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 - Dreyfuss

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
1
Spore: Creation Corner / Re: NEW CREATURE: Nezumi
« on: June 18, 2008, 02:14:50 pm »
Resurrecting my old thread to add an image of the Nezumi in-game ;D



And my sporepedia page: http://www.spore.com/view/profile/Dreyfuss

And I changed my avatar if anyone even remembers the old one.  New one's by Justin Hernandez.

2
Thread needs more bacon.

Previous versions of the game are beta. They are not the final version that will be shipped. The devs will have had nearly a year to fix graphical problems by the time this ships since we last saw a demo video.

Last video to be released was October '06.  So more like half a year.  And the original GDC '05 vid had much more fluid animations, but those were probably scripted anyway.  Still, not nice to show off scripted animations like that and make us think that the procedural animation will be just as good.  Compare the Willosaurs to Fourlegs.  Still, another year before release, plenty of time to work on it.  If you actually think it will release this year then you haven't been following games much :P  If they say it releases in 2 years, it will release in 3.  If they say 4 quarters, it'll release in 5.  Release dates are never accurate until they start giving dates less than 3-4 months from the time of the announcement.

3
Spore: General / Re: Videos slowly getting less exciting.
« on: March 06, 2007, 08:12:03 pm »
I have no problem with the sandbox nature, I have more then enough scripted confined games, I'm not getting spore for a "challenge" I'm getting it because I want to create stuff and mess about.


As for the creature movement, well different creatures move in different waus, likewise, just because you didnt see a big predator doesnt mean it doesnt exist or it cant exist for other planets and species.

The whole point is anything goes with Spore. My bet is every world gives your creature some competition, it simply wasnt seen in the vid.

And wasnt something trying to attack the young or steal eggs of that critter?.

Well I would like that to be in the game, but that doesn't mean there should be no campaign mode.  Think back to SimCity.  You could start a new city from scratch, or you could play a scenario.  That's the sort of feature I would like.  Of course, it shouldn't limit as much as SimCity did, like building your city (or in this case, your creature) for you.  The sort of campaign mode I would like would be similar to GTA, where you can go around and do whatever you like and customize your character in the area you have access too with the parts you have access to, but in order to progress you had to complete certain scripted missions.  The fact that you had everything available from the moment you leave the sewer in Oblivion really turned me off.  Without unlocking previously locked content I get no feeling of reward for my accomplishment.  Not just me, lots of players like me prefer a more linear, objective-oriented sort of game.  Why alienate them?  I love everything Spore offers, it's just missing one thing.  I feel if there were a challenging, story-driven campaign mode (without limits to the creature you use to play through it of course), it would easily double the playerbase for Spore.

Of course, I'm not saying change what's already there to a campaign style, rather there should be OPTIONS.  Options are ALWAYS, ALWAYS a good thing.  Just make the main menu look like this:

New Campaign
New Sandbox
Load Game
etc.
etc.

Besides, a campaign would be so easy to implement.  Just have certain scripted events take place when the player reaches a certain point (or string them together start-to-end) and keep features/parts/places locked until the player completes them.  And by that I don't just mean making the player gain such-and-such many DNA points, I mean a giant predator has found your nests, fend him off!  Or an enemy tribe has stolen an object of importance from your village, attack them and reclaim it!  Etc. etc.  Honestly it wouldn't be hard to do at all.

why are people losing aith in a game that wont be released for a year

here is what is basically being said

"i think this game will have gotten worse now that they have had over 3 more years to work on it since we first saw it"

which is just plain stupid.
This isnt a new thing, people have been doing this since early 2006. The answer is probably as simple as : "People are getting disheartened at the release date being constantly nudged back". Though to be fair, some people do make fair points. Not all added development is exactly necessary, or adds to the experience of the game, but we really arent in a place to make much of a judgement, given the lack of info. An example of 'growth in the wrong direction' would be that Star Wars MMO, where in an attempt to refresh the game system and make it feel better, they lost a massive chunk of their playerbase (apparently the changes were horrendous).

As long as Maxis is at the scene, and the vision they build towards is what WW points them to, im certain at the very worst, it will still be enjoyable.

The part I highlighted is exactly what I mean.  SWG's changes were DEFINATELY for the worse, and although I'm 100% certain that Spore's final product will still be enjoyable, I still don't want to see it be anything less than perfect.  Honestly who would?  You guys need to not settle for anything less.  If you see a flaw, demand it be fixed.  If it doesn't get fixed, oh well, at least you tried, better than ignoring it and letting it remain when there was a chance your speaking up could have changed it.  That's all I'm doing, voicing my concerns that the three aspects I mentioned in the original post seem to be regressing in quality rather than advancing, and that I would like some solid reassurance that the demos simply don't cover those aspects and that they're still in there, or will be.

