gamemaster04 wrote:

ashkelon wrote:

Seriously.

well,spore is still alive,even though maxis has pretty much abandoned it.

maxis is working on a new sim city game,while spore is pretty much abandoned.
even though it would be good for maxis to work on spore,at least they're making a new simcity. played the one on the SNES,Simcity 4 and its expansion,simcity societies and its expansion,and simcity creator.

i really hope that after the (hopeful) success of simcity,they get back to work on spore,reviving it from the dead.

It's still EA's call either way.

I played the sim games up until "The Sims". Really enjoyed SimCity. Used to play that on the Palm during board meetings. LOL!

I don't care for games that demand high levels of micromanagement. MinionJoe actually likes a high level of control, so our tolerance for games is very different. The Sims made me pay WAY more attention to the homunculi than I could stay interested for.

Without Will Wright, Maxis lost it's soul. In my opinion. Spore was supposed to be his magnum opus and EA gutted it, but what's done is done and those that still play the game can see the quality bits and forgive the rest.

I also played many of the old Sim games -- Ant, City, Life, and even 'El-Fish', a Russian decorative-fish breeding sim Maxis published and which flopped royally. To be honest old-school Maxis games were one of the foundational gaming experiences of my childhood, and it's sad to see them go the way of every other brilliant studio that EA ever devoured.

But meh, posting about it is just griping to no purpose I suppose.

Pietoro wrote:Without Will Wright, Maxis lost it's soul. In my opinion. Spore was supposed to be his magnum opus and EA gutted it, but what's done is done and those that still play the game can see the quality bits and forgive the rest.

I also played many of the old Sim games -- Ant, City, Life, and even 'El-Fish', a Russian decorative-fish breeding sim Maxis published and which flopped royally. To be honest old-school Maxis games were one of the foundational gaming experiences of my childhood, and it's sad to see them go the way of every other brilliant studio that EA ever devoured.

But meh, posting about it is just griping to no purpose I suppose.

Well, to some extent you are preaching to the converted. I am rather in a minority, having been in the same line of business for another world media publishing giant, so whether I like EA's business practices or not, I see their intent and can't damnn them out of hand, since the true intent of any corporation -- even Maxis -- is to generate revenue for its stakeholders.

Software is a huge gamble for any company. There is no income until there has been a huge outlay for everything from programmers, designers and artists, to the support and production people and actually advertizing, shrink-wrapping and shipping the product. So one of the things any company has to rely on is how much they can invest, given the estimated revenue.

Some of the "blame" with Spore's end result rests squarely on Wright's shoulders. He knew Spore was going to cost a pile of money to produce, and also that the real worth of the product was not as a toy to play an evolution game -- but as a tool to allow companies to produce user- skinnable and moddable games, the extent of which is controlled by the design team, extensible and the user developed content then autoshared between players to develop unique gameplay for each player. The Spore game was a "canvas" choice, and Will saw the chance to market it diversely -- to academics as well as players. The mocks used to sell the idea to the academic and scientific backers were released even before the game itself was in production or scope finalized.

That happens, but it gave the community the illusion that more was "finished" than actually was.

When EA acquired Spore, they assumed the burden of paying for what Will had sold to the community, but only partially developed (his talk and presentations notwithstanding).

I was a lead designer for more than 25 years, and I've seen this scope problem many times.

The code for Spore needs some major changes to bring it up to compatibility with current machine architectures. This has nothing to do with the quality or execution of the design. There was excellent work done by the EAxis team in all aspects of Spore. It was not terrible or shoddy code, as some people claim. But those are the same people who can't grok Spore as a client server application. I don't fault EA for discontinuing maintenance to it. That decision doesn't predicate abandonment of the product, just this iteration.

As a user, I think EA made poor choices, but as a stockholder, I'd likely feel differently.

All we can do is wait and see.

There was also the marketing (even a series of science episodes on Discovery I believe it was) that gave the impression that Spore was more of a biology/life sim than it ended up being. That was my main disappointment with the game; regardless of how much I like making creatures and exploring the galaxy in the Space stage I wish there had been a bit more content in the Creature/Tribal/Civ phases.

And I agree totally with the coding issues -- the reason I quit the game originally was a series of crashes and bugs plus C&C not recognizing that I finally got fed up with manually uninstalling, reinstalling, and all that pita stuff trying to fix it. Even now the game doesn't completely work right for me but I've given up caring because as long as I can still make creatures I'm content pretty much. I can't share GA stuff but I don't make adventures so that's a moot point as long as I can play other peoples'. And somehow my C&C was recognized by the Sporepedia this time around (maybe because of Origin?) so that was a plus.

