Don't expect EA listen to any of our protest here. They will keep their money-making policy no matter what we say.

My realistic expectation ?

I'm done with EA (new games) for the forseeable future.

I'll check for news around once a month. In case Spore actually becomes something to hold my interest.

I expect to be enjoying Fallout 3 for longer than I did Spore (so far so good anyways).

But for now...So long and thanks for all the fish..............

Same here. My wife has a copy, and I occasionally play it, but there's no chance EA will be getting any more of my money until their policies change.

As far as my expectations for Spore, choice #1. It'll continue for as long as EA can squeeze money out of it.

RedLightning777 wrote:

MadHeishe wrote:

Eekwotsthat wrote:

MadHeishe wrote:
it doesn't need to be realistic, but they should add realistic gameplay (just a short example: better terraforming and controlling of ecosystems)..

Can you give practical examples of "better terraforming" ? I know the space prototype had more things you had to populate the planet with, based on ground height I seem to remember, but it still ended up with a checklist, only with more items to carry around. It added little true gameplay value and I can understand why they simplified it.

sea levels should rise once you shoot down an ice comet, just to give a short example on actual terraforming. i chose the wrong term, what i meant was better terrasculpting and more abilitys to share your planets around. the raise and lower ground tools, for example, shouldn't have cooldown and should be either way more precise, or way bigger. its retarded like it is at the moment. one one side you can't make detailed looking planets because the small tools are just way too big for it, on the other hand you need hours to unify the look of a whole planet because the big tools are way too small. the worst thing is that you can't even share your planets, like anthems for example.

we should be able to put permanent doodads on the planet, geysirs, (permanent) volcanoes or waterfalls for example. things that make your planet look living and cool. you know, things that make me wanna actually explore solar systems and look at the cool planets created by other players.

In one of the videos I saw a laser beam that was etching the ground like a land cutter.... used by Will Wright himself. I wonder where that went.. It looked like it WORKED to me.. another EXPANSION PACK CUT?

yeah! now i remember, i saw that one too! do you remember where you saw it?

Bump for the poll.

I'm guessing at some point the interest will wane, so they'll drop prices and put more into their patches.

There is still time left for spore, but as time goes by I start believeing more and more that maxis looks at us here on the forums and thinks that we are too small a percentage of spores fanbase to matter. I mean, these forums are overwhelmingly supportive of a realistic version of spore, but maybe maxis just thinks we are to small a group to make a game for.

Although, with the info I have, which is based on polls on these forums and other people I know, most spore players want a realistic version of spore.

Where did everything go?
Come on people! They spent more time taking things out of the game than actually working on it!

Superraptor wrote:Where did everything go?
Come on people! They spent more time taking things out of the game than actually working on it!

Yeah. They downgraded the thing for 3 years. Now it's buggy, full of nests(not all animals live in a nest!!), lacks aquatic stage, shallow, childish, has less freedom, too simple, has loading times in Space Stage unlike the original, and the animation of the creatures are far worse than before(clipping of limbs? bipeds walking with the left and right limbs synced? Yuck!)

Megazear7 wrote:There is still time left for spore, but as time goes by I start believeing more and more that maxis looks at us here on the forums and thinks that we are too small a percentage of spores fanbase to matter. I mean, these forums are overwhelmingly supportive of a realistic version of spore, but maybe maxis just thinks we are to small a group to make a game for.

Although, with the info I have, which is based on polls on these forums and other people I know, most spore players want a realistic version of spore.

You may think you know what people here want. I hope you are really looking in feedback, and not just GD to decide that.

The part of the equation you are missing is the part that you can't hear, but that EA/Maxis can -- sales and revenue. They know if the game is making a profit or not, and they know how much money they have committed to invest in it.

Another very, very important part of the equation is one none of us are privy to -- who is the stake holder inside the company for the product. If a product has an influential and powerful stakeholder, their view will be enough to watershed resources into a product, even when they might not be justified by profit and marketing alone.

