remember that feeling, like in Terminator when the light in the machine goes dim? And how that was a great representation of how a lot of people felt after actually playing Spore?

Remember that giddy feeling you had when you put Spore into your computer, played for a few hours, then realized you were already starting to become an apologetic for all of its vast shortcomings?

Remember how embarrassing it was when you realized you had actually recommended this game to the people you knew that were older than 8?


Things have died off to an alarming degree. Because I'm a glutton for punishment (I know, QQ some more), I still visit this desolate place--that's almost deader than a doornail. Any news about any upcoming Spore expansion is now greatly tempered with slamming down hype (and for good reason).

Just wanted to say that it was nice back when, back before the POS that is Spore came out. I suppose the fact that the owner of this site (the one it's named after) not even showing up for years on end is a good indication that this site needs to go the way of the '05 Willosaur. Or maybe just me.

PC Games / Re: Onlive!!!!
« on: March 26, 2009, 07:31:32 am »
I think you misunderstand what this service does. It's not a new console. It's strictly PC games. But instead of transmitting keyboard and mouse input directly to your computer, it'll go over the internet to the OnLive server, and that server will make all the game calculations, and stream a video of that back to you. So all your computer does is transmit user input to OnLive, and it receives a stream back. So there won't be, and never will be, Xbox360, PS3 or Wii games on OnLive. Because there won't be any point, people can just buy a console and the games themselves, they don't need OnLive for that.
The little box you can buy from OnLive is just so you can play the PC games on your TV, instead of on your PC.
Didero, I think you're wrong on this part. The OnLive demo I watched, the guy mentions that it wouldn't be that difficult to port over PC, X360 or PS3 games to be playable with OnLive. Of course, in order to use the service, you have to have one of three things: PC, Mac, TV. This is geared for people that don't want to or can't shell out money for just buying the consoles or keep upgrading their PCs in order to play the best games.

I think it's a little naive to say "there won't be, and never will be, Xbox360, PS3 or Wii games on OnLive." It's not up to the console-makers to decide what goes on the OnLive service, but up to the publishers. And if they see opportunities for more revenue from people that, again, can't or won't pony up the cash for the respective platform, of course they will consider hosting it through OnLive.

PC Games / Re: Onlive!!!!
« on: March 24, 2009, 11:16:56 am »
This looks fantastic. And, munchkin5, do you mean bad implementation? Part 1 says it's been in development for over 7 years, so about as long as Spore. Hopefully OnLive's dev team worked on the code a bit more than just on holidays and a couple nights a week.

Spore: General / Re: User experience testing for Galactic Adventure
« on: January 06, 2009, 08:27:53 am »
Is it exciting or frightening that they bring up games like Starcraft? Which, as an RTS, completely blows Spore out of the water at every turn.

Is it possible that Maxis is trying to learn from its mistakes with Spore? But you say you love Spore? Cool beans. Then it's more of the same.

Spore: General / Re: Spore Expansion: Galactic Adventures on Gamestop
« on: December 31, 2008, 12:58:50 pm »
I agree, watch the hype. Especially as there's a really good chance the devs may be reading what you're wanting and saying, "Crud, none of this is in the expansion. What should we do? Let's not answer them and let them build it up in their mind about what a proper expansion means and then grasp to rebuild our company's image once they see the final product."

Books / Re: What are you reading?
« on: December 31, 2008, 11:29:59 am »
Still reading IT.. It's a big book :-\

Oh man, I love IT. One of the best King books out there for me. I also really liked Tommyknockers as well as a few others, but IT has one heckuva hook at the beginning.

Spore: General / Re: Wild Spore vs Domesticated Spore
« on: December 22, 2008, 10:11:09 am »
Lippy, I know you've made the point before about the Spore 2 divisions and I have to say I agree with you. It would have been nice (read: better forethought on Maxis' part) if they had done this with the current version of Spore.

It's like they realized the amount of depth they would have to include for the game's 5 different stages and had 2 choices:
  • Release it separately so nothing was cut out (ala Starcraft 2), or
  • Dumb it down by stripping each stage almost completely and then adding those parts back in incrementally through expansions & maybe patches
So it kind of comes down to the psychology behind their decision to gimp the game instead of just releasing a fully packed Cell & Creature stage first. This gives the impression to the customers (a good lot of them) that they're just trying to milk the franchise and milk the customers in the process. They're after the Almighty Dollar and they're not making any bones about it.

If, however, they had chosen to go the Starcraft 2 route (broken up into 3 separate, packed to the hilt, games), they would've told their customers that they believed first in quality & quantity rather than an incomplete (and devastatingly simple) game.

People end up voting with their pocketbooks. The ol' "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me" thinking comes into play here. Customers see what Maxis did out of the gate by bastardizing their own game and making it one of the most asinine games to ever want to repeat-play it and now these same customers have backed off and won't be buying the XPs or next iteration wholeheartedly, if at all.

