Author Topic: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??  (Read 18403 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline strghtupG

  • Fire Truck Driver
  • *
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« on: September 17, 2009, 10:01:50 pm »
So do you guys think the "old" spore which was 100% hardcore gamer, had extreme micromanagement, etc have sold more than the current game out now?

Me I think it would have since nearly every game that has good ratings sells like crazy!

I mean halo, gta, mgs4, madden. If it lived up to the hype and became one of the best games of all time than EVERY hardcore pc gamer would have bought it PLUS im sure they wouldnt have made it hard for non hardcore to play



gec05

  • Guest
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2009, 10:13:43 pm »
I really don't think it would make a difference.

Maxis isn't the big name titan like it used to be when people were into sim games. The things you've listed such as Halo, GTA, MGS4, Madden. What demographic generally has interest in such cinematic and high-action gameplay like that? Spore would be too much of a game for their brain to handle. So I don't think it would satisfy them, either if the game was uber technical or super cute.

Now if you were to instead mention the target audience of games like Civilization, Starcraft, WoW and such. Maybe things would be different.

Offline Spore-addict

  • Kaboom Boomer!
  • ****
  • Posts: 717
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2009, 01:19:45 am »
I just wished we had a real life simulator....

The hitting area is also totally weak. it is silly that a 10 pound creature does 5 in damage to a 200 pound creature...

Where you could put a three legged creature into a living world and see how it would survive behave...like a movie.

Of course you could take control of it. perhaps you could earn some time slots where you can control it in a critical moment of your choosing.

More real life calculations...what is there to worry...we have the computer power or we will get it. Look at crysis it is ahead of its time graphic wise so it sells even this day nearly 2 years after release because it is THE game to test your new rig on.

I am not sure that it would have sold much more but I could personally not care ...I just wanted a graphic real life simulator where you could test an infinity of things out. Like moving the sun closer what would the result be? Change their eating habits etc.


Master Raytracer Spore-addict = KarmaCowboy

See you out there, feel free to comment my creatures.

Offline Snork

  • Ensign Seventh Class
  • *****
  • Posts: 2934
  • Do I care?
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2009, 03:05:46 pm »
I agree with you, Spore-buck.
Spore was a massive Disappointment. I didn't care about how much it would have sold. I only cared about playing a game where I could create an Alien and watch it evolve and Live in a realistic and alien environment. Where I could create a true intergalactic empire of the stars.

I found none of this in the original Spore.
Quote from: Orc Creation Story.
Stop rolling like pigs amongst the faeces and get out of the way of my sunlight, you stupid f***ers.
Jawless women and their fine, fine feet

Offline Skyward

  • Ballblazer Plasmorb
  • *****
  • Posts: 3481
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2009, 03:43:56 pm »
The things you've listed such as Halo, GTA, MGS4, Madden. What demographic generally has interest in such cinematic and high-action gameplay like that? Spore would be too much of a game for their brain to handle.

I find that offensive!  :'(
Hell, Skyward Descent is pure win!
Quote from: Captain
I kill you in the name of DELICIOUS!

Offline Raz

  • Questron Serf
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2009, 03:53:49 pm »
I just wished we had a real life simulator....

The hitting area is also totally weak. it is silly that a 10 pound creature does 5 in damage to a 200 pound creature...

Where you could put a three legged creature into a living world and see how it would survive behave...like a movie.

Of course you could take control of it. perhaps you could earn some time slots where you can control it in a critical moment of your choosing.

More real life calculations...what is there to worry...we have the computer power or we will get it. Look at crysis it is ahead of its time graphic wise so it sells even this day nearly 2 years after release because it is THE game to test your new rig on.

I am not sure that it would have sold much more but I could personally not care ... I just wanted a graphic real life simulator where you could test an infinity of things out. Like moving the sun closer what would the result be? Change their eating habits etc.

Even the 'old' spore would not have been as good as you the thing you want.

Offline Yannick

  • Tetris Tumbler
  • *****
  • Posts: 5508
  • The end is nigh
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2009, 04:21:04 pm »
But it would've been a lot closer than what we have now.

"It's only your virginity, loosen up!"

Offline Rysworld

  • Autoduel Mechanic
  • *****
  • Posts: 4221
  • hhhhhhhh
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2009, 04:27:16 pm »
I agree, even if old Spore did have bugs, they would've taken them out by the final release.

Offline Lippy

  • Galaga General
  • ****
  • Posts: 982
  • Deal with it.
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2009, 05:12:19 pm »
I agree, even if old Spore did have bugs, they would've taken them out by the final release.