4
Spore: General / Re: Videos slowly getting less exciting.
« on: February 24, 2007, 04:26:55 pm »
Dungeon Siege 2, for a good example.  There's a campaign which scales in difficulty all the way to the end, and sandbox mode, where you just build the best dungeon you can in the area you're given and then have an endless amount of heroes to throw at it to see how it holds up

That sounds like dungeon keeper 2, not dungeon seige 2. unless there is a game called dungeon seige 2 with that style of gameplay too, in which case i'll shut up  ;)

Gah, did I actually type Siege?  I must have Dungeon Siege on my mind from playing SupCom so much recently.  I did mean Keeper.

Has anyone else noticed that?  Compare the original GDC '05 vid http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-262774490184348066&q=spore to some of the more recent vids http://media.pc.ign.com/media/735/735340/vid_1663756.html , for example stuff from E3 '06 and the ones released last fall.  Three big things I've noticed are that the animations are far less fluid, the visual style is less natural, and what little challenge there was seems to have disappeared.
The '05 Great Video was scripted, and built on the Sims 2 engine. Some of the features was only a plan, and not really made.
Compare the motion of the Willosaur's limbs to the very rigid, robot-like darting around of the new four-legged creature, whatever it's called.  I just can't imagine a creature with the leg structure of fourlegs moving in such a manner, not to mention that it's moving far too quickly.  I suppose the way it actually moves its legs isn't so bad, it's simply doing so far too rapidly, almost like one of those speedy beetles.  Is it an insect?  I suppose that could explain it, but it doesn't really look it.  And the torso seems to remain completely still while it runs.  What happened to the bobbing and swaying of the creatures from the GDC '05 vid?
Again:
Some of the features was only a plan, and not really made.
And besides the creature itself, the environment seems much less natural now.  Now I know that Spore is supposed to be very Dr. Seuss-ish, or at least Will's worlds are, but I'm talking about things like the color scheme and lighting effects.  The GDC '05 was much more natural, soft, easy on the eyes, and comprehensible, but in the recent vids it seems the bloom has been turned up so far it would make Fable look dark.  The colors are unnaturally bright, almost play-dough-like, and the light makes you almost want to squint a bit, not to mention that the environment in general is very chaotic and cluttered.

When it was firstly presented, they shown the basic features. Now they show the extremes to the fans. All that you see is createable by the player, and dependig on the player's style

And lastly, what happened to the big scary spider that the poor little Willosaur had to run away from?  Or the seeming lack of other Willosaurs.  Not to mention the scary tanks that came and started blowing up Will's city?  Now our friend fourlegs seems to have no problem at all fighting his enemies (especially since there's nothing bigger than him around), has lots of friends there to help him, and never gets attacked by other towns, or at least not that we've seen.
What happened to them?? Of course they won't show us the same creature again and again, at least they change them yearly. :P But it doesn't mean you can't recreate them.
About our new friends: What is your point? You think there won't be big predators or enemy cities in the game? On GDC 2005 they wanted to represent the food chain with the Splodley, and civilisation with scary tanks.
They didn't show them us again, because they spen't their time on showing new features. (UFO upgrades, sporepedia, UFO discoveries, creature society, etc...)


All good points, and do relieve some anxiety.  I suppose I could see them only showing parts of the game they've updated.  And I think the Sims 2 engine looked better >_>  But that's just me I suppose.

Still, what about the issue of challenge?  The one thing that turns me off the most is that it seems once you reach the UFO stage you're invincible.  We've seen the UFO being attacked, but it never seemed to be in any real danger.  Besides, what would happen if your UFO was destroyed anyway?  Game over, start from last save?  Doesn't seem like much of a penalty...  Of course, once again, we haven't seen the whole game I know.  But I'd at least like these things to be mentioned.  It's been almost two years and Spore still seems to be pure sandbox, no challenge.

5
Spore: General / Re: Videos slowly getting less exciting.
« on: February 24, 2007, 07:40:52 am »
Spite post.

I would likely say that they haven't cut the smooth moves out, just that they might want to use something else while developing other features, hence the jerky plodplodplod movements. They'll likely shuffle them back in once they're at an acceptable stage of completion.

Remember, ALL videos and media we've seen so far come from test builds.

