SPORE! What can't we do..

posted on September 24th, 2008, 7:55 pm

Well... I have prelims so,....

...but I will say that the space stage needs more development . After journeying to the center... conquering 500,000 diff worlds is kinda scary. I have 27 fully upgraded colonies... and it just takes far too long. I don't wanna befriend the grox... so my plan is to conquer one full arm of the galaxy (only allowing me and a few of my allies the chance to colonize it.)

posted on September 24th, 2008, 9:28 pm

The space phase Could be so good if they only try to be more enthusiastic (or passionate, strong word but you know what i mean) to make it so.Having only one ship is fun in the begining, and maybe even for awhile the first time through but its not. All faults and bugs people report aside, the thing thats making me most irritated is how they market the game to be based on sience. Its Wrong in almost all means. Most of it makes no sense or is twisted. Gameplay > realism buti n this case thats irrelevant. Turrets make no damage when defending your colonies even if your on it for example, they responded and said thats how it should be. Bullshit
Getting DNA from a dead corpse is how the believe evolution works too. But thats offtopic. I cant believe they ship all kinds of sience videos and papers with this game..

posted on September 25th, 2008, 1:00 am

Well... I haven't heard any claims about how it is supposed to be based on scientific knowledge... but then again, I have no TV and I haven't see any advertisements about it 

True, it is not based on the science of our universe for the most part (the evolutionary scheme here is lamarckiasm)... but that's what you get for a videogame (afterall we don't compare startrek to real world science either) . What are these science videos and papers that you speak of? I haven't seen any in the packaging etc...? Turrets do spit out damage and take damage though, so I am not sure what you are talking about there... The uber turret for example is terrific.

Getting DNA from a dead corpse does have a bit of background to it though: it is called transformation (i.e. bacteria pick up naked DNA from the environment and splice it in). But yeah, the methods of "evolution" in this game are not realistic, and Will Wright himself said they weren't supposed to be. It is his version of a metagame, and it works relatively fine for its purposes (what would you suggest the developers do anyway?). I would never expect this type of game to teach... and yet there will always be some people trying to learn about "real life" from a video game (as in people who play CS talking about the various advantages of a handgun, even though they've never held a real one).

posted on September 25th, 2008, 10:24 am

Its not the game WillWright designed OR his idea of "the" metagame spore was supposed to be, EA changed the game while taking out alot of features making the game worse than it should have been.

The uber turret works but the one s on your homeworld for example does no damage at all in either mode, and the rest of your planet defenses does nothing for you but it works for the computer controlled empires.
Will wright and EA has said all along that Spore is based on sience, and the papers and video i meant is in the special edition, check them out Its fine that the game arent realistic, but that they are trying to tell people that it is based on sience is wrong, and EA are still defending that. You shouldnt protect them.

posted on September 25th, 2008, 9:47 pm

Spore Game DVD (PC/Mac compatible)
“The Making of Spore” DVD. A behind the scenes documentary on the making of Spore.
“How to Build a Better Being” DVD. A 50-minute evolution documentary by the National Geographic Channel featuring Will Wright and Spore.
“The Art of Spore.” A 128 page hardback book featuring Spore artwork and stories from Maxis’ artists.
Exclusive 100-page Galactic Handbook
Exclusive Spore poster
All in a collectible ‘Spore Glyphics’ hard plastic box

I stand corrected. I wasn't trying to defend them, more I just wanted to clarify that such an argument is not completely black and white. I do not own the galactic edition version, so I do not have first hand knowledge of it's experiences. If it really does state that Spore is "based on science", yes indeed, that is false (although there are a lot of cool features that are possibilities: antimatter, globular clusters.. that sort of stuff)... I am indeed very disappointed that soooo many features were removed however  >:(

Still, I have never had a problem with the turrets... as they all seem to target enemy/pirate ships just fine... but perhaps I haven't looked closely enough.

posted on September 26th, 2008, 2:02 am

What do you mean basted on science?

Every things baste on some scientific they, theory of idea gravity, color theory, theory of relativity, and so on.

If the game has even some hint of what we see in a day of our lives its basted on science.

all science is a butch of agreement on things that have not bean disprove. Please elaborate.

[FireHam]

posted on September 26th, 2008, 9:40 am

Last edited by FireHam on September 26th, 2008, 9:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Based on science as in based on science.. For example they say or did say before the game came out however, that since you can be omnivore, carnivore or herbivore, cellstage is based on sience for onecellular micronisms. In the game everything you see is multicellular for example. They are lying about much of it, is that elaborated enough?

If someone sais that "this book" is based on science, people will learn from that book. Its the same with this game, only that they arent telling the truth. Saying the game is based on science is fine by me since it dosent mean everything, but saying like the above example is wrong. And they defend it too. People have talked alot about it in the official forum awhile back.

posted on September 27th, 2008, 8:48 am

Well, actually it is based on science. For all its flaws, it does (simplsticly) show people some basic steps of the evolution and the basic principles of the survival of the fittest and other stuff as well.
How much do u think people really want to play it as realistically as you want it. I don't think people would enyoy playing for days only to evolve 2 more teeth in the mouth What you have to remember that this game is for children as well as us, older folk and that means that there have to be compromises. You cant have it too complicated or the game looses its appeal to children and it cant be too simple cause the game looses its appeal to adults.
The fact to the matter is, no matter how you disagree with it, they have created a very fun and novel game, that is enyoyed by many (including me ). And the sales prove just that.

posted on September 27th, 2008, 9:10 am

Really Baron, What you say isisnt well thought through.. I respect that you like the game but that isint enough to make up for all it flaws that you say, as a whole. I like the game aswell to an extent, but not anymore.

Here is a post from a Ex-Macxis intern who worked on the game before he left Maxis that i found yesterday:
Thoughts on Spore from an ex-Maxis intern.

Its just one of many posts. Its not the game Will wanted to produce since it was changed, he sais that too.