Like they did with the Spore they released?  They cut a ton out of it, released 2 years after their first projected release date, and it still had a ton of bugs. 

So do you guys think the "old" spore which was 100% hardcore gamer, had extreme micromanagement, etc have sold more than the current game out now?

In the first demo in '05, Will said it was being made for the casual gamer.  I didn't see extreme micromanagement in the demo, nor did I hear him talk about micromanagement.  I did hear him say how he thought Spore '08 had more gameplay than Spore '05

Offline Ghidoran

  • Lunar Lander Leader
  • *
  • Posts: 91
    • View Profile
    • Ghidoran's Diablo 3 Fansite
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2009, 05:18:52 pm »
People seem to think the old spore was the game they imagined, a "100% hardcore" game as you said.....Not so. Will Wright has said MANY MANY times that Spore was never going to be complex or hardcore. It would always have been relatively shallow, but great in scope. True, some of the stuff was cut, but Spore never would have been as mindblowing as some people seem to think. Just get over it and enjoy Spore for what it is.
That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons even death may die

best spore game http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/genmessage.php?board=926714&topic=43989778

Offline Flisch

  • H.E.R.O. Rescue Worker
  • *****
  • Posts: 3546
  • Banned - 17/07/15
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #10 on: September 20, 2009, 05:31:02 am »
People seem to think the old spore was the game they imagined, a "100% hardcore" game as you said.....Not so. Will Wright has said MANY MANY times that Spore was never going to be complex or hardcore. It would always have been relatively shallow, but great in scope. True, some of the stuff was cut, but Spore never would have been as mindblowing as some people seem to think. Just get over it and enjoy Spore for what it is.

No.

We are the customer. We decide what's getting bought and what's not. We are responsible for telling the gaming industry our opinions. In the end it should be in the company's interest to listen to their customers, to maximize their profit.

Also, many of the things that would have made Spore alot more fun does not even need to be too complicated for the casual gamer. Though I find the word casual gamer quite offensive, a game that is totally new in its gameplay is new to hardcore gamers as well and both player types start on the same level. Furthermore, casual gamers does not equal people that are too stupid to play games, they just don't play that often. So a game for casual players should "merely" have a very balanced learning curve, it doesn't need to be too simple to be fun.

Back to the things that could have been changed easily without making the game much more complicated: For instance, why is every single planet(ary system even...) the same? Why is the landscape roughly the same on your homeplanet all the time? Why is not every planet you play on totally different? Why are the events absolutely the same? (Asteroid shower and UFO) And why the hell are the enemy cells in the cell stage always exactly the same? I mean, Spore is a game that features a new technology: Sharing content with other players. Why do I have to wait roughly 10 minutes until I can actually enjoy that feature? Why are the buildings always the same, why don't the parts on buildings (and spaceships as well) have any functions like in creature stage? Why do I have to pay for every single copy of a part though it doesn't even add anything to the stats? Why am I getting punished for trying to create "realistic" creatures?

I could go on and on and on and on... I think you get the idea.
There is, of course, a difference between having a laugh with someone, and having a laugh at their expense

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8080
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #11 on: September 20, 2009, 12:34:58 pm »
I feel like we've had this conversation before, so I'll say what I've probably said before and what has kind of been said already in this thread.

There is no such thing as 'old' spore.  There was the hypothetical game made of a few demo videos and 24.3 metric tons of hype.  I'm not saying that the game we got is perfect, it does have plenty of flaws.  It's constructive to point out things we wish were better, it's not constructive to compare it to an unrealistic ideal we dreamed up.
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline Gorman Conall

  • Space Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 2983
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #12 on: September 20, 2009, 01:32:52 pm »
I like Spore, I like Spore a lot and i still play it to this day.

I just don't see how things..the ideas for it got changed so radically.

How did the creature stage go from actual combat with physics to stand and exchange blows MMORPG style.

Spore is fantastic as their is nothing else like it, But from the ideas shown in 05 the game went backwards and kept going backwards. What happened to being a baby? What happened to picking a nest site and guarding it?.

Even in those videos the combat was not what it was now.

Screeble went in and picked off a pink pig, They surrounded him roaring would run in peck at him and back off.

When the scavengers attacked the nest  there was actual movement, It was not what 05 had shown but it looked much like animals fighting then it does now.

