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 - LaFinAbsolueDuMonde

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Spore: General / Re: The spice must flow!
« on: August 25, 2007, 11:57:28 am »
I was under the impression there are a few different resources you can harvest. Not just the one that is referred to as spice. Will harvested oil at a recent demo. I doubt there is one universal resource that your stuck with. I'm not sure what determines what you can harvest but I'm sure there's at least a few different ones. Its possible spice is just a default generic resource, that is maybe the cheapest and easiest to get, or what you can harvest if the planet is barren.

Spore: General / Re: Spore Fansite/Content Sharing Sites
« on: August 25, 2007, 11:49:26 am »
Of course the database is searchable. It will be categorized, and I'm sure you can search for specific words as well. If there is copyright related content on the database, then you can get it just as easily as any other content. There will be plenty of copyright related content on there, that they receive no complaints for or are modified from their source material enough to not be considered copies. If its on there, they haven't removed it or gotten any complaints about it. There will be fan sites. The primary use of these will be to get certain content that is kept off the official Spore database. The problem as has been discussed before is the likelihood that these sites will lack the favorites option the official database will have. You'll have to manually download everything you want. No in-game surprises from your favorite creators. Unless somehow this feature works with third-party sites, but I doubt it. It also seems unlikely you'll be able to see any interesting metaverse reports about your creatures that you upload to such a site.
It remains to be seen how moddable Spore will be. There are many unanswered questions regarding copyright related issues.
See here:
"Will copyright related content be deleted from the Spore database?"

Thanks for uploading these. Good to finally see some new demo footage even though its limited. The editors look really good. They've continued to refine and polish them. The vehicle and building editors look very impressive. I like how each creation gets its own custom icon in the game directory and it seems that you can just drag anything into the game and start editing it. And the parts inside the Groob's mouth didn't seem like a glitch to me. They looked like sensible inner-mouth parts. That probably are part of that mouth automatically.

Spore: General / Re: GCDC Leipzig 07 (August 20-22 & 23-26)
« on: August 17, 2007, 02:29:57 am »
The requirements for Supreme Commander are only a 1.8 ghz processor. You have a Geforce 6600 with a slower processor than that? How old is your system? The requirement for the newest Sims expansion pack being released next month is only a 1.3 ghz, and 2.0 ghz for Vista users. The minimum processor requirements for Doom III and Medieval II are identical, a 1.5 ghz processor. I don't understand how you can run those games but you can't run Supreme Commander. I've never played the game but the difference in requirements seems negligible. Can you not run it at all, or it just runs bad? The most money to be made with Spore is with Sims players. Spore's requirements will be only slightly higher if not basically equivalent to the newest Sims 2 expansion requirements. So I disagree, anyone who can run Doom III or Medieval II well will be able to run Spore, well.

Spore: General / Re: gravityy
« on: August 17, 2007, 01:44:06 am »
I interpret Will's comments to meaning that throwing a creature into orbit with the abduction beam was a glitch, an unintentional side effect of the the beam's coding. I imagine it wasn't removed because they thought it could be funny, and they thought players might want to throw creatures around. I think they can stay in orbit indefinitely unless you kill them. Or maybe they just die after a few orbits.

Spore: General / Re: GCDC Leipzig 07 (August 20-22 & 23-26)
« on: August 17, 2007, 01:38:13 am »
Half-Life 2 isn't a bad benchmark to use when speculating on Spore's system requirements. One of the most excessive and illogical aspects of the entire Spore community is the prevalence of worry if the game will run well, or at all on people's computers. You don't need a supercomputer. You never did and you never will, to run Spore. If you can run any popular title from the past 2 or 3 years, such as Half-Life 2, Doom III, the Battlefield games, the recent Sims 2 expansions, the Warhammer games, Medieval II, stuff like that, then you'll be able to run Spore fine. I've thought that to run the game at full settings will be more dependent on your processor and RAM then graphics card so in that way Spore could likely be less dependent on a recent high-end graphics card to look its best when compared to the games listed above and other recent ones like Bioshock and Crysis. Basically, if your computer is no more than 3 years old, you'll probably be able to run Spore well, if not very well.

