So now that it's obvious there's a market for it, do you think Maxis should simply make a second Spore game that's more in line with the original vision? Do you think they will? And speaking of will, should Will Wright put in an appearance and actually make a statement on this issue?

I, for one, would love to know if Maxis has any plans to revisit the original vision, to release Spore For The Rest Of Us™.

Discuss.

well, if EA does the same to spore as it does with the sims..

We can expect another three versions of spore with twenty expansions each, give or take ten


But whether or not one will be science baised, I doubt it, im also not sure if i would buy it, depends on how complicated they make it.

I think an expansion would suffice. I dont know about having a spore 2 already.

No offense meant to the two above posters, but your posts make it seem as if you've misunderstood the question.

Read the first two posts in this thread: http://forum.spore.com/jforum/posts/list/5225.page
...then tell me if your response is still the same.

Whether it's a comprehensive expansion or an entirely new game, I would give quite a lot for a Spore that is based much more on science and not "cute" and "marketability."

Yeah, Spore is fun now, but imagine the wow factor if the Spore galaxy was based more off of those prototypes. I also feel a galaxy based off of those prototypes would be much more flexible and open-ended than the one we have now.

eh sorry, I kinda skipped over the parts I didnt care much about.

I suppose you meant the early version of spore shown to us, who knows, but i doubt it..

Will wont commit himself to anything extra yet, so dont expect any statements on this issue (we can suppose that "Spore For The Rest Of Us™" is not release quality.

My opinion is: I would definitely buy it if it came out. 100%. BUT I would prefer that Maxis worked on extending the gameplay for the Spore we have now with expansions and patches instead of producing a new game 'couse waiting for it would simply be torture for me. I have waited 3 years for Spore, the last month before the release was a real pain and I really don't want to go through that again.

i think it should come in the form of an expansion... this way it remains optional... ppl who want science spore can have it (yay!!) and ppl who want arcade-ish spore can just keep it as it is

i´m not really talking about the looks of the game... it CAN be scientific AND cute, i mean the actual game mechanics that were anounced before and got dumbed-out of the current release

i hope they can see how much money there is in making such expansion... and lets hope they deliver it soon should they do it

Every time I read one of these little reahshed topics, I die a little on the inside.

Then I realized it's all from the same 3 people these days anyways.

We get it, you like the game that you saw in the prerendered 2005 developer video. That's just not going to happen.

sardonik wrote:We get it, you like the game that you saw in the prerendered 2005 developer video.

There's already proof that the 2005 vid was NOT pre-rendered.

That's just not going to happen.

Prove it.
If there's enough popular support--and I think there is--Maxis might be persuaded. I see no reason to just give up.
A thread like this is positive; it sends a message to Maxis and maybe gets something done beyond complaining. Which, frankly, is my goal; I'd rather not have anything to complain about, but that requires change.

rocketgirl wrote:No offense meant to the two above posters, but your posts make it seem as if you've misunderstood the question.

Read the first two posts in this thread: http://forum.spore.com/jforum/posts/list/5225.page
...then tell me if your response is still the same.

/reads


my answer is still the same. It is what it is.

I know a guy that could freeze you, and we can wake you up in the future when EA releases your version of spore.

"Science Spore" would be ideal.

I.e. a game that displays some actual appreciation of or relevance to the scientific ideas the designers parroted as marketing rhetoric--or to be somewhat more generous--ideas they had some initial professed enthusiasm for, but which were deliberately abandoned in the name of compromise.
The final insult on this count is their use of the word "Creatio-lutionism" in their own TV adds, and Will Wright's tepid, middle-of-the-road comments about intelligent design creationism. This is simply indicative of their general un-seriousness about the ideas they claimed to champion.

I think many people will claim that although some kind of abstract commitment to science would have been nice in Spore, what they really want is just some decent, engaging and clever gameplay, instead of a rigid pattern of repetitive, simplistic grinding tasks.

But I think these are two very interrelated issues. The gameplay elements that attracted many of us to the game were precisely the "sciencey" parts. Because by science we're not talking about the propounding of abstract theorems or doing calculus problems here--the science parts most of us want are basically just the interesting game mechanics everyone is talking about (e.g. functional consequence to parts placement in Creature, or a more realistic Creature ecosystem and behavior system, or any number of sci-fi features we wanted in Space, etc.).

These are science-related not because of any didactic teaching of facts, but in their basic nature and the mental approach you'd have to take to them. Such as trial and error, experimentation, exploration of the world, problem solving, inducing general principles of how the world works, etc. E.g. figuring out what kinds of creature design would be effective. Figuring out what kinds of creature behaviors and strategies are appropriate for which niche, etc.

So in asking for a "Science Spore," most of us are really asking for a game that actually engages our minds on some level. That's why we play games in the first place.

(It is also true that a more explicit emphasis on science, in terms, for example, of actual facts you could discover or read about in your exploration of the galaxy, would be a welcome addition. No one would force you to read them. Think of a Civilization game, where each unit and building has historical background information and the game is full of actual quotes from famous figures. Think of, say, a game like Baldur's Gate, where the whole game is packed with detailed books on the history and culture of the game world--all made up in a fantasy setting. Would it be too much to ask for some kind of actual science reference, put in English words, somewhere in Spore? That is not dreary or didactic. It's just added interest for those with the inclination.)

rocketgirl wrote:If there's enough popular support--and I think there is--Maxis might be persuaded. I see no reason to just give up.

From EA/Maxis' point of view, a second version of Spore would incur duplicate expenses for a product that would be competing with their existing release. It'd be twice the cost for the same amount of sales.

For that reason alone I doubt we'll ever see a hardcore version of Spore released anytime in the near future.

rocketgirl wrote:I'd rather not have anything to complain about, but that requires change.

You're no Barack Obama.