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 - 0goober0

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Spore: General / Re: Technical questions
« on: July 02, 2008, 08:17:50 pm »
any newer video card than the ones they list will be fine.
I have 2 9600gt's and it runs fine.

2
Spore: General / Re: 500,000 Stars
« on: June 01, 2008, 03:15:02 pm »
From what I remember you have a choice where to start out in from the galaxy view aka the main menu.



I've never seen that video, ever... Weird.. Thx though =)
me neither, where'd you get that picture?

3
Spore: General / Re: 500,000 Stars
« on: June 01, 2008, 02:48:30 pm »
Ugh, it's over don't bring it back up again :P.


Again I say, does anyone think the Spore team will simulate all the main types of stars in the stellar classification graphs? You think they will give you an over view of the main elements consisting with in the star via Sporepedia? )Example methane stars for one)
I think there will probably be different types of stars in the game. What do you mean by an overview? Like tell you when you click on a star what it's made of? I think that it's possible there will be a very simplified version of that with just very very basic characteristics of different interstellar objects.

4
Spore: General / Re: 500,000 Stars
« on: June 01, 2008, 02:38:53 pm »
I think since that there's gonna be more planets than i can possible visit anyway there may as well be enough to fill up the whole galaxy and look good instead of only 3/4 full but still more than is possible to visit

and just because that was one of the dumbest arguments i've ever seen: (small because it's off topic)
To end this discussion here it goes:

Every 4 years you have 366 days instead of 365 (leap year)
70 / 4 = 17.5 leap years
70 - 17.5 = 52.5 common years
17.5 x 366 + 52.5 x 365 = 6405 + 19162,5 = 25567.5 days
2,000,000 / 25567.5 = 78.224308203774322870832111078518 planets each day
78.224308203774322870832111078518 / 24 = 3.2593461751572634529513379616049 planets each hour
3.2593461751572634529513379616049 / 3 = 1.086448725052421150983779320535 planets each 20 minutes
20 / 1.086448725052421150983779320535 = 18.408599999999999999999999999999 minutes for each planet (exactly 1 planet)

That's about as far off of 16.9344 as it is of 20.

20 - 18.408599999999999999999999999999 = 1.59140000000000000000000000001
18.408599999999999999999999999999 - 16.9344 = 1.47419999999999999999999999999

So, yeah... we were both wrong:
Quote from: Malt
DISCUSSION OVER
according to here:
http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast161/Unit4/movearth.html
it takes 365.2422 days for the earth to complete one orbit around the sun.

70 * 365.2422 = 25566.954 days in 70 years
2,000,000 / 25566.954 = 78.225978738022527048001103299204 planets each day
78.225978738022527048001103299204 / 24 = 3.2594157807509386270000459708 planets per hour
60 / 3.2594157807509386270000459708 = 18.408206880000000000000000000001 minutes per planet.

5
You can still play it like if you weren't designing it at all (well, kinda). What I mean is most people already have their creatures planned and are gonna play and modify it to look like they want it to in the end. But you can also play so that for example if fast predators are hunting you, so you get better legs to be faster than them and run away. In evolution terms it would mean that at some point there was a mutation that allowed for stronger legs and over time all of the population now has those legs.
True. That's kind of what I meant by Intelligent Evolution. People are probably going to design their creatures so that they are better equipped for their environment. It would probably happen randomly over time but that wouldn't work for a game.  When people redesign their creatures to be better adapted to the environment they are doing it intelligently. If the player wanted to better simulate evolution the would just randomly change things on their creature and then see what happens. If the game designers wanted to make spore more realistic evolutionary all they'd have to do would be to take out the stat bars in the creature editor and limit how much the player could change his/her creature each time they were in the editor.  Tons of small changes without knowing the result would be very close to evolution. 

6
Its only based on intelligent design or evolution if thats how you view it.

Let me give you an example. You are viewing it as intelligent design because you are viewing yourself as the god the creator. Rather then just a creature thats evolving. You control the microbe you control the creature.

In tribe you control the tribe so you are basically the tribal leader.

In civ you are the president/king/dictator whatever.

In space you are flying the space ship and controlling the creature again.

Its all perspective.
I think of it as Intelligent Evolution.  It's really a cross between both. Your creature evolves but only because your designing it. If the game were really evolution based there would be no creature editor. If Spore were truly evolution then every time a new creature of your species was born in any way different than the one you were controlling you would have a choice whether to stay controlling the same one or to switch to a slightly different one in hopes of being able to survive longer. The game would be about reproducing with the smartest/strongest of your species to get more advanced children. 

I agree with you that in cell/creature you are the creature and in that way your are not an all powerful god, but when it comes to editing you creature, that's not something a creature can do to itself.  If a zebra finds a dead elephant that doesn't mean it can suddenly grow a trunk. If an all powerful being sees a dead elephant and gets the idea for a trunk there's no reason that being can't put it on the zebra.

I'm not trying to be all religious and stuff here but the game (especially the creature editor) really is based on intelligent design.

7
Spore: General / Re: Official System Requirements!
« on: June 01, 2008, 10:36:46 am »
i fail miserably....

what really sucks is that i'm not going to have time to build my new computer before the CC comes out....

8
Spore: General / Re: New Spore video index.
« on: May 31, 2008, 02:24:08 pm »
we really don't need the The Spore Omnibus and New FAQ Project (Under Construction) sticky or the Spore Forum Index sticky. Neither one has been updated recently and they both link to threads that are dead. They also don't have much up to date and still accurate information.