Spore: General / Re: The tribal Stage
« on: August 17, 2007, 01:29:04 am »
What information are you basing that conclusion on? I vaguely recall something about your creature being "set" once you develop the intelligence necessary to become a tribal species so even if you can't use the creature editor after the creature phase, there's still logic to it. As has been said, we ourselves didn't undergo any drastic physical changes for a very long period of time despite significant technological advancement. I doubt Maxis left out the ability to vary your creature's appearance over time after the creature phase by not being able to do anything but create new tools, buildings, and technology for your species. Though those things alone seem like significant milestones of development anyway. Since you can create hats, clothes are likely too, and regardless after your first species develops to the space phase, can't you then go back to a previous phase, such as the creature phase, and edit your creature again. Since at the space phase your supposed to be able to have access to all the editors whenever you want.

Spore: General / Re: The tribal Stage
« on: August 16, 2007, 04:05:07 pm »
What do you mean a lot of the game comes after tribal phase? Its my understanding that as I said, you can remain in the tribal phase for as long as you wish, making whatever changes you want and can afford before advancing to the next stage. I don't see why you can't portray whatever changes you want to occur with your species. Add, subtract, and morph parts as you evolve it, or begin with conceptual designs of what different features you want it to have at certain times, and then give it those features accordingly. You can design hats and likely clothes as well so I don't see a problem with the visual changes you want your creatures to go through to reflect their intelligence.

Spore: General / Re: Religion used as a form of conquest.
« on: August 16, 2007, 03:53:17 pm »
It seems possible you could lose colonies culturally but losing them because of war seems quicker and more likely. The complex relations dynamics would have been nice, but as I said Maxis decided against this, and it wasn't without reason. It really was probably way too complicated and it just wasn't practical in terms of programming. I haven't played the other games you speak of but you have to remember there's never been a game like Spore before and as such its design is unique, with both great benefits and certain limitations. There's also the overrriding policy Maxis had of making the game accessible to non-gamers, casual gamers, and especially Sims players so any overcomplications and certain complexities were simply scrapped or never considered in the first place. I don't have a problem with this, since there's no point, since the game just doesn't have it.

How would other civilizations joining together and attacking you work when each one only has one UFO? Attempt to fight 3 or more UFOs simultaneously, with only your 1? Or decide which of 3+ colonies spread across the galaxy you want to try and defend? If you attack multiple civilizations and leave those conflicts unresolved, they'll attack, eventually, but not necessarily simultaneously, so I don't see any vital need for them to be able to formally ally themselves with each other.

Religion is implemented as culture for a reason. Omission of its blantant labeling I interpret as being for reasons of political correctness. And I think you may be underestimating just how much time and effort it will take to become a lone superpower with 200,000+ planets in the galaxy, constantly being updated with new races. In fact, its impossible, since the Spore galaxy is so immense and fluctuating in its contents. I don't see any stagnation or replayablity issues at all. Except for the one old standard, of, no matter how great someone thinks a game is, eventually they'll stop playing. That's just about always the case with gamers. In a few years Spore 2 or some other game could be out, and only some will still be playing Spore. In 10 years Spore could be looked upon like Doom or the original SimCity is now. A classic, great game, but people mostly just play it for nostalgia purposes since there are much newer and better games available.

Once you lose a few colonies in the game maybe then you'll be reassured that you can get steamrolled back. Personally I like some resistance, but excessive amounts can be irritating. Do you actually think Spore will draw no controversy? Of course it will. Just like the Sims did, or GTA. It contains elements controversial to children, yet will have some direct marketing towards a younger audience. It will have a far higher profile than most games, as much if not more than Sims marketing. There were no EU III commericals in primetime on children's networks and popular cable ones that showed slavery. I doubt that game had any television advertising at all. I've never agreed with the validity of people getting offended by anything in Spore. I've merely stated how and why some of its content could easily offend some. To me its very easy and simple to see in such a politically correct and media-connected world where people get offended by anything they think they should be. Religion itself being expressly featured in the game in a literal way would not in itself make it controversial, but I believe its omission is to make the game more innocuous and appealing to a broader player base.

