Spore Is EA's New Ace

BusinessWeek reports on EA's Next Big Thing. From the article: "EA is stumbling, and a big part of its time-tested strategy is about to change. The company hopes that its next mega-franchise will revolve not around a football star, a boy wizard, or a dashing British spy, but...a microbe. The game is called Spore. Developed by Will Wright, the creator of SimCity and The Sims, it lets players design an invertebrate in its primordial stages and then guide its evolution until the creature's offspring develop into a thriving civilization with cities, religion, and spaceships. EA's ambitious goal is to create more such innovative, internally developed games while lessening the company's dependence on professional sports and Hollywood movie franchises."

Comments

Spore video

[RonnyJ]

Spore video on Google: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8372603330 420559198&q=spore

Re:Spore video

[Ryvar]

That's the partial video, the full video is here, free registration - which does not require you to validate your email address so any garbage works - is required.

--Ryvar

Re:Spore video

[queezle]

Thanks for the link, I saw the shorter google video last week and was really impressed. I just hope it doesn't turn out to be a let down like black and white did.

Re:Spore video

[spudwiser]

Admittedly, B&W2 is going to be little more than Warcraft + (Warhammer 40k)Titan... but it does not dissuade me from:

"I just hope it doesn't turn out to be a let down like black and white did."

you = heretic

Re:Spore video

[johneee]

My wife saw that video, turned to me and said, "we're getting this game, right?"

I'll give her this, when I told her it would cost us somewhere in the region of $2000 she actually had to consider it for a full second and a half before she said ok.

So, I'll get a new computer, but I won't be able to use it for six months, and I won't actually see my wife for that time either... Thanks Will Wright.

Re:Spore video

[Blazeix]

I saw this video a few months back, and I have been drooling ever since. I rarely get this way about computer games, but I think I might actually legally buy this one!

Re:Spore video

[Anonymous Coward]

"B&W2 is going to be ..."

You realize that it came out months ago, right? And that it crashes on startup on about 1 in 5 machines, has no multiplayer, doesn't let the creature learn from your actions, doesn't let you skip the tutorial (until the most recent patch 1.2), has bugs that cause the game to stop progressing to the next world, lets armies run right through your city walls, and absolutely *crawls* on nVidia GeForce 6800 cards?

Just checking.

Re:Spore video

[Anonymous Coward]

In the next game, you will start as a seed, and grow into an apple tree, and then your apple will be eaten. The goal will be to end up as a steaming, peanut and corn encrusted pile of poo, and fertilize a seed, and start the process over again...

Re:Spore video

[Traiklin]

you forgot to mention the part where they encurage you to build armies to avenge your tribes murder, only when you create an army it adds to your evil meter.

oh and then there is the part where no matter how many trees you rip out to build your citys it adds to your evil meter aswell.

basically everything you do in the game makes you evil.

Re:Spore video

[Phisbut]

Dang, I don't know what part of the game you or I missed, but last I checked, I was 96% good, and I did rip out hundreds of trees... Ripping out a tree is evil indeed, but using it to build or to put in the store is good, so it balances it all. Uprooting trees is only evil if you do it just for fun.

And even though building an army is somewhat evil, using it to attack is much worse. If you just build an army of archers to put up your city walls and defend, the little bit of evil you got from having an army is easily counterbalanced by watering a couple of fields... nothing to grow horns with...

Re:Spore video

[TrueKonrads]

All you have to do is register with Name: Viagra, Surname: Cialis, Company: Free and it will send spamassasin score to that of mt. everest

Re:Spore video

[shut_up_man]

Well played, sir.

Re:Spore video

[Anonymous Coward]

You have a wife?

Re:Spore video

[Anonymous Writer]

Don't forget the official site.

Re:Spore video

[insane_machine]

It also crawls on ATi Crossfire setups due to eiether a driver bug or game bug.

Re:Spore video

[rolandog]

Thanks for the link... though the camera crew should've also showed some of the slides or pictures that Wright talked about.

Re:Spore video

[gforce811]

Here's the full video on google, without the absolutely horrible loading times of that GDC site. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-262774490 184348066&q=spore I hope you like it.

Re:Spore video

[The Only Druid]

(a) Crashes in 1/5 machines? News to me, I've never had a crash nor heard of this problem. Documentation?
(b) The patch that let you skip the tutorial came out around a month after release.
(c) Crawls on 6800 cards? I have an eVGA 6800 GT (with a 3.2 AMD and a gig of ram) and I get between 30-60fps almost 100% of the time. Again, care to document this claim?

Re:Spore video

[Anonymous Coward]

He must be new around here.

Re:Spore video

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm new here, you insensitive clod!

Re:Spore video

[jandrese]

Is anybody else driven nuts by the fact that the camera doesn't show his slides? He keeps talking to them and they sound real interesting, but the camera stays fixed on his face for the entire time it's not in game mode.

Re:Spore video

[__aapspi39]

i think the point here is that black & white was a big disapointment and failed to live up to the hype.

one of the central features of the game was the creature, and the ai code that allowed it to learn. well it didn't learn or at least forgot stuff almost straight away. it soon became clear that the game was big on gimmicks but very light on gameplay and most people i know didn't play past the third or fourth level. i wouldn't bother with the sequel or anything else from molyneux, once bitten...

spore looks very promising though and maxis have, in the past, delivered the goods. it'd be nice if you could evolve creatures to the point where they create computer games (life simulators)

Re:Spore video

[Eightyford]

Spore video on Google: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8372603330 420559198&q=spore

Um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um..