9
Spore: General / Re: Official System Requirements!
« on: May 31, 2008, 09:19:14 am »
i failed miserably....

10
Spore: General / Re: Official System Requirements!
« on: May 31, 2008, 08:20:45 am »
They don't sell my type of Ram anymore and when installing something that is very similar to it, it crashes my comp.. :(
I think I may have this problem also.  Haven't really checked into it.  But the Gateway site has an app that checks your computer for memory upgrades, and it told me there are no memory upgrades for mine.  I assume that means the type of memory is obsolete. 

How much trouble is it to switch out a mother board, but keep everything else the same?   There's basically no chance I'm getting a whole new comp, so I need another option.

I'm gonna join the chorus on this one; I wouldn't change the mobo if you haven't tried it before as it is THE most difficult thing to change in a PC. Everything connects to the mobo, so if you change it you have to take it completely apart. And if your PC is as old as you say so your RAM is obsolete, then it's likely that you will have to change just about everything else as well because the new mobo wont be compatible with the other old parts. From GFX, over RAM to CPU, cooler and PSU. In extremes possibly even HDD/CD as well depending on the motherboard (some of the newer don't support IDE). On an old PC a new mobo usually = completely new PC with very few exceptions. You might be able to keep your case :P

...oh and $200 is NOT gonna do it for you I'm afraid, if you want a machine that can run spore decently. I would say at least double that and upwards. Your best bet might be to buy a used PC if you're tight for cash :) If you can find someone who's selling an old gaming rig for a few quick bucks while they're building a new. I know I ususally sell my old parts I don't need dead cheap when I build a new system.

EDIT:
Here's a quick sample gathered in 5 mins. You might find something cheaper but my guess is if you want to RUN spore this is roughly the amount you'll want to spend on upgrades as a minimum (new parts):
$50 GFX ATI HD2400
$60 RAM 2GB (because it's not worth it to go less when you look at cost differences)
$70 MOBO
$80 CPU Dual Core 2.4GHz (with stock fan)
$60 PSU
So $320 could probably get you what you need to run it... just. I would personally buy a somewhat more powerful gfx card, the HD2400 is not a gaming card... it's just cheap and likely to work. Personally I wouldn't spend less than $150 on the gfx on a rig that needs to run 3D games at all, that's usually the area around which you find the cost-effective cards that can still run games decently.
I build gaming rigs for myself with $600-$800 GFX cards, but I also build for friends who have lower requirements and more tight funds so I'm used to looking at it from a cost-effective point of vew. Not just the "leet gamez0r" POV.
Also keep in mind that all these are low spec, low quality parts. You want decent brands and spec; that adds to the price.
I'd say if you were going to upgrade the gfx card from that original list you probably want to get a better psu also.

11
Spore: General / Re: Slavery
« on: May 31, 2008, 08:13:27 am »
I've been thinking (yea I know, me thinking?!?!) and realized: is there really a difference between slavery and domestication? If we trained animals to work like slaves isn't that basically the same thing as having sentient things doing the work, isn't it?

No. It's not the same because Sentient beings are Sentient. That's a type of argument PETA would use (and everyone knows PETA are nothing more than a bunch of fear mongering Eco-Terrorists) for "Animal Rights". I love animals. I could never be one of those who abuses animals. That, however, does not mean I'd not make them work for me. It's not like they don't get anything out of it. They get cared for, feed, and loved. Sentient life is unique, and slavery of a sentient species is amoral because sentience and (human) "intelligence" is considered special.
right, but for us slavery is only our race. In spore we would be enslaving other races which is a big difference. I'm not saying that it would be right to enslave other races, just that whenplaying the game people wouldn't think of it as wrong because it doesn't hit as close to home.

12
Spore: General / Re: Slavery
« on: May 31, 2008, 07:53:17 am »
I've been thinking (yea I know, me thinking?!?!) and realized: is there really a difference between slavery and domestication? If we trained animals to work like slaves isn't that basically the same thing as having sentient things doing the work, isn't it?

13
Spore: General / Re: 500,000 Stars
« on: May 31, 2008, 07:40:56 am »
Wow... So many letters...

About finding our solar system maybe the position of that easter egg in the galaxy is procedurally generated so that eventually you find it based on playing time or something, you know, like some events occur in a RPG based on time of day or play time.


More likely, it could be a wormhole that can take you there. Wormholes may as well be randomly created so discovering the right wormhole would just be a matter of playing the campaign.
I think she actually said that our solar system would be where it actually is. So if you know where our solar system is located in the galaxy you'll have a much better chance of finding it.

14
Spore: General / Re: New Spore video index.
« on: May 31, 2008, 07:36:45 am »
Lurker28 found a new video

This spore video index should be stickied.

I agree. The picture one is so the video and maybe events should be also.

15
Spore: General / Re: 500,000 Stars
« on: May 30, 2008, 06:46:57 pm »
They said each star would have about 4 planets on average which means some could have 0 others could have 8.

Unfortunately in the same quote where Lucy said there were a couple million stars, she also said that they would have up to 5 planets. 

Now the problem is the Solar system shown in the NASA video.  That clearly had all 8 planets.  Now it would work if they're only talking about having up to 5 "habitable" planets, which don't include the gas giants.  Mercury, Venus, Mars, Earth, and the Moon would make the 5 planets you can terraform in the Solar System. 
I think she was talking in general. Our solar system is apparently very rare in that it has 8 planets. Most stars don't have that many and they're trying to make the galaxy in spore realistic. She also said in that video that you would be able to find our solar system as an easter egg so I think it's possible for stars to have more than 5 planets but I might have heard wrong/interpreted wrong.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10