Animals actually roamed around, In the space stage the creatures weren't just decorations on a planet, But they actually did things to,

From 05 onward the game went in reverse, it didn't stop with the things we were shown in any of the following years, Nearly everything shown each tome at E3 was not in the final product.

Someday we may yet get a spore closer to the one shown, Ether through expansions or Spore 2.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2009, 01:34:33 pm by Gorman Conall »

Offline Huckbuck

  • Balloon Fight Aerialist
  • *****
  • Posts: 4498
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #13 on: September 20, 2009, 01:42:28 pm »
If Spore 2 will come out and it will be good I will probably download it. I think I deserve that after paying for the Spore we have now.

@davidramnero

Offline Flisch

  • H.E.R.O. Rescue Worker
  • *****
  • Posts: 3546
  • Banned - 17/07/15
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #14 on: September 20, 2009, 01:53:06 pm »
There is no such thing as 'old' spore.  There was the hypothetical game made of a few demo videos and 24.3 metric tons of hype.  I'm not saying that the game we got is perfect, it does have plenty of flaws.  It's constructive to point out things we wish were better, it's not constructive to compare it to an unrealistic ideal we dreamed up.
Yes there is. Just because it was not scripted is no excuse not to put it into the game. I can't think of one thing that was impossible to realize. Aquatic species? I actually doubt that navigating underwater wouldn't be too hard, sure you have to get used to it first, but if executed right it could turn into a lot of fun. Also, why is there no planet editor? (OK, now there kinda is, but there wasn't in the original game)

Spore is fantastic as their is nothing else like it, But from the ideas shown in 05 the game went backwards and kept going backwards. What happened to being a baby? What happened to picking a nest site and guarding it?.

Even in those videos the combat was not what it was now.

Screeble went in and picked off a pink pig, They surrounded him roaring would run in peck at him and back off.

When the scavengers attacked the nest  there was actual movement, It was not what 05 had shown but it looked much like animals fighting then it does now.

Animals actually roamed around, In the space stage the creatures weren't just decorations on a planet, But they actually did things to,

From 05 onward the game went in reverse, it didn't stop with the things we were shown in any of the following years, Nearly everything shown each tome at E3 was not in the final product.

Someday we may yet get a spore closer to the one shown, Ether through expansions or Spore 2.
That's exactly what I mean. They promised us a cruise ship and we got a raft.

If Spore 2 will come out and it will be good I will probably download it. I think I deserve that after paying for the Spore we have now.
Seriously, 50 (Plus Cute and Creepy), my a**.
There is, of course, a difference between having a laugh with someone, and having a laugh at their expense

gec05

  • Guest
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #15 on: September 20, 2009, 02:00:50 pm »
Why do I have to pay for every single copy of a part though it doesn't even add anything to the stats? Why am I getting punished for trying to create "realistic" creatures?

Though I can agree with what you said Flisch. These limitations are mostly due to space concerns. Maxis was of course concerned about balancing issues. With the stat system that they created, they had to limit what was allowed for creatures. And for performance issues, you're only allowed so much resources for a single building or vehicle. So that the game could run on low end configurations as well as conserving space required to download content and storing it. Can you imagine how the game might run if multiple creations that break the complexity meter were all in the same place at the same time? Not to mention how much more hard drive space you'll need to store all those subscribed downloads.

Offline Gorman Conall

  • Space Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 2983
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2009, 03:06:40 pm »
If Spore 2 will come out and it will be good I will probably download it. I think I deserve that after paying for the Spore we have now.

Just because you don't enjoy Spore does not mean you deserve anything.

Offline DaMuncha

  • Lode Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • GREAT SCOTTS!
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #17 on: September 22, 2009, 10:50:06 pm »
I expected a living ecology in the creatue phase, I expected to see herds of wild creatures migrating accross the plains, I expected to see creatures going out and hunting for prey, I expected to see creatures gathering food and making little homes.

What I got was a bunch of dumb animals standing around thier nest not doing anything. It was nothing like what saw in any of the vids.

Offline Detoxicated

  • Pack M.U.L.E.
  • *****
  • Posts: 2296
  • Spirit of Monkey
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #18 on: September 22, 2009, 11:06:36 pm »
I expected a living ecology in the creatue phase, I expected to see herds of wild creatures migrating accross the plains, I expected to see creatures going out and hunting for prey, I expected to see creatures gathering food and making little homes.

What I got was a bunch of dumb animals standing around thier nest not doing anything. It was nothing like what saw in any of the vids.
hes right you know, this cant be will wrights work, hes more of a simulator, it was probably ea who forced him to make this stupid little thing with even smaller phases
OK, both of you die and let us know what happens.