Re:Spore video

[timeOday]

But I wonder if they fumbled with the name "Spore."

My suggestion would be "Battlecruiser 3000ad Forever"

Re:Spore video

[forgetful_ca]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Yep, my coworkers literally had to hold me back. I was ready to quit playing the video after the first 2 minutes..

Re:Spore video

[Maian]

You have a wife?

Well that's not the thing that surprised me (though this is /.). What surprised me was that this time around it wasn't the wife complaining.

Re:Spore video

[Flendon]

My wife saw that video, turned to me and said, "we're getting this game, right?"

I'll give her this, when I told her it would cost us somewhere in the region of $2000 she actually had to consider it for a full second and a half before she said ok.

So, I'll get a new computer, but I won't be able to use it for six months, and I won't actually see my wife for that time either... Thanks Will Wright.

So if I get this game I get a new computer and I don't have to see my wife for 6 months? If I hadn't already been following this game for a year I would be waiting for release now!

Re:Spore video

[Kaychsea]

Now, now! Play nice. It's hard to tell with you being an Anonymous Coward and all.

Re:Spore video

[MindStalker]

Are you saying that so your wife or SO won't want to play?? :)
Seriously though Spore is just a temporary working name, though it may stick.

Spore looks to be GREAT

[Daath]

From what I've seen, Spore looks to be awesome! Simply huge! I wonder, though, when it will be done - From what I've heard it's been developed on for a LONG time. From the video, it looks fairly complete, though!

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[G)-(ostly]

They're just waiting for it to mutate into Duke Nukem Forever.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[DrEldarion]

All along, they've been saying "winter 2006" as a release. I think everyone was hoping that would mean Q1, but Q4 2006 seems to be the target.

Knowing Wright, though, he won't let it out the door until he feels it's done completely, so it may be later.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[misleb]

I'd be concerned about the game being too ambitious and not being a particularly good implementation of any of the other games it emulates. In the demo video, he talks about all the other games that it is like. Pac-Man in the beginning, then the Sims, then Sim-City, then Civilization, etc.

It sorta reminds me of that "Sim-Sim" game found inside the old Space Quest series. Anyone remeber that? Those Sierra games were really fun.

Anyway, Spore does look really cool.

-matthew

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[wampus]

Knowing Wright, though, he won't let it out the door until he feels it's done completely, so it may be later.

Ever play the 1.0 of either Sims? And if its lacking in some feature? Expansion pack! Of course, I doubt it will be as incomplete as something like Outpost, where there was stuff in the printed manual that never made it in the game. That was the last Sierra product I bought.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[ToiletDuk]

The first time I met Will Wright it was at a company picnic when he had just started pre-production on Spore. He sat around for at least a half hour just firing off his ideas about the game, and from just that one conversation I'm convinced that he won't try to release a game that falls significantly short of his vision. Of course the Spore team is in a different office now so I have no real idea of what their current progress is like, but unless EA corporate is unnecessarily rushing them, I'm confident Will will deliver a great game.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[wampus]

I certainly hope so, because I have every intention of purchasing this the day it hits shelves. I expect it to have some bugs at first, I know what keeping a release schedule means, but I also hope that the powers that be don't decide to withhold major pieces of gameplay in the interest of 2 expansion packs per year.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[Burning1]

Think of it more like a set of mini-games. The main game is the part where you fly around the galixy, spread like weed, and blow shit up. Everything up to that point is just a set of well featured mini-games.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[modecx]

I'd be concerned with the scope of their project being so large also, but from the video it really seems that it's all pretty well buttoned up.

When the little guys were running around, and he was going on about the additions you can make to your creatures, I thought that looked like great fun, and that it was pretty amazing. When they got the spears, drums, etc. that was yet again amazing, and to me the laughter of the audience echoed "You've fucking got to be kidding, nobody can do that, nobody's even thought something like that was possible!", and yet again he zooms out on that universe, and everyone is awestruck all over again... But there it stands.

Color me impressed, I would have never imagined a game so open ended, and so vast. I'm awestruck, and I want it yesterday!

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[misleb]

Sure, but how fun is that? No real competition? It isn't multiplayer. It has to at least have a good AI.

-matthew

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[misleb]

In a way, though, it wasn't open ended. I mean it seemed to have very strict "stages." What if you want to go back and design more animals? Or micro-manage cities?

-matthew

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[Anonymous Coward]

You clearly did not play The Sims Online.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[moonbender]

From what I can tell, you can always go back to previous stages. Certainly you can once you have "beaten" the game and are essentially omnipotent.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[modecx]

I watched the shorter length google movie, and that was addressed towards the end. He says that when your civilization(s) advance enough, that manipulation of creatures is possible, and that when you get to that stage of the game most of the editors are freely available (i.e. that you don't have to follow the usual rules that drive evolution in the game, feeding, reproduction)

It certainly looks and sounds as if you can micromanage to your heart's content once you get to that point, including growing new colonies, managing old ones, creating new ecologies, etc.