Spore: General / Re: The tribal Stage
« on: August 16, 2007, 03:12:46 pm »
Creatures gradually becoming upright as they evolve was considered to represent progressions of intelligence but decided against. One reason was that people will design such a variety of creatures that this would not be universally applicable, and the other reason is the same why you start as a featureless slug. To encourage creativity and diversity. Maxis doesn't want to tell you what makes your creature look like its evolving, its up to the player. You can remain at any stage and develop and evolve your creature as much as you like, as long as you have the DNA points for it. There have been vague references to a clothes and dressing editor and it is likely in the game, at least in some limited capacity. As for hats, they have been confirmed and can be seen in recent videos.

Spore: General / Re: Religion used as a form of conquest.
« on: August 16, 2007, 02:42:52 pm »
As far as music goes you must be kidding about identifying different real music genres, as the only music heard and likely in Spore created by creatures is of the tribal, drum, and simple instruments like trumpets, kind. There may be some imagination requirement to assign values to what each culture holds sacred. The drum fantatics may find excessive trumpet play extremely blasphemous. The point of the music and dancing and chanting is to influence nonviolently, and therefore, is not war. Considering there is no complex government or social issues dynamic within or between societies, imagination is required if you want realistic earthlike justification for any war or conflict of any kind within the game.

And all this referencing to complex relationship dynamics, if society A offends society B, then ally of B, society C will then look unfavorably upon society A, is irrelevant to the game because it was confirmed months ago that the developers decided against this because in space it was just too difficult and complex to program because of the massive possibility space and intricacy required. I have no problem with societies remaining yours once you conquer them, and not having to micromanage the happiness level of every single one. Whether there was automanage or not avid players will be conquering thousands of civilizations and I don't want to have to concern myself with lands already conquered, and I don't believe you can lose colonies once you establish them, unless they get destroyed.

Always playing aggressively warlike the same way to me seems more likely to result in gameplay stagnation than if you vary your gameplay style or the game just not being challenging enough. If you continue to be more and more aggressive and your difficulty slider, if there is such a thing, isn't set to very easy, I'm sure you'll get attacked plenty and have unsuccessful attacks with creatures who are as strong if not stronger than you, since the same "your never the top of the food chain" dynamic begun early in the game continues in space.

And if religion was an obvious and blatantly labeled feature in the game it could easily be offensive to some. It doesn't matter if most of the world is religious. A large target audience of this game is younger people and to have a game they might ask for as a gift feature the ability to create new imaginary religions or poorly conceived representations of existing ones and advertise this as a feature and call everything religion, and a temple, and "worship altar" by default would likely result in additonal controversy to what are already the controversial topics associated with this game, creationism, evolution, the odd mixture of the two in Spore, the mating, and the actual ability of Maxis to monitor and moderate the database once the game actually comes out.

Spore: General / Re: Religion used as a form of conquest.
« on: August 16, 2007, 03:17:12 am »
By artifacts I meant tools you could make that might resemble objects used in earth religions, or ones you make up for an imaginary religion. Very little is known for certain about how many different tools you can make or buy. Spears are all that've been seen and at the most recent demo fishing poles were used. I was thinking along the lines of making little bibles or carpets to represent different Judeo-Christian and Islamic religions, or making odd random things that are parts of religions people make up. Someone could make a building that resembles a christmas tree, maybe scale it to be small enough to be realistic, or if it was huge it'd be like the Rockefeller center one.

I don't want to recreate any earth religions but it might be interesting to see some really odd alien creatures who have aspects of earth religions. The dancing and chanting does seem like religious rites of some kind but I meant that the actual word religion as far as I know isn't in the game, and that the aspects of religion are simply known as culture, cultural influence, or other adjectives that will not be as controversial or offensive to some as religion.

And in response to your earlier post I think if a race was played by someone to be very strong in terms of their cultural influence then those creatures will be a lot harder to convert. And it has been confirmed that members of your culture can be culturally converted.

Spore: General / Re: Religion used as a form of conquest.
« on: August 16, 2007, 12:40:25 am »
I don't think religion is referenced literally, in the game at all. You can "culturally" influence other creatures by use of dancing, instruments, and cultural vehicles, and, possibly by building some sort of cultural center structure, but I doubt it'll be referred to as a temple. The gameplay mechanics will be similar to using a religion to nonviolently dominate or ally with other tribes and civilizations.