Offline Notorious B.O.B

  • Venture Conqueror
  • ****
  • Posts: 798
  • I still live!
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #19 on: September 23, 2009, 08:48:24 pm »
I expected a living ecology in the creatue phase, I expected to see herds of wild creatures migrating accross the plains, I expected to see creatures going out and hunting for prey, I expected to see creatures gathering food and making little homes.

What I got was a bunch of dumb animals standing around thier nest not doing anything. It was nothing like what saw in any of the vids.
hes right you know, this cant be will wrights work, hes more of a simulator, it was probably ea who forced him to make this stupid little thing with even smaller phases

Actually, I think it was the guy who came around about halfway through the project (what was his name?  I don't remember)  who tried to add gameplay, because it "wasn't there".
I know this has been mentioned before, but I can't remember the exact details...was it Ocean Quigley?

That really did bug me, though.  I love zoology and nature shows and all that jazz, so I was excitedly anticipating a natural dynamic to the creatures, cause I knew I would spend hours just watching them, but then we got what we got in the creature phase.
Leave to a Thark his head and one hand and he may yet conquer.

The glass is alway in balance and full: half liquid, half gas.

Visit my Sporepedia page! http://www.spore.com/view/profile/Bob_Of_Mars

Offline RR_Raptor65

  • Boot Hill Bandit
  • *
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #20 on: September 24, 2009, 01:43:23 am »
I've said it before, the problem with Spore is nothing you make matters.  You can make a T-Rex and it'll be defeated by a Chicken, you can make an M1A1 Abrams and it'll be defeated by a Panzer I.  For a game using the word "evolve" to describe creature creation there's no natural selection to be seen at all.  I would have loved a game where my creatures physiology and biology competed with other people's creatures.  Striving to create the perfect survivor rather than collecting bones and working the stats up with the parts.

I was one of those who was hoping for a game that looked and played like a TV special like Planet Earth or Walking with Dinosaurs in the Cell/Creature Stage, then like the movie "Quest for Fire" in the Tribal Stage, Band of Brothers in the Civ stage and a mixture of Star Wars and Star Trek in the Space Stage.

Course the closer and closer Spore got to release the more obvious it was that Spore was never going to be like this at all, but I bought it anyway hoping it'd still be fun, played it for about a week and got frustrated at all it's glaring gameplay flaws that would have been so easy to fix with a little imagination on the part of the developers.  Spore really could have been something great, but it wasn't designed that way for whatever reason.

Offline Hydromancerx

  • Master of Orion
  • *****
  • Posts: 12388
  • Klaatu Barada Nikto!
    • View Profile
    • Sagan 4
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #21 on: September 24, 2009, 04:37:40 pm »
I expected a living ecology in the creatue phase, I expected to see herds of wild creatures migrating accross the plains, I expected to see creatures going out and hunting for prey, I expected to see creatures gathering food and making little homes.

What I got was a bunch of dumb animals standing around thier nest not doing anything. It was nothing like what saw in any of the vids.
hes right you know, this cant be will wrights work, hes more of a simulator, it was probably ea who forced him to make this stupid little thing with even smaller phases

Actually, I think it was the guy who came around about halfway through the project (what was his name?  I don't remember)  who tried to add gameplay, because it "wasn't there".
I know this has been mentioned before, but I can't remember the exact details...was it Ocean Quigley?

That really did bug me, though.  I love zoology and nature shows and all that jazz, so I was excitedly anticipating a natural dynamic to the creatures, cause I knew I would spend hours just watching them, but then we got what we got in the creature phase.

I think it was a guy from the "Civilization" games, but not Sid Meir, some other person.

EDIT: It was Soren Johnson who left 2K games to join the Spore team.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2009, 04:40:06 pm by Hydromancerx »

Offline Raz

  • Questron Serf
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #22 on: September 25, 2009, 04:47:22 pm »
Meh, Spore has already lost a number of people based on much it sucks now anyway, in terms of later expansions. They might get the first wave, but the resulting waves, not so much.

Offline Ichthyostega

  • Rally-X Roadster
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
  • Behold! The fanhorn from the planet Snaiad.
    • View Profile
    • Ichthyostegland
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #23 on: September 25, 2009, 08:00:47 pm »
Now that I think about it, I think the real problem with Spore is that it tries to be too many things and ultimately fails at being any of them, except for a great editor. Another main problem is that it isn't that fun and is repetitive. Of course, then there is the lack of science...