Maybe it's not open ended, if you take the definition of "open ended" to not include growing, and becoming better... Who knows where evolution is supposed to take us, maybe we're supposed to transcend our existence beyond what we can imagine, maybe we're meant to roam the stars, and maybe we're supposed to stay. It looks open ended from our view, but if you had the perspective of some enlightened, omniscient being, our existence might not look open ended. It might look like a continuation of many, many stages. I'd say that this game appears to be as open ended as the player wants to make it.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[Elminst]

You didn't watch the video did you?
Wright explicitly explains multiple times that the other creatures you come into contact with are created by OTHER PLAYERS. And the system plays them based on how the OTHER PLAYER created them and modified them.
Direct multiplayer? No.
But the other creatures you run into were created by people, and all behavior is based on how those people created them, modified them and whatever behavioral quirks the player gave them.

I predict massive losses of "real" productivity and family time for this game...

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[ChocoBean]

The main game is the part where you fly around the galixy, spread like weed, and blow shit up.

truly?

Personally since I saw the video early last year I've thought the main chunk of the game will be developing your creature culturally. IE: from when he gave them spears and fire to attacking neighbouring countries etc. I personally thought the stuff before and after are the mini games.

Part of me thinks that EA will release each component one year at a time as separate games (2006: pac-man 2007: guided-evolution [an oxymoron] 2008: critter-civ 2009: space blast [with critter])

Kind of like their sports franchise, ish. Here's hoping i'm not giving EA enough credit.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[ChocoBean]

I think he mentioned that you won't always be at the top of the food chain because other critters/races/planets/galaxies are downloaded to your game. Maybe that's good, but I'm sure like sim city there will be cheats where you can turn more powerful "stuff" off so that you can play god-mode.

In a game like this I think it'll be fun to be challenged sometimes, and will be fun to play omnipotent god at others. =) I'd be overjoyed if the game lets you adjust and re-adjust how hard it is on a whim.

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[misleb]

I understand that the other creatures and civs are from other players and have their "personality." THat doesn't mean they act intelligently when not being controlled by their master. Nor does it mean they present much of a challenge. For example, near the end of the longer video, Wright goes to a another star system, visits a planet, finds that it is hostile, and simply blows up the whole planet. No battle. No challenge. Nothing. Just *poof*, gone. I guess maybe he was just glossing over the features, but I didn't get the feeling that there was much challenge to the whole game. I could be wrong. But that was my impression.

-matthew

Re:Spore looks to be GREAT

[Curien]

"Guided evolution" isn't an oxymoron. "Guided natural selection" would be, though.

Old links

[moral kiosk]

Video of Will Wright's Spore Demo (~35 min): http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8372603330 420559198&q=spore PA's take: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/05/27

Re:Old links

[cloudofstrife]

Penny Arcade must be missing out on something in their view of Spore. If Will Wright and his development team can deliver on half of the things that they featured in the preview, this game will be the most innovative game. Ever.

I don't think that anyone has ever attempted to write a game like this before. Will Wright has a tendency to create games that are ridiculously good (and innovative), and if he keeps the pattern going, Spore will be ridiculously good. One potential issue, though, is that it's trying to do everything (Civilization, MOO, etc.). Will Wright and his team will have to work ridiculously hard to make sure that Spore does all of the things that it does really well.

Re:Old links

[phasm42]

Reading the news portion of the comic may clear things up. Tycho is definitely into Wright's games.

Re:Old links

[Retroneous]

Off topic, but for this...

"It's so much more attractive / inside the moral kiosk."

You absolutely rule. The lyrics made me think of the song which made me think of the alubm which made me finally dig it out of my CD collection which made me play it which made me a happy person which ate the rat that...

GTA model

[Douglas Simmons]

I'm surprised to see people going in the opposite direction that GTA did insofar as raciness considering they had the most successful game. Perhaps it wasn't just GTA's R-ratedness that made it such a hit but the quality of the game itself, and it appears that EA and other companies agree if they're making games about microbes in lieu of cop/whore/pedestrian killer games.

Re:GTA model

[chrismcdirty]

Of course it's the openness of the game that made it so popular, and not the fact that it's outright offensive to a multitude of people. Custer's Revenge had plenty of sex and violence, and a handful of people remember playing it. The Sims, on the other hand, managed to be one of the top selling games of all time by being an open-ended game with no real ending point.

Re:GTA model

[misleb]

What do you mean? It *is* racy. It is about evolution. Hot topic these days. It'll be banned in Churches around the country!

Or is it Intelligent Design? I can't really tell. ;-)

-matthew

Re:GTA model

[Anonymous Coward]

Racy? Wait until you see the custom creature designs people start uploading into the game to be distributed randomly to players. I'm not looking forward to seeing the war of the Dildonians versus the ravenous Buhtmunchi raging back and forth over the grazing fields of my herds of anthropomorphic coffee mugs...

Re:GTA model

[sehryan]

"Or is it Intelligent Design? I can't really tell."

I guess it depends on who is playing it.

Re:GTA model

[Amouth]

"The Sims, on the other hand, managed to be one of the top selling games of all time by being an open-ended game with no real ending point."

I think you ment

"The Sims, on the other hand, managed to be one of the top selling games of all time by being an open-ended game with no real point."

You just had an extra word in there.

