There are already a few thread on how people would like to change the way creature attributes are determined from morphology method to spending DNA points to increase values instead of parts. In creating this poll I don't really intend to add another one of those threads. Instead I mean to gauge how everyone feels about the current creature part statistics method used in Spore. Currently you stick parts on and the statistics of each attribute is determined by the maximum value for that attribute given by all parts. That is, statistics are not stackable. Only the max is taken. I see advantages and disavantages to both the stackable and maximizing approach Spore/The Creature Creator has taken. But I want to see how people like the current version.

I was thinking, this poll, if it becomes popular might be good evidence for Maxis to see that a lot of people, regardless of type, probably want the statistics looked at. So, in order for this poll not to get lost in a pile of other threads. I think it might be nice to basically sketch out different possible options for determining the attributes of creatures. A lot of threads already focus on one way and argue the merit but it might be nice to collect outlines here. That is, not nessicarly argue the merit of different options as present them. If people could present their suggestion, like the morphological method and the use dna point to improve values method, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

*boing*

My major gripe with the current system, if it works the way you say (There was a time when I imagined that multiple weapons gave me faster recharge), is that it forces me, us, to put all four kinds of weapons on every creature.

But this ties in to how inadequate Spore is in all kinds of ways. I enjoy the creature phase because I like to develop creature through the generations and look at them as they act in their world. But I really wish it had been so much more. And it's so easy to imagine how much more it could have been.
So IMO everything needs to be revised. - AND EXPANDED! They have the graphics and editor engines. The framework is there, ready. Now just put in new rules to make a better experience.

Starting suggestions: Make the cost of most parts and ALL advanced parts, not just DNA points, but also requiring a trade in of certain previous parts that your creature already possess. Lots of new parts and part paths need to be added of course. Put back the fish stage into the game. Forget about the underwater civilization. Just use it to evolve a lot of basic trade-in parts in preparation before the land creature stage. Creature complexity increase by introducing certain forks.
Some part path forks could look like this:

spine -> spine + skull.

skull -> skull + jaws

scales + jaws -> scales + jaws with teeth

... etc. Just look at evolution if you need inspiration.

I think such a system could work well to avoid weapon spamming a creature. In return we must of course have longer chains of weapon parts and more advanced weapon versions so we can upgrade the strength of the creature that way instead. ...- If we choose to. Alternatively, we could try to maintain multiple talents. But the idea is that that will cost us slightly more DNA points than it's worth.

The latter would result in a more flexible and adaptable creature though. And again gameplay could be expanded to make use of that in turn...

I just wish the game had been more. I like the creature stage. And I play it over and over again. But it's so shallow and also "wrong".
The tidepool stage is cool and very polished. It's not much of a game though.
Tribal and Civ, I've played so many RTS games that are about 100 times better.

I've tried to get into the Space stage for a couple of days, but I find it painfully tedious and just annoying.
I've played many 4X games that were about 3000-10,000 times better. Roughly.
Those wouldn't be possible to port to a console though. And my guess is that is Spore's major problem. Marketing has dictated consoles. Consoles has dictated the interface. The interface has dictated the gameplay.
Pretty much the completely opposite way of what it should have been. (sigh)

Yes ... very dissatisfied with the current system in Creature stage. It just limits far too much, and makes everyones' creatures too homogenized (similar) ... I would like to see more diversity in stats...


---


P.S. your Sig, Riain? Pwahahahah! (RFOL!) *nod nod nod* It's a conspiracy, I tell ya! To drive us nuts!
(SIG QUOTE)
My converstation with my homeworld
"Hello space command."
"Yes?"
"I think maybe you should start employing some more captains now that I have expanded our empire to 100 star systems."
"Ahahahah. You're kidding, right? We will build only one ship to defend our people at a time. That is all. You fail."
"Doesn't matter that you can clone me and build a new ship in a matter of seconds?"
"No! Now go away!" *Click*
"Well fine. I'll go back micromanaging my colonies. And see if I don't!"
(END QUOTE)

This was in fact my very FIRST beef about the Space phase.

I would prefer the art and the stats to diverge.

As I earn DNA, I can add more parts.

As I play Creature, I gain more stats. Fighting makes me a better fighter. Socializing makes me a better socializer.

Now, HOW I fight and socialize might change based on parts - maybe I just gore like a madman if all I've got is a horn. But I'd like the 2 to be more distinct from each other.

I think I would like this:
Each abilities score is expanded from a max of 5 to a max of 10. I think the only reason why it is 5 is because they did not want to make a ton of parts to cover that range. But if a different approach was taken they wouldn't have to do that.

Each part that you can add starts with only one point per attribute. You can then spend dna points to increase attribute score of that part. As the you add to the score the part starts to look different. It looks more advanced then the original part you had.

Okay... so a nice model for parts. So how to determine the creatures stats?

Well let's list what would be decent for statistic:

1. Having more parts should contribute to an ability. (A bunch teeth is better then one tooth.)
2. However, a bunch of wimpy parts shouldn't out do one strong part to a point. (Three bee stingers shouldn't out do a giant bear claw.)

The two models maxis used took the two extremes and people are annoyed by the failures of both...

So take the middle ground. Take the average score and add that score to the maximum.

That simple. The only downfall is some people might not understand how to achieve the score they want (or do the math in their heads), but by playing around with it they should get an idea. In a way, I think it is sort of intuitive.



EDIT:

There are some issues with this scoring that may be confusing so this explains them:

If you have multiple parts with the maximum score all but one are counted in the average (that way each part is only counted once in the scoring, and the score doesn't get screwed by double counting). So if you had the parts with the following scores 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4 only two of the 4s would be added in the average and the score would be [(2 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 4)/ 5] + 4 = 7 . Fractions would be rounded down. So 1, 2, 4 gives [(1 + 2)/2 + 4] = 5.5 which is rounded to 5 .

It is too much like Diablo, in that you are always looking for teh uber-lewt. I wish it was more based on your actual design. I know the argument goes "then it stifles creativity" - but look at what is actually happening with uber-lewt: very, very few quadrupeds or more generated by users, little to no use of expensive otherwise decorative parts, no part repetition (it does no good, and for some parts is prohibitively expensive).

I contend that the current system does far more to stifle creativity during actual gameplay than any correlation between design and performance ever would.

Even as a kid, I would expect my long-armed creature to be able to reach farther than my stubby armed creature. Advanced users can tweak this still further with other purchasable abilities. Provide dummy tools for less apt users, such as the default legs, or even default torso/spine setups; perhaps hints or informational cards in-game for what might help.