I would have gotten at least a quasi-scientific game who focuses on good gameplay yet not completely disregard science. But if I had that and a real scientific simulator, I would get the latter.
Ichthyostega

Offline Spore-addict

  • Kaboom Boomer!
  • ****
  • Posts: 717
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #24 on: September 28, 2009, 04:42:38 am »
I wanted a fun playing experience combined with a science game.

The video where they drop a monolith and all the creatures run into the water is fun.

What happends when there is 60% carnivores and 40% herbivores on a planet?

Will the eco system balance out or will they eat all the herbivores and die. a barren planet in time.

It is a ton of these socalled experiments.

Another, moving the sun closer to the planet so it gets warmer...what happends?

It is so simple in spore that even a 3 year old kid would get bored after 2 min.

a low, mid and warm climate...please what about using celcius instead and numbers.

There was so much potential in spore but most of it has been lost. No offense to will wright but when
thinking on what spore could have been after some stupid long development time like 7-8 years time and what it has become...
epic fail sadly.

Any game that has been in development that long should be a masterpiece nothing less.

Yes there are some that like spore, but I think we can say without lieling that 99.9999% of all people has been disappointed.
Limitless adventures, limitless creatures....

Well the limitless creatures is not true at all, and what does shape and size matter at all if there is no impact on gameplay`?

This is spores main problem today.

If shape, size, legs, arms..you name it does not influence the stats more than a pointless numbersystem that is flawed completely then what is the point of actually designing your creature, vehicle etc at all?

The game should take into consideration stats like weight, size etc etc. and calculate a number for hits etc. I am sure that would be much MUCH better than the current flawed child system.

Another area:

The 5 stages is silly. We have 4 stages that is more or less irrelevant. That is the problem with any of these development games.
The glue that needs to stick the stages together is simply not there. We get a simple ability transfered to next round but besides that it does not matter at all the previous stage. This continues until space stage. Why not combine something like creature-city-space and make one good stage that has tons of dept instead of four stages until the last one that has not.

There are many areas where you think this game was just a marketing hype and nothing at all. Let us take a look at tribal...15 minuttes then it is over , maximum time. How much did they advertise that stage...it is BS simply.





Master Raytracer Spore-addict = KarmaCowboy

See you out there, feel free to comment my creatures.

Offline DaMuncha

  • Lode Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • GREAT SCOTTS!
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #25 on: September 29, 2009, 06:29:56 am »
There is no trading between villages, no social gatherings, no learning each others languages, no comunication, no getting to know each other. You just play a song for them and thier your best freinds for life. Boring.

Offline Ichthyostega

  • Rally-X Roadster
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
  • Behold! The fanhorn from the planet Snaiad.
    • View Profile
    • Ichthyostegland
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #26 on: October 01, 2009, 02:11:14 pm »
Well, what I think a good development plan Spore could've followed would be developing one stage at a time, and releasing them as they're completed. Like for instance, you could spend a few years on the Creature Stage and then release it and have all of your fun experimenting with different bodyplans and see which one is better, as well as eating up everything you see. Then after that is released, you work on the Tribal Stage, where you are intelligent, nomadic species that builds temporary structures and move to new places when resources run out, but when you find a comfortable spot like a river to settle along, where food is plentiful enough to feed a certain number of individuals, and when the population booms, half are willing to farm the food, while the other half is free to do whatever they want, thus effectively starting civilization. But for the sake of the development plan, you will just be a very advanced tribe. I'll need more time to think about what would be in the Civilization and Space Stage.

But even if "stages" are developed separately, I say screw stages, because then that'll tempt you to simply glue together separate games, and give them very rudimentary transitions (I mean, there is barely any transition between the Tribal and Civilization Stages, it's like they learn how to use electricity overnight).
Ichthyostega

Offline Flisch

  • H.E.R.O. Rescue Worker
  • *****
  • Posts: 3546
  • Banned - 17/07/15
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #27 on: October 01, 2009, 03:29:26 pm »
Well, what I think a good development plan Spore could've followed would be developing one stage at a time, and releasing them as they're completed. Like for instance, you could spend a few years on the Creature Stage and then release it and have all of your fun experimenting with different bodyplans and see which one is better, as well as eating up everything you see. Then after that is released, you work on the Tribal Stage, where you are intelligent, nomadic species that builds temporary structures and move to new places when resources run out, but when you find a comfortable spot like a river to settle along, where food is plentiful enough to feed a certain number of individuals, and when the population booms, half are willing to farm the food, while the other half is free to do whatever they want, thus effectively starting civilization. But for the sake of the development plan, you will just be a very advanced tribe. I'll need more time to think about what would be in the Civilization and Space Stage.