Re:GTA model

[Overly Critical Guy]

I'm not surprised by it. Non-violent games like The Sims mean a much wider target audience, as well as appealing more to females.

Re:GTA model

[Cy Sperling]

I think you ment "The Sims, on the other hand, managed to be one of the top selling games of all time by being an open-ended game with no real point."

But isn't the lack of a 'point' a point in and of itself? The beauty of the open ended nature of games like The Sims is that it is the player who determines the goals and play style that they enjoy. It puts the imagination of the player at the center of the game, rather than the imagination of the developer.

Re:GTA model

[br0ck]

opposite direction that GTA did insofar as raciness

Ok, this is definitely tongue in cheek, but game does have it's evil side. It has drive by killing, war, cannibalism, mass genocide, planet destruction, mutilation, and even *gasp* sex..

In the video, the creatures find each other with mating calls and then get it on to funky 80's romance muzak. Now design your creature to look like an anatomically correct human and 'teach' it human-like mating behaviors. (You've got to admit that now that I've mentioned it, anatomical correctness is the very first thing that's going to occur to you as you design the lil guy.) Now your content gets uploaded to the server and as everyone asynchronously downloads it they'll end up involuntarily watching your sordid little sex sim in much higher detail than the hidden / rate M for mature / ridiculously overstated by polititians / pixelated hot coffee mod.

Re:GTA model

[Amouth]

but what are the goals, the achivements. in sim city it is a task to create a working city (and then demolish it :) but for the sims it is as if people are trying to live out lives via a computer game.

I like open ended games to a point.. i don't care too much for a game that has no point at all.

When there isn't a challange is where i see it no longer being a game and more of just a simulation - which makes sence for the sim's but i don't see it as a game

Re:GTA model

[dr.badass]

I'm surprised to see people going in the opposite direction that GTA did insofar as raciness considering they had the most successful game.

I wouldn't be so surprised considering The Sims has sold in excess of 10 million copies. A few million more than GTA:Vice City. Consider also what makes both of them fun: the openness and the different styles of play.

A lot of people look at GTA and see a game where the object is to kill as many people as possible, but if you play the game you find that this is a poor strategy. Likewise people see The Sims and are quick to assume it's all about buying better and better furniture, another poor strategy.

If you really play them, more possibilities open up, and the game becomes more complex, and thus more fun. To excel at GTA you have to get better at driving, evading the police, managing your assets, performing a variety of missions/mini-games. To advance in The Sims you have to get and maintain a job, make friends, form relationships, have children, or do any of the other stuff available in expansion packs.

You can always fall back to stealing cars and running people over, or decorating your house, but that's not the heart of either game.

Re:GTA model

[ucblockhead]

One thing to understand about a "hit" is that in a broad market like games, books, movies, etc., only a small part of the audience has to buy something to be a "hit". If 25% of gamers love GTA-type games and 75% hate GTA-type games, it can still be a huge hit because no game sells to anywhere near 25% of potential buyers. It's why a game like "Civilization IV" can be a "hit" in the same year GTA is. (I know they are from different years, but you get the point.) They aren't necessarily being made a hit by the same buyers.

It's one reason why copying the big hit is often a bad idea. What you really want to do is find what part of the market that is being underserved and make something that appeals to them.

Re:GTA model

[Doctor Faustus]

It is about evolution. Hot topic these days. It'll be banned in Churches around the country!

Or is it Intelligent Design? I can't really tell

Directed evolution. That's what I believed in back when I was still a Christian, and it's what my little sister, the Baptist biologist, believes in.

Re:GTA model

[yppiz]

Just wait until someone discovers the Hot Chordate mod.

--Pat "mod +1 Evolutionary Biology / GTA tie-in"

Re:GTA model

[Maian]

This is just one of those things where it depends on your personality. Some people (including me) just like to craft things, and some (also including me) just like to observe things. I enjoyed the Sims for a while. I guess some people just can't stand not having a goal and just doing things for the sake of doing it. Still, I understand your point of view - the lack of a goal eventually gets to me.

To give an example, I've been playing GalCiv2 a lot recently. And a lot of time was spent not on playing the game, but rather designing ships. The shape of your ship has no impact on gameplay, so it's pointless to waste time building them, right? Some people agree. Yet others including me regard the ship designer feature as a creative outlet. Well, from someone who played Legos all the way thru middle school, that shouldn't be surprising.

Re:GTA model

[FirienFirien]

You don't even need a mod... they made a Care Bear, they made some really quite funky other stuff, and from the look of the editor you can make anything you want so long as it can still walk and eat, or anything at all if you don't mind it getting attacked in short order by a predator. Considering a fair number of people will have a bipedal race with two arms and one head, and human movement is going to be the major component in modelling how bipeds walk in the game, it'll probably be fairly easy to create a race of naked women. Creative use of eyes for texture.

There'll probably be muttering about it, but if EA censor anything that looks like a woman then someone will release a patch to get round the censor and /that/ will be picked up by the media; there's a mild chance that the simple ability to create naked people will cause minor uproar, but the look and feel of the game put it such a way away from the likes of GTA and the lawsuits that have been zooming around there that it probably won't be an issue.