Pietoro wrote:There was also the marketing (even a series of science episodes on Discovery I believe it was) that gave the impression that Spore was more of a biology/life sim than it ended up being. That was my main disappointment with the game; regardless of how much I like making creatures and exploring the galaxy in the Space stage I wish there had been a bit more content in the Creature/Tribal/Civ phases.

....

This is exactly what I was talking about that was done by Will as a method of procuring financial backing via support from the academic and scientific communities by trotting around a demo piece and implying there was more programming and design finished than there was.

I've been in this business for years and I see users deluded all the time by mocks -- even when you stress the appearance of a "working" program is nothing more than a "puppet" and there is no usable code at that point. To trot around a mock as though it was an application is dirty pool.

ashkelon wrote:

Pietoro wrote:Without Will Wright, Maxis lost it's soul. In my opinion. Spore was supposed to be his magnum opus and EA gutted it, but what's done is done and those that still play the game can see the quality bits and forgive the rest.

I also played many of the old Sim games -- Ant, City, Life, and even 'El-Fish', a Russian decorative-fish breeding sim Maxis published and which flopped royally. To be honest old-school Maxis games were one of the foundational gaming experiences of my childhood, and it's sad to see them go the way of every other brilliant studio that EA ever devoured.

But meh, posting about it is just griping to no purpose I suppose.

Well, to some extent you are preaching to the converted. I am rather in a minority, having been in the same line of business for another world media publishing giant, so whether I like EA's business practices or not, I see their intent and can't damnn them out of hand, since the true intent of any corporation -- even Maxis -- is to generate revenue for its stakeholders.

Software is a huge gamble for any company. There is no income until there has been a huge outlay for everything from programmers, designers and artists, to the support and production people and actually advertizing, shrink-wrapping and shipping the product. So one of the things any company has to rely on is how much they can invest, given the estimated revenue.

Some of the "blame" with Spore's end result rests squarely on Wright's shoulders. He knew Spore was going to cost a pile of money to produce, and also that the real worth of the product was not as a toy to play an evolution game -- but as a tool to allow companies to produce user- skinnable and moddable games, the extent of which is controlled by the design team, extensible and the user developed content then autoshared between players to develop unique gameplay for each player. The Spore game was a "canvas" choice, and Will saw the chance to market it diversely -- to academics as well as players. The mocks used to sell the idea to the academic and scientific backers were released even before the game itself was in production or scope finalized.

That happens, but it gave the community the illusion that more was "finished" than actually was.

When EA acquired Spore, they assumed the burden of paying for what Will had sold to the community, but only partially developed (his talk and presentations notwithstanding).

I was a lead designer for more than 25 years, and I've seen this scope problem many times.

The code for Spore needs some major changes to bring it up to compatibility with current machine architectures. This has nothing to do with the quality or execution of the design. There was excellent work done by the EAxis team in all aspects of Spore. It was not terrible or shoddy code, as some people claim. But those are the same people who can't grok Spore as a client server application. I don't fault EA for discontinuing maintenance to it. That decision doesn't predicate abandonment of the product, just this iteration.

As a user, I think EA made poor choices, but as a stockholder, I'd likely feel differently.

All we can do is wait and see.

well,as the moral of mass effect 3 would say (the indoctrination theory,actually),you need hope,and without hope,your doomed.

gamemaster04 wrote:

ashkelon wrote:

Pietoro wrote:Without Will Wright, Maxis lost it's soul. In my opinion. Spore was supposed to be his magnum opus and EA gutted it, but what's done is done and those that still play the game can see the quality bits and forgive the rest.

I also played many of the old Sim games -- Ant, City, Life, and even 'El-Fish', a Russian decorative-fish breeding sim Maxis published and which flopped royally. To be honest old-school Maxis games were one of the foundational gaming experiences of my childhood, and it's sad to see them go the way of every other brilliant studio that EA ever devoured.

But meh, posting about it is just griping to no purpose I suppose.

Well, to some extent you are preaching to the converted. I am rather in a minority, having been in the same line of business for another world media publishing giant, so whether I like EA's business practices or not, I see their intent and can't damnn them out of hand, since the true intent of any corporation -- even Maxis -- is to generate revenue for its stakeholders.