I, like many others, have little interest in "science spore" per se. There are many improvements in the game that I'd like, things that add richness to gameplay, but so much of what falls into the science spore bucket wouldn't do that for me. PacoPaco's expanded AI and advanced pollination techniques would.

Future of Spore? When this was first posted, I don't even know if GA had been leaked.

We don't know where they are taking it. But I do know that there had to be a powerful stakeholder inside EA or they would never acquired Maxis.

And that person's reputation is riding on making Spore a continued success. You don't want failed products riding your resume. And at this point EA does have an investment to protect. Where they take it will be their call.

I'll keep posting what I want in feedback, hope for the best, play the Spore I've got, and not lose any sleep.

And if EA drops the game, well, I won't have to spend any more money with them, since I'm not too cool with anything else they market.

ESPEE wrote:SPORE will never be realistic. Its a fiction game.

OMG ARE YOU SERIOUS?
Have you seen the early development gameplay?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiaXyNrUChI
THAT is what I was looking forward to - a realistic evolution from unicellular organism to full fledged space empire.
NOT
This cutesy WOW, toddler crap.

I wanted violence, survival of the fittest, evolution, cunning, building your own empires (complete with Age of Empires style gameplay), and above all a realistic, scientific simulation, with a sea stage and maybe even limited multiplayer gameplay.

What I got:
- Toontown

They don't even put effort into the map making part of the game, providing faulty tools and scripting that doesn't do what you tell it to do.

Cybroxicon wrote:

ESPEE wrote:SPORE will never be realistic. Its a fiction game.

OMG ARE YOU SERIOUS?
Have you seen the early development gameplay?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiaXyNrUChI
THAT is what I was looking forward to - a realistic evolution from unicellular organism to full fledged space empire.
NOT
This cutesy WOW, toddler crap.

I wanted violence, survival of the fittest, evolution, cunning, building your own empires (complete with Age of Empires style gameplay), and above all a realistic, scientific simulation, with a sea stage and maybe even limited multiplayer gameplay.

What I got:
- Toontown

They don't even put effort into the map making part of the game, providing faulty tools and scripting that doesn't do what you tell it to do.

how long did it take you to find this thread? i mean seriously, did you just click on the last page and found a thread? check the dates before you post next time

It was relevant to my feeling of dissatisfation and dissapointment. And what I said is TRUE. If you doubt it you are a FOOL.

It IS toontown, broken down from this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiaXyNrUChI
to its current, juvenile, cartoon graphics state.....

I will make an observation of the current cell stage.... CELLS DO NOT MATE. THEY DUPLICATE. -_-

He did contribute to the discussion, Stealth. It's fine, and we all make mistakes.

Cybroxicon wrote:

ESPEE wrote:SPORE will never be realistic. Its a fiction game.

OMG ARE YOU SERIOUS?
Have you seen the early development gameplay?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiaXyNrUChI
THAT is what I was looking forward to - a realistic evolution from unicellular organism to full fledged space empire.
NOT
This cutesy WOW, toddler crap.

I wanted violence, survival of the fittest, evolution, cunning, building your own empires (complete with Age of Empires style gameplay), and above all a realistic, scientific simulation, with a sea stage and maybe even limited multiplayer gameplay.

What I got:
- Toontown

They don't even put effort into the map making part of the game, providing faulty tools and scripting that doesn't do what you tell it to do.

But let me just say that most every person on the forums has seen the 2005 Spore preview, and we all acknowledge it to be a video of the concept of Spore and was not actually any developed part of the game. It was an entirely scripted demonstration of what the makers would have liked Spore to be. Sadly, it was not finalized in the end, mainly due to in-game mechanics (and - arguably - profits).

Well, whatever the development value, in my book, Spore shot about a 5 mile distance short of its promised value.

It has little to no science incorporated into it, which makes it, YET AGAIN, Toontown, a large profit, low quality, juvenile game.... My point being, I was basically very disappointed.