But who wants to model a human? There's already mention of winged predators, which means that flying is in the game; it's unclear whether you can have an underwater civilization until you have pressure domes. But the game has no end and no win (other than going ET, which is like reaching top rank in your job in the Sims... and soon ditching the job and starting elsewhere), and no lose (unless you get eaten/starve/etc, on which it hasn't yet been made clear whether you respawn in another species-member, or start over, or what...). The entire game is about creativity; while some will no doubt make those naked women, the rest of us will get our naked women somewhere more realistic and get on with playing the game more creatively.

Re:GTA model

[realnowhereman]

All evolution is directed.

Re:GTA model

[Doctor Faustus]

The output of any version of evolution is directed through natural selection. I'm talking about having the input directed, though, so that it's more like "Let's see how this works." than random mutations.

Re:GTA model

[Amouth]

It that case i agree it is a creative outlet and i enjoy it alot (i love building with Legos) but that is only one aspect of the game, there is the other side that has goals.

Acheiving the goals is what makes me want to play the game, the creative aspect lets me enjoy a game more.

if all there is is a creative side with no goals i would rather be painting.. atleast i have something worth something at the end of the day

Re:GTA model

[MindStalker]

Which is the great spark of this game. Its a very directed game, and the ending presents you effectivly with an openended sim, where among other things it appears to allow you to create the contructs for your next game (where you start back as a cell but in a world totally precreated by you.. or someone else).

Re:GTA model

[Amouth]

that is fine for spore infact that would be one of the best ideas..

expecialy if they make it online where everyone starts out at the same time in one place.. then as people join they have to grow in the world that the comunity has created (for online sakes only)

Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[G)-(ostly]

How long until the lunatic right fringe elements start screaming over the subject matter, or until Jack Thompson files a (doomed to fail) lawsuit on the grounds that it dehumanizes human life and makes kids into killers who think their victims are nothing more than petri-dish bug projects?

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[caffeinemessiah]

There's a more obvious boycott on the horizon -- Pat Robertson et al. denounce the game as an assault on the Bible. It teaches kids the wrong things about how life is created. BLASPHEMY!!!! I can see EB Games stores around the country picketed by nice old ladies and zealous preachers in rural Pennsylvania picking up the "cause" for their sunday sermons.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[G)-(ostly]

I don't think it teaches anything about how life was created. It's about evolution, and evolution has no solid say on that particular question at the moment.

It teaches about how life, once it existed in its simplest form, got to be so complex. That's not the same thing. Not that Pat Robertson is capable of making such an important distinction, since the odds that he's even slightly acquainted with reality anymore are pretty much null, but I still felt the need to make that point.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[nuzak]

> Pat Robertson et al. denounce the game as an assault on the Bible. It teaches kids the wrong things about how life is created. BLASPHEMY!!!!

You drag and drop body elements onto your new lifeform in order to give it new abilities. If that's not intelligent design, I don't know what is.

Of course, the man's got pretty much nothing but hate, so unless EA releases "Abject Grovelling And Supplication To Almighty Pat^H^H^HGod" then he'd hate it anyway. Let's try an experiment: how much would you have to give me for me to actually care what he thinks?

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[Overly Critical Guy]

Ignoring your typical, condescending, vehemently anti-religious comment about a large cross-section of normal folks with a certain set of faith beliefs you happen to disagree with in an attempt to feel enlightened, this game is great in that you can interpret your input in the game as the natural hand of evolution, or you can interpret it as God shaping the development of the creatures. Whichever floats your boat.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[n2art2]

I would say it could do the exact opposite. Ironicly it involves ideas from both "evolution" More correctly "Darwinism", as well as ideas from "Intelligent Design" Maybe it's "rightwinged" and a "leftest" all wrapped up in one Microbe.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[G)-(ostly]

Ignoring your typical, condescending, vehemently anti-religious comment about a large cross-section of normal folks with a certain set of faith beliefs you happen to disagree with in an attempt to feel enlightened...

The fringe I speak of is comprised of "a large cross-section of normal folks"? Who have a "certain set of faith beliefs [sic]"?

Congratulations, you just called the typical Christian church-goer a fringe lunatic because you were offended by my comment regarding an actual fringe of lunatics that, by definition, had nothing to do with the typical Christian church-goer.

Maybe you should spend a little less time being a reactionary, overly-critical zealot so that you have some extra open time to think before you post stupid comments like that.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[n2art2]

Well said. What he said. . . That's what I'm talking about.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[Gilatrout]

If God did not want us to eat spores, the God would not have made them so tasty.

I like my spores in a cream sauce, with just a dash of freshly ground pepper.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[Anonymous Coward]

Username delivers.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[katsiris]

Parent may be flamebair but I think more importantly it's insightful. It could be interpreted as the hand of God guiding development, especially since it appears that the evolutionary parts don't spawn themselves, but rather, are selected by the God/player.

And of course, there are plenty of games that allow players to be God in various ways that haven't raised an uproar. Hopefully the fact that it's a game, it's non-violent, and it seems to require some intervention (I might say divine were that not self-aggrandizing) to work.

Slightly more on topic, I think a move to innovative games by EA is just what the doctor ordered, good on them for not moving the same direction as Hollywood and the music industry, trying to increase profits by flooding the market with garbage. Quality, my friends, quality. People like Will Wright, Sid Meier, Peter Molyneux, and hell, Tim Schafer are just the ones to look to.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[HiThere]

E/A. Those are the people who are engaging in unfair labor practices aren't they? I can think of other reasons for a boycott than those based around fanaticism. Enlightened self-interest comes to mind.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[Anonymous Coward]

Creationists aren't a large cross-section of normal folks and making fun of them isn't anti-religious, it's anti-ignorance.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[Overly Critical Guy]

The fringe I speak of is comprised of "a large cross-section of normal folks"? Who have a "certain set of faith beliefs [sic]"?