Software is a huge gamble for any company. There is no income until there has been a huge outlay for everything from programmers, designers and artists, to the support and production people and actually advertizing, shrink-wrapping and shipping the product. So one of the things any company has to rely on is how much they can invest, given the estimated revenue.

Some of the "blame" with Spore's end result rests squarely on Wright's shoulders. He knew Spore was going to cost a pile of money to produce, and also that the real worth of the product was not as a toy to play an evolution game -- but as a tool to allow companies to produce user- skinnable and moddable games, the extent of which is controlled by the design team, extensible and the user developed content then autoshared between players to develop unique gameplay for each player. The Spore game was a "canvas" choice, and Will saw the chance to market it diversely -- to academics as well as players. The mocks used to sell the idea to the academic and scientific backers were released even before the game itself was in production or scope finalized.

That happens, but it gave the community the illusion that more was "finished" than actually was.

When EA acquired Spore, they assumed the burden of paying for what Will had sold to the community, but only partially developed (his talk and presentations notwithstanding).

I was a lead designer for more than 25 years, and I've seen this scope problem many times.

The code for Spore needs some major changes to bring it up to compatibility with current machine architectures. This has nothing to do with the quality or execution of the design. There was excellent work done by the EAxis team in all aspects of Spore. It was not terrible or shoddy code, as some people claim. But those are the same people who can't grok Spore as a client server application. I don't fault EA for discontinuing maintenance to it. That decision doesn't predicate abandonment of the product, just this iteration.

As a user, I think EA made poor choices, but as a stockholder, I'd likely feel differently.

All we can do is wait and see.

well,as the moral of mass effect 3 would say (the indoctrination theory,actually),you need hope,and without hope,your doomed.

You all are right about the whole thing.

Mostly the problem with EA is not that they do what other corporations do, but that they do it to excess ...

As in Jimquisition's response to the IGN article:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5946-Why-Do-People-Hate-EA

the gleeful, unrelenting, excess of EA's **fecal reference omitted* that has drawn attention..." Or rather, the whole point Moore wants to ignore in his IGN apologism.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/06/14/why-do-people-hate-ea

Well of COURSE it came out that way. Ask the offender, not the offended. *shrug* I forbear to digress further, being on EA's turf.

And that said, I see very innovative, quality programming with Spore. Excellent, clever design and problem solving, and a brilliant schema (and I'm not talking about the stupid space game). The programmers and designers were top drawer.

Management holds the reins. As any coder, sometimes very unhappily, knows.

were do I sing up

dinolizard12753 wrote:were do I sing up

In the shower?

I think you mean "sign" not "sing" LOL!

But there is no real point in "signing" now, and no-one updates the initial post. This area is mostly to play "what if" games with the Spore we have and not to really induce any changes.

ashkelon wrote:

dinolizard12753 wrote:were do I sing up

In the shower?

I think you mean "sign" not "sing" LOL!

But there is no real point in "signing" now, and no-one updates the initial post. This area is mostly to play "what if" games with the Spore we have and not to really induce any changes.

sing up...lol.

sing what,exactly? still alive? want you gone? the tribute song to the mass effect series?!

(if you know what the song is,then well...achievement unlocked for you!
if you dont know,then...ehh...your indoctrinated?)

Blues. I sing blues with a lot of bands, also Irish and Appalachian music. So yeah. Shower... Little Feat, Oingo Boingo, Tod Rundgren, Van Morrison... mostly.

ashkelon wrote:Blues. I sing blues with a lot of bands, also Irish and Appalachian music. So yeah. Shower... Little Feat, Oingo Boingo, Tod Rundgren, Van Morrison... mostly.

yeaaah....but you do get the reference,right?

gamemaster04 wrote:

ashkelon wrote:Blues. I sing blues with a lot of bands, also Irish and Appalachian music. So yeah. Shower... Little Feat, Oingo Boingo, Tod Rundgren, Van Morrison... mostly.

yeaaah....but you do get the reference,right?

Duhr. I'm the one who called him on whether he was singing or signing.

ashkelon wrote:

gamemaster04 wrote:

ashkelon wrote:Blues. I sing blues with a lot of bands, also Irish and Appalachian music. So yeah. Shower... Little Feat, Oingo Boingo, Tod Rundgren, Van Morrison... mostly.

yeaaah....but you do get the reference,right?

Duhr. I'm the one who called him on whether he was singing or signing.

I stink at spelling and when I type quickly I may hit the key at the wrong time