You think about Blizzard and then think about Maxis. I remember Maxis' pitch involved comparisons to WoW. Hilarious, given what's happened since with Spore. Blizzard is making money hand over fist, why? Because they put out a game 4 year-olds and grandpas can play? No, because they put out quality and realized they have to put that carrot (or dragon) just out of reach so you'll continue to chase after it. Any fan of SC or Diablo is waiting with more confidence in Blizzard's ability to deliver than what they've witnessed with Maxis & Spore.

Spore: General / Re: Wild Spore vs Domesticated Spore
« on: December 17, 2008, 01:55:02 pm »
The second poster was correct - this proliferation of "Spore was a disappointment" threads is getting way out of hand... There should be one thread for this topic - not a thousand. 
Alternatively, it could be said the apologist threads are getting way out of hand. Depends on perspective, I guess.

PC Games / Re: Back in WoW
« on: December 17, 2008, 08:07:23 am »
I find that it's hard to stay away for too long. And not because it's online crack or have a lot of gold (I don't necessarily). It's just polished on all fronts. It's like I go away to play another game, then realize WoW has that nice, comfortable gameplay I'm already used to. I got into WAR quite a bit and had a lot of fun, but even then the graphics just didn't do it for me like WoW.

Level 75 Death Knight
Perenolde (PvE)

I was a 66 Hunter (Tauren), but then rerolled a DK at level 55 and haven't looked back since. It's been easy leveling the entire way. Outland was good, but Northrend seems better and a bit more diverse, both in quests & locale. The gear upgrades, for those that didn't raid (me), in Outland was better than those in Northrend, but it's still been too fun.

I'm sure I'll quit in a month or two (again), then resume at some later date. It doesn't help that WoW seems to retain your characters no matter what. I swore the last time I quit, I deleted my main character just to force me to quit. Then, lo and behold, when I started back up again for the Lich King expansion, he was back again.

Spore: General / Re: Wild Spore vs Domesticated Spore
« on: December 17, 2008, 06:58:06 am »
With friends like Snork, who needs anemones? Your comment about the rigidity of Spore rings true to me. I kept thinking that, in spite of its open atmosphere, the game is on rails the entire time you play. It's deceptive, though; in Creature stage, you're given the illusion that it's all open-ended, but the amount of options for interacting with other creatures is incredibly diverse--if you're living in a binary world, that is.

I also like the "wild place" you mention that we had in our minds. Science seems like a wild place where emergent behavior can happen. Spore seems like it went the route of intelligent design and proceeded to dumb down every part it could. It's like that biblical phrase where there's milk and then there's meat. We didn't even get 2% milk, we got the white-colored water of skim milk.

Spore: General / Re: Spore, Wired's 1# Most Disappointing Game Of The Year.
« on: December 16, 2008, 08:55:28 am »
Exactly, it's the hype behind the technology that we all got suckered into. Whoa, whoa, whoa, you mean to say we can create our own creature and it'll interact in a truly dynamic way (read: infinite variety based on procedural algorithms) with other creatures? And Maxis' response, as usual, was: Silence. So, neither confirming nor denying what we were saying aloud, in front of everyone, on these here forums, which they apparently frequented from time to time.

It's clear that whatever form Spore started as was gimped beyond all recognition; it's a wonder the game even plays successfully through all of the stages. Can you believe some of the devs were saying their favorite stage was Tribal? Of all the stages to pick, they choose Tribal?! Hahahaha, choke, cough.

People, it's okay to admit that Spore was dumbed down for the masses. Take the lowest common denominator of the amount of intelligence it takes to play through this game--8 year old? younger?--and there's your intended demographic. That is not to say that dumbed-down games are for simpletons to enjoy only. I still love Solitaire and that's a pretty easy concept to get down. But Spore was not made for the people that enjoyed anything but Pacman of all of the other 'genres' it was supposedly cribbing from.

Spore: General / Re: So check this graph out..
« on: November 26, 2008, 06:51:44 am »
You weren't die hard Fumanchu. You had unrealistic expectations of the game. I was die hard and still am, The difference is i knew what the game was going to be like and i was not even one lucky enough to play it before release. But i could see what it was from the videos i got what i expected and i was happy with it and i still play it. Sure it needs some work but i can't name a single game in existence that does not.

If you would feel embarrassed being caught playing Spore the same as if you were playing with barbies then i am embarrassed for you here and now oh mister of manly he man of the god damn testosterone mountains of the manly god of manliness.

Grow up.
I humbly prostrate myself before you and beg your forgiveness, oh wise one. But hey thanks for acknowledging my he-man qualities--it's not easy maintaining that magnanimous glare you see in my avatar.

Isn't there a line from the Bible, "When I was a child, I did childish things. When I became a man, I put away those childish things." Glad to see you're still enjoying yourself with Spore. Maybe I can send you my barbie-doll collection as well as a few tea-sets.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13