No, you're calling a large cross-section of normal folks a "fringe." Get the difference?

Congratulations, you just called the typical Christian church-goer a fringe lunatic

No, you did.

Maybe you should spend a little less time being a reactionary, overly-critical zealot so that you have some extra open time to think before you post stupid comments like that.

Maybe you should spend a little more time learning actual debate skills instead of calling people names like "reactionary, overly-critical zealot." You don't even know what my religious beliefs are (non-Christian). But I'm tired of the vehemently anti-Christian, anti-any-religion mindset on Slashdot that says anything that dares suggest a creator is somehow "lunatic fringe."

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[Burz]

But I'm tired of the vehemently anti-Christian, anti-any-religion mindset on Slashdot that says anything that dares suggest a creator is somehow "lunatic fringe."

Oh OK.

But the Spaghetti Monster wants to have a word with you...

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[G)-(ostly]

See, the problem with you is that you think that what you say is the way things are. Unfortunately for you, everyone can always go back and read my original post, and note - via the basic reading comprehension that you so grandly display no pretense of having - that what you're bitching about in it apparently only exists in your tiny, demented brain.

But I'm tired of the vehemently anti-Christian, anti-any-religion mindset on Slashdot ...

Then maybe you should stop posting and making normal Christians look like screaming retards, because making things up to be offended by sure does make you look like a lunatic fringe member...

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[gunmod]

Jack Thompson is a petri-dish bug.

Re:Queue Boycott In 5.. 4.. 3..

[DataCannibal]

I tend to boycott queues as well. I just hate standing in lines

Article text

[Anonymous Coward]

Electronic Arts: A Radical New Game Plan
The gaming giant is ditching tired tie-ins for more daring, interactive video game ideas

Video game giant Electronic Arts Inc. (ERTS ) had a very simple formula for success: base a product on a popular sports or movie franchise, spend a fortune marketing it, and then push out a new version of that game year after year. The strategy netted big bucks with games based on the Harry Potter, James Bond, and Lord of the Rings movies, as well as with EA'S Madden NFL series. It also delighted investors with a reliable stream of revenue in the notoriously hit-or-miss video game business. In 2005, the company landed the No. 34 spot on the BusinessWeek 50 list of top corporate performers.

But now EA is stumbling, and a big part of its time-tested strategy is about to change. The company hopes that its next mega-franchise will revolve not around a football star, a boy wizard, or a dashing British spy, but...a microbe. The game is called Spore. Developed by Will Wright, the creator of SimCity and The Sims, it lets players design an invertebrate in its primordial stages and then guide its evolution until the creature's offspring develop into a thriving civilization with cities, religion, and spaceships. EA's ambitious goal is to create more such innovative, internally developed games while lessening the company's dependence on professional sports and Hollywood movie franchises.

SLUGGISH SALES
The plan is nothing if not challenging. It's forcing EA's president of Worldwide Studios, Paul Lee, to rethink the way the company creates games and to figure out a way to transform a risk-averse organization known for its operational efficiency into a hotbed of creativity. Lee has little choice. Movie studios and sports leagues are driving the costs of licenses higher, while video game sales have stayed sluggish. Making matters worse, EA flubbed its debut on Microsoft's new Xbox 360 console, failing to grab its usual No. 1 market share and losing out to smaller competitor Activision (ATVI ) Inc. Although the company's revenues, an estimated $3.3 billion to $3.4 billion for the fiscal year ending on Mar. 31, remain more than twice the size of its next-largest U.S. competitor, it has either lowered or missed its earnings guidance for the past six quarters. The reasons include delayed games, higher-than-expected development costs, and disappointing sales of key titles.

To reverse the slide, Lee needs the EA home team to hit a few home runs. He wants to push the number of games based on internally created concepts above 50% of EA's total portfolio in the next 12 to 18 months, from about 30% today, and create at least one new franchise a year. The company is aggressively snapping up marquee talent ranging from award-winning game designer Doug Church to movie director Steven Spielberg, who will consult on the story lines of three original games. It is also building a brand-new development studio in Montreal that will focus entirely on cooking up new, original titles. With some $3 billion in cash and zero debt, EA is also eager to acquire independent studios.

At the heart of the Redwood City (Calif.) company's mission is figuring out how to inject creativity into its 6,100-employee operation without losing control. Most development houses typically rely on tightly knit groups of 40 or so programmers, artists, and designers, who focus on one game from start to finish for 12 to 18 months. Many such studios are wholly owned by large game publishers but have tremendous autonomy. And these little outfits have created some of the most imaginative and best-selling games today, from the Grand Theft Auto series, which came out of Take-Two Interactive Software Inc. (TTWO ) subsidiary Rockstar North (TTWO ), to Halo, which was created by Microsoft Corp. (MSFT )-owned studio Bungie. Studios in this model "create an environment where creative control goes without question, and the voices around the table are all supporting the same vision," says John Riccitiello, a former

I'll start being interested when it comes out.