Aye, but I can't help but wonder why they would take steps backwards on things like animation.  Oh well, we still have quite a while before it goes gold, hope the game ends up looking much different by then.  I really don't like this new style :\

6
Spore: General / Videos slowly getting less exciting.
« on: February 24, 2007, 05:26:54 am »
Has anyone else noticed that?  Compare the original GDC '05 vid http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-262774490184348066&q=spore to some of the more recent vids http://media.pc.ign.com/media/735/735340/vid_1663756.html , for example stuff from E3 '06 and the ones released last fall.  Three big things I've noticed are that the animations are far less fluid, the visual style is less natural, and what little challenge there was seems to have disappeared.

Compare the motion of the Willosaur's limbs to the very rigid, robot-like darting around of the new four-legged creature, whatever it's called.  I just can't imagine a creature with the leg structure of fourlegs moving in such a manner, not to mention that it's moving far too quickly.  I suppose the way it actually moves its legs isn't so bad, it's simply doing so far too rapidly, almost like one of those speedy beetles.  Is it an insect?  I suppose that could explain it, but it doesn't really look it.  And the torso seems to remain completely still while it runs.  What happened to the bobbing and swaying of the creatures from the GDC '05 vid?

And besides the creature itself, the environment seems much less natural now.  Now I know that Spore is supposed to be very Dr. Seuss-ish, or at least Will's worlds are, but I'm talking about things like the color scheme and lighting effects.  The GDC '05 was much more natural, soft, easy on the eyes, and comprehensible, but in the recent vids it seems the bloom has been turned up so far it would make Fable look dark.  The colors are unnaturally bright, almost play-dough-like, and the light makes you almost want to squint a bit, not to mention that the environment in general is very chaotic and cluttered.

And lastly, what happened to the big scary spider that the poor little Willosaur had to run away from?  Or the seeming lack of other Willosaurs.  Not to mention the scary tanks that came and started blowing up Will's city?  Now our friend fourlegs seems to have no problem at all fighting his enemies (especially since there's nothing bigger than him around), has lots of friends there to help him, and never gets attacked by other towns, or at least not that we've seen.

Speaking of which, where exactly would the challenge even come from once you reach the space stage?  One thing that's always irked me about Will's game, even though they're all great and I would never dream to call them anything less, is that there's no challenge past the initial stages.  Once you have a stable economy in SimCity, the rest is a peace of cake.  Once you have a good job and the necessities in the Sims, you'll never have to fear anything again.  And it seems in Spore the only time we ever saw the player in any danger was in the cell stage when that brown thing attacked Will.  I love the whole concept of Spore and everything it stands for, especially the revival of the "old ways" of the demo scene, but I don't play games just to mess around with some toys.  Without a challenge to overcome, there's no sense of victory or achievement, and then what?  Maybe the Sim games just aren't my thing, but I enjoy them nonetheless, and would really like to see at the very least an option between "sandbox" mode and, I don't know, let's say "conquest" mode, where you are never far from the danger of extinction, and your spaceship isn't the uber-hand-of-god-machine it seems to be so far.  I'd recommend looking at one of my favorite games, Dungeon Keeper (fixed)* 2, for a good example.  There's a campaign which scales in difficulty all the way to the end, and sandbox mode, where you just build the best dungeon you can in the area you're given and then have an endless amount of heroes to throw at it to see how it holds up.  The fact it had both meant that gamers who only liked one mode could still have fun with everything the game had to offer in their own way.  Spore needs this.  Sure, it'll still be successful without it, but it wouldn't be a perfect 10.

Anyway, not putting down Spore, I still think it'll be a great game regardless, but I'm just saying the more recent videos seem to be less and less... well... awesome compared to the original, and it really makes me worried.  Anyone else notice this?  Oh, and feel free to flame, I can take it.

7
Spore: Creation Corner / Re: Just wondering...
« on: May 17, 2006, 12:42:45 am »
No... dude... you're not getting it.  This "solely" thing is YOUR idea, not mine.  People who jump into our fandom for the express purpose of cybering are freaks among our standards as well.  You keep coming back to the whole "that's why they exist" idea, when for an actual furry, that's not true.  That's an aspect, to be sure, but anyone who gets into the fandom just to get off is a just pervert with major issues.  For anyone who can actually be called a part of the culture, that sort of thing is off to the side.

We just have this issue of attracting the type of people (if you can call them people <_<) who DO want to screw anything that walks, simply because we're known for having less inhibitions than others.  99.9% of real, honest, into-what-they-do furries are not sex addicts though.

Again, every group has people who "just don't get it" and they're usually the ones going around proudly labelling themselves because they're too insecure to be an individual and have to mimic their limited understanding of other groups to be "accepted".  This is why so many "unpopular" fandoms get a bad rap, because the SMART members stay out of the spotlight while the freaks chase it.  You ever had a group of friends with one pitiful guy who followed you around, trying desperately to fit in and failing because he was just trying way too hard and being an attention hog?