I think common civilizations that worship you won't fight each other, but rather become part of your alliance and benefit you the same way diplomacy and trade will. You'll get more money by having them as part of your power sphere. In multiple demos the crocodile people on the pink planet seem to be in a state of advanced civilization, but they worship the UFO anyway, so I don't think just because a civilization is advanced doesn't mean they're not vulnerable to cultural influence, which is realistic when compared to earth societies past and present.

Depending on how the player played that civilization will probably be the primary factor in determining their susceptibility to cultural takeover. I doubt there'll be any referencing of higher powers, and if you can actually name a religion, since "religion" isn't even in the game. If someone wants to recreate earth religions then all they'd have to do is create buildings that resemble those religions' places of significance and if possible other artifacts that have to do with that religion. Since you will most likely be able to add biographical information about your creature on your creature's database page, you can say your creatures follow whatever religion you want them to, if you want them to be religious at all.

PC Games / Re: Bioshock
« on: August 13, 2007, 01:27:44 am »
I watched some videos about this and it looks like a cool game with the underwater and 40s themes and the nonlinear gameplay but the circular object being squeezed reminds me a lot of the alien object used in Half-Life 2 to control the antlions and the flying machines are almost identical to manhacks so it felt derivative of HL2.
I don't think I'd be able to run the game well, if at all. The system requirements are very high and discriminate against all PC gamers who haven't bought expensive systems or video cards in the past 2 years. How much money do they expect to yield from such a minority demographic? Most of their sales will probably be XBOX sales. I'll try to run the demo when its released but I doubt I'd pay more than $30 for a single player game that I could beat in less than a month anyway even if I can run it well.

Uroboros you wrote some great ideas for expanding the Spore playing universe with mini-games and transparent implementation of community features built into the game itself, like the content sharing already is. I doubt most if any will actually be made but it'd be great if they were. You should email the ideas in that post to EA and Maxis now and/or when the website expands to include some kind of official ideas and suggestions section or email address. Most of those features are extensions of the content sharing and browsing being done in-game already, so I think Wright and the Spore team would approve of and like those features as well.

I also like the multiplayer idea of a 2 player co-op mode. Players could directly connect to one other player's galaxy, and between the two of them they could decide who wanted to do what, and evolve a species together. They would both see the same in-game screens, and have a messenger to communicate with at all times. They could also possibly have the ability to do different things at once if they wanted, and one player would be able to see what the other is doing in a smaller window they could zoom to at any time.

The game could be saved at any time, so they wouldn't have to play for many hours consecutively to advance, and be resumed when the two people wanted to play again at the same time. There could be a setting to only access the saved game if both people were online and logged in to play so one person couldn't play extensively by themselves, or if agreed the two players could allow the other person to play their species individually when they weren't playing. There is the additional possibility that the game could be resumed by either player whenever they wanted, but they'd continue the game as their own personal galaxy, and the shared galaxy wouldn't be affected.

Most multiplayer game disruptors target and thrive in group settings. In a co-op mode of only 2, even if the people didn't know each other personally, because of the gameplay mechanics and complexity of Spore, if someone else agreed that they wanted to create a new creature with someone, its more likely they'd play respectfully and cooperatively instead of wanting to ruin the other person's experience. It'd be easy to tell early on in the creature editor if you'd be able to get along with the other person and by the time the creature was done being made you'd basically be on the same page.

There could also be a ranking and rating system to classify and sort co-op players into different types, with an emphasis on identifying players who have excelled in co-op mode. Players who had played co-op mode with positive results would easily be able to find other co-op players they know would be good to play with. Dynamic searching could be programmed so that certain players who wanted to do certain things in the game, but not others, could easily find others who liked to do the things they didn't. The co-op matching algorithm could also include code related to when people were logged onto the Spore database, so that people most often on at certain times of the day would be listed and matched with others who played at the same times.

With these methods very accurate pairing of co-op players who don't necessarily know each other could be done. Players could quickly find other players who complemented their style of play and would want to play a co-op game at the same times they would. This is one of the simplest and cheapest ways I think Maxis could implement a multiplayer feature in Spore. And its one they could make as a free add-on after the game is released that would greatly enhance the game for those wanting to see what the results of collaborative thinking are.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4