[Guspaz]

Seriously, the game has been in development for quite a while, and there has been no news of late of a potential release date. I'm excited about the game, sure, but until it comes out, I don't care if EA thinks it is going to save them or not.

Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[Opportunist]

Or really something new?

That would be something new for EA.

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[danpsmith]

It's really something new. If you watch the demonstration, this game is basically many games in one. You start off as a microbe basically eating other micro-organisms in order to gain strength or points or whatever and trying not to get killed by other microbes. As you evolve you eventually go from bacteria->sea creature->land creature, then after you are finished that evolution, tribes form allowing you to have control over the tribe. After this cities form and a civ like game goes on. After you have populated the whole world you can leave your home planet and populate others. Magnificent. The most impressive bit had to have been when I saw him drop a creature from one planet onto a moon and the creature simply exploded because the moon had no atmosphere. Then there's the fact that this will use an online database to link up everyone's creatures and try to maintain an eco system. I mean, I honestly think this game is a little bit more than a "sim" something. It's more like a computer incarnation of the living breathing thing, maybe a little sillier looking, but very scaled and nice otherwise.

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[RedLaggedTeut]

Well, it looks like it would work more like an RTS than a simulation - much cooler than stomping out bots with your delete tool in SimEarth

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[Jugalator]

From the videos I've seen, it's nowhere near Sim Earth (that was a lot about controlling climate) or Sim Life (that wasn't about organisms evolving to anything else than other organisms).

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[misleb]

I can easily imagine that trying to cram all of those games into one could backfire. I mean, isn't that how it works with gadgets? Try to cram too many features into a device with a restricted max price tag, and you just get a device that can't perform any of its many functions very well. Is software, and games in particular, too much different?

Then again, it could just work. Look at GTA. You coudl do a lot in GTA. Drive cars, fly planes, FPS, role playing.. The aspects weren't all great individually, but together it made a well rounded game.

The problem I see with Spore is that it may not be so open ended as a game like GTA. In GTA you could go anywhere and play any sub-game at any time. Although you still had to progress and open things up. Spore looks like the player will be forced to leave the "Sim-City" and move on to the next sub-game whether they like it or not. What if a player wants to focuse on the Sim-City aspect? Or come back to it after colonizing other planets? Things I'd like to know.

-matthew

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[Trixter]

"It's really something new."

Maybe in scope, but not in idea. There was a Dreamcast game (whose name escapes me right now) that did exactly the same thing: You started life as a lower organism, and evolved.

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[danpsmith]

There was a sega genesis game like this as well which I found entertaining. I'm not saying that this is the first time that evolution has been tried before. Nothing I've ever seen does this to any depth even similar. You aren't just following a linear path, you design from the ground up, leg by leg, arm by arm, brain by brain, each new incarnation of the creature. And once you get into the whole balanced eco-system and online database bit, it's just, it's definitely an achievement if it turns out anything like the demo would have you believe.

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[danpsmith]

The problem I see with Spore is that it may not be so open ended as a game like GTA. In GTA you could go anywhere and play any sub-game at any time. Although you still had to progress and open things up. Spore looks like the player will be forced to leave the "Sim-City" and move on to the next sub-game whether they like it or not. What if a player wants to focuse on the Sim-City aspect? Or come back to it after colonizing other planets? Things I'd like to know.

I'm not 100% on this but from my understanding, initially you may be forced to leave areas of the game. However, once the main goals of the game are accomplished, it is my understanding that the sandbox portion of the game is most of it. That is to say that basically put: the player is forced to go through the game in order to understand how to use the creation toys along the way. After that, it looks like it's pretty freeform.

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[modecx]

I mean, isn't that how it works with gadgets? Try to cram too many features into a device with a restricted max price tag, and you just get a device that can't perform any of its many functions very well.

Well, I dunno, Swiss Army type knives have been very popular throughout the years.

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[Allison Geode]

yeah, and Seventh cross: evolution was absolute and utter garbage. don't try to compare that to this: its a similar idea, but this looks to actually be *playable*

a better example would be E.V.O. on the snes. at least that game didn't suck.

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[drachenstern]

okay, while i'm pretty much a huge sim* fan, just like (everybody else on this site)-10%, i never, for the life of me, had the time or motivation to figure either one of those out. were they really good games?

ah, for the love of no school and no work

and my $.02 on the article, "Yay! Another WW game!!!"

Re:Sim Earth / Sim Life sequel?

[jafuser]

From the video, I got the impression that you can always stay where you are, or go back levels, but you have to accumulate accomplishments to proceed to the next "evolutionary step".

obl. gary larson

[pimpimpim]

Reminds me of a "far side" cartoon: Movie Concepts Walt Disney Never Brought to Cinema:
"Bert the adventurous amoebe"
"Andy the sandworm"
etc :)

Re:obl. gary larson

[clem]

So until next time, "Adios, Amoebos!"

Re:obl. gary larson

[Avatar8]

Actually, they should give credit to Matt Groenig.

This game premise sounds exactly like the science project Lisa did where she placed her tooth in a petri dish and it developed into a micro-civilization worshipping her.

None of this sounds original to me, and I'm still banning ALL EA products after the way they ruined Ultima Online and for the way they treat their employees.