But even if "stages" are developed separately, I say screw stages, because then that'll tempt you to simply glue together separate games, and give them very rudimentary transitions (I mean, there is barely any transition between the Tribal and Civilization Stages, it's like they learn how to use electricity overnight).
I totally agree with the first part. That's actually what I am saying. Most people think that releasing 5 games rather than Spore would be even more money-making, but if every stage was developed as well as any other "real" game is it roughly based on (MMOs, RTSs, Civilisation and uhh... sandbox games?) then you would pay a fair price. After all the whole content is stored on an external database, in the Sporepedia. All these four games could use the same database. So that, even if you don't get to create animals in the tribal game, it will still download creatures made by players owning the creature stage game. The cell stage could be released as some sort of demo, as it does not really affect the other games in any way content-wise and it's too short to be a stand-alone game. Or it simply could be included in the creature stage, or in any game, really, maybe even with different content (bodyparts) in all four games to encourage the players to buy all four. >_>

However, I don't think the idea proposed in the second part would be a good one, except it just affects the looks of the stage and not the actual gameplay. What would a gameplay transition between creature and tribal look like? And what would the players do who prefer the tribal stage over the creature stage and skip it altogether? I admit that the civilisation stage should feature some kind of evolution, that means improving your technology level from wheels over electricity to high-technological stuff like... holograms. I also wished the different stages would affect each other more than just those simple cards. The closest thing we have right now is the available of mouthes based on the behaviour of the cell (which I don't like... a creature should be able to evolve from herbivore to carnivore) and the available type of food in tribal stage, which I find very interesting, but its execution is very dull and silly. I would have prefered lots of different types of food. Nuts, fish, filterfood, leaves, grass, roots, etc. That would not only have made creature stage much more interesting, but also it would have given the tribal stage a different twist each time you play it.
There is, of course, a difference between having a laugh with someone, and having a laugh at their expense

Offline Grangan

  • Q*Bert Qrazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 1294
  • We're all mad here.
    • View Profile
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #28 on: October 02, 2009, 09:20:26 pm »
Despite initial excitement and defense, I gave up "new" spore after about a week.   I say we need a new revolutionary world-improving game design, to avoid the bad taste in our mouth left by Spore.  I have an idea...
Twas Brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe, all mimsy were the borogoves and the mome raths outgrabe.

Offline Ichthyostega

  • Rally-X Roadster
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
  • Behold! The fanhorn from the planet Snaiad.
    • View Profile
    • Ichthyostegland
Re: Would "Old" spore have sold more than "New" spore??
« Reply #29 on: October 02, 2009, 09:39:32 pm »
Quote from: Flisch
However, I don't think the idea proposed in the second part would be a good one, except it just affects the looks of the stage and not the actual gameplay. What would a gameplay transition between creature and tribal look like? And what would the players do who prefer the tribal stage over the creature stage and skip it altogether? I admit that the civilisation stage should feature some kind of evolution, that means improving your technology level from wheels over electricity to high-technological stuff like... holograms. I also wished the different stages would affect each other more than just those simple cards. The closest thing we have right now is the available of mouthes based on the behaviour of the cell (which I don't like... a creature should be able to evolve from herbivore to carnivore) and the available type of food in tribal stage, which I find very interesting, but its execution is very dull and silly. I would have prefered lots of different types of food. Nuts, fish, filterfood, leaves, grass, roots, etc. That would not only have made creature stage much more interesting, but also it would have given the tribal stage a different twist each time you play it.

Well, what I meant is that the stages shouldn't be like separate games glued together, more like subgames that effectively flow into each other.

But yeah, it would be nice to have some progress in the Civilization Stage, even if it may be simpler than the tech tree of the Civilization games. You first settle your nomadic people and have them build edifices, thus building your first city. You train warriors to defend your rising population center against predators and barbarians. Then the computer will have other nomadic populations of species become civilizations once they find a comfortable spot. You can interact with these other civilizations by trading with them or waging war on them. It will basically be a real-time strategy version of Civilization. When researching new technologies or building new units or buildings, your game will pause in order to allow you some time to decide. Although this may be a little too complicated, you could be given the option to allow the game to build your creature's buildings or vehicles for you if you are the kind who are too lazy to design buildings, like me.
Ichthyostega