Yeah... those are the people you usually see first when you look into furries...  The rest of us are in the back trying to mind our own business.

8
Spore: Creation Corner / Re: Just wondering...
« on: May 17, 2006, 12:13:30 am »
Yeah, but the part you need to understand is, it's only negative from your point of view.

You say tomayto, I say tomahto.  Whatever.

9
Spore: Creation Corner / Re: Just wondering...
« on: May 16, 2006, 11:50:32 pm »


Anyhow, as for being horny sex maniacs, humans are the only species that will decline an opportunity to mate you know, and the only that have concepts such as "horny" :P  If something is too "horny" for you to handle, that's your problem.

It's called being in character :)

You may not have realized this but uhh, anthros are human created entities and share quite a few human characteristics. They are in fact, also partly human in form. The word works just fine in either context. It's also only called being "in character" if you're character concept is "I wanna be a cyber whore that bangs anything that moves, but I want to have fur!"

I'm pretty sure anthros weren't created as solely sexual beings. Isn't that one of the misconceptions we're trying to break here?

Anthropomorphic literally means something not human with human characteristics, and when talking about "furries" specifically, refers to a humanoid skeletal structure.  Hydromancer's creature hardly has a humanoid skeleton... the only human characteristic I see is the intelligent look in the eyes.

Anyhow, the "solely" was all you.  I never said they are "solely" sexual beings.  In fact I doubt they are any more sexual than any other human.  The only difference is they don't have any inhibitions.  When you would hesitate, they will not.  That's all.

10
Spore: Creation Corner / Re: Just wondering...
« on: May 16, 2006, 11:14:11 pm »


Here is my Anthro from the Native American style Furry/Anthro site called "Tribes"





Gotta comment here 'cause I have issues with semantics. That thing right there, not an anthro or a furry. Slapping fur on something doesn't make it a "furry", it just makes it furry. And for it be an anthro it'd have to somewhat resemble a human. Looks more like a hairy raptor to me.

Moving on. As someone who's spent quite a bit of time within the online free form roleplaying community I have some problems with anthros because of the manner in which the overwhelming majority are played there, as constantly horny sex crazed maniacs who will hump anything regardless of species. But have nothing against the concept or furries in general.

You're right, that's not really "a furry".  Of course, furries also have several forms but they're almost always upright so I'd have to rule that out.

Anyhow, as for being horny sex maniacs, humans are the only species that will decline an opportunity to mate you know, and the only that have concepts such as "horny" :P  If something is too "horny" for you to handle, that's your problem.

It's called being in character :)

11
Spore: Creation Corner / Re: Just wondering...
« on: May 16, 2006, 11:05:10 pm »
Oh great...seems like my thread started something.

And yeah, furries can get a bad rep, but it is (at least in part) justified to some people. Still, there isn't a stereotype in the world that's entirely true.

Quote
It's a subculture, and people hate on subcultures to look cool. The first few did it, then the rest of the numbskulls took their usual "me-too" angle and started hating on it, resulting in the mass furryhate going on
Amen.

You give yourself too much credit.  My Nezumi were around months before you joined the forum :P  As for how this is on topic... well, it relates to peoples' opinions on others' creatures, no?

12
Spore: Creation Corner / Re: Hi, I would like to share a story.
« on: May 15, 2006, 11:22:22 am »
Not really a furry, let's go with "anthropomorph". ;)

Indeed, not a furry at all.  And anthropomorph is almost just another word for furry, just a bit more vague.  She's really just kind of... decorated.  Anyways, coolness.  Loved Blue Sub, would be nice to see some of the races in Spore :)

13
Spore: Creation Corner / Just wondering...
« on: May 15, 2006, 11:19:37 am »
Where does all the furry hate come from?

I know what it's about, why it's popular, etc.  but what convinced you guys to hate so much?

Molested by Chuck E. Cheese when you were a kid, or what?

14
Spore: Creation Corner / Re: The Belottrians
« on: May 15, 2006, 11:17:01 am »
Actually this thing isn't really a furry.
It looks more like a regular weasel that started walking on it's hind legs.
If it were a furry it would be some weasel/human hybrid abomination.

Regular Weasel but walking upright and sentient = awesome.
Furry Human/Weasel hybrid abomination = horrible

...

Upright and sentient is what makes humans humans... How can "upright and sentient" and "human hybrid" be two different things?

Btw, awesome creature.

15
Spore: Creation Corner / Re: Worst Creatures EVER
« on: April 27, 2006, 10:59:42 am »

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12