There's a great demo video

[Anonymous Coward]

with Will Wright himself narrating whats going on. It's over at google video. It's 35 minutes long, but it looks to be an amazing game and there's a lot of humor in Wright's presentation. Give it a watch if you've got 35 minutes to kill.

-Nis

Spore's orginal name was:

[Anonymous Coward]

Billy and the Intelligent Design workshop.

They had to tone it down a little.

Re:Spore's orginal name was:

[OSS_ilation]

Building off of that, I've heard the adult entertainment industry has already secured rights for their version of the game, called Sperm.

Neat Spore Demo Video on google video

[mephistus]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-262774490 184348066&q=spore

It's about 35 minutes long, but it's pretty sweet.

Intelligent Design Simulator

[withears]

Conservatives feel that Spore will open the way to fully immersing our youth into the Intelligent Design movement.

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[shelterpaw]

Conservatives feel that Spore will open the way to fully immersing our youth into the Intelligent Design movement.

Liberals hope that Spore will open the way to fully immersing our youth into bi-transsexual organisms with no morals or values. :P

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[Cy Sperling]

Actually, I think it is quite the opposite. It makes a very compelling case for the mechanics of evolution. Granted, the player exerts a guiding hand over mutations, but the whole point of the game is to grow organisms from single cells all the way to intelligent extra-planetary species. This is achieved by progressive mutations that, hopefully, give the newer organsim an advantage in it's environment. Intelligent design proposes that fully-formed complex creatures simply sprang forth onto the earth from a 'designers' hand. The beauty of Spore is that you cannot create your creatures with the end result in mind. You start with a single cell and intervene with it's design at intervals based on it's ability to succeed in the environment. You would never get to simply sculpt an intelligent humanoid from clay, give it a soul and toss it out into the world. Instead your end-game form is dependant on a multidue of generational mutations which were each a reaction to a gradually changing environment. Add in the fact that the other creatures in your world can be comprised of the creations of other players and, if anything, you get polytheism- multiple creators whose 'children' compete for success in the universe.

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[Ph00p]

wtf? are they retarded or something? This game is about EVOLUTION and everything evolves, the only ID stuff is when you go to another planet.

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[Anonymous Coward]

There'll be a few intelligent designers behind the keyboard of this game, true.
But looking at the typical game player as of late, the vast majority will be simulating the dumb luck of evolution.

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[Anonymous Coward]

Opposed to liberals who have the urge to stab the cell with a coat hanger before it evolves!!!

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[prell]

Two questions:

1. When does this come out?

2. Will it run on my new iMac 20" (w/ 2.0GHz Intel Core Duo)?

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[Eagle5596]

You seem to miss the point of Intelligent Design, it is "guided evolution", ala Spore.

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[Anonymous Coward]

Since you, the player, get to choose what changes are made to your organism, you can't really classify them as 'mutations' unless you were rolling dice to make your choices (Which could be interesting to see how bad/good your survial rate would be). In addition, I believe that in the UFO stage of game you will be able to sculpt intelligent humanoids and other complex species. It all smacks of intelligent design to me ;-)

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[Anonymous Coward]

1. After you stop waving your cock around

2. Probably not, because your cock isn't compatible with a pussy

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[lisaparratt]

Bi-transsexual organisms with no morals or values hope that Spore will open the way to fully immersing themselves in our youth liberally ;)

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[prell]

Hey, at least now we'll have a choice other than "Scantily-clad woman with back problems A," "Scantily-clad woman with back problems B," and "Illogically-clad woman enhanced with mammary-bouncing algorithm." :-)

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[xtracto]

oh man unfortunately I do not have mod points but I would really mod you up, I have not laughed in some time because of a slashdot comment, yours is a nice one =-)

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[Damek]

Nope, it's closer to Intelligent Design than evolution. Here's why. Evolution has a number of aspects:

1) Randomness. When new alleles appear, they are the result of random recombination/error/mutation. However, it appears that in Spore, the player has control over new traits, choosing them as they go. Changes are not a result of natural recombination or random error/mutation.

2) Environmental pressure. A population changes over time when the frequency of alleles changes, often because the environment selects for or against certain traits. In the Spore game, it seems that the player can pick whatever traits he wants, tailoring the organism to its environment. Sure, the player may find that, for example, the short legs he chose makes the creature move too slowly so it's always getting eaten, so he has to reload his earlier game and choose different legs. That's almost natural selection, but not quite.

3) everything else... Everything that follows from gene pool dynamics and random changes (genetic drift, migration, the bottleneck effect)... These things don't seem to be represented in the game at all.

It's entirely an analogy to Intelligent Design.

Not that it makes it a bad game - I'm sure going to enjoy it if it delivers most of what it promises. But it has very little to do with evolution.

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[DerWulf]

I agree. Also, it's probalby worth to mention that the simulation of evolution would make for quite a boring game. There just wouldn't be anything to do for the player, let alone anything to be "build" by the player.

Re:Intelligent Design Simulator

[Damek]

Well, you could create an interesting game of "guided" evolution, where they player gets to make continuous modifications to the environment(s) and see how the organisms evolve to adapt to them. Make your own Earth! Play with geological history!

But then you're just moving the design from biology to geology & astrophysics (solar radiation, etc. could be mutable, too)...

Now YOU can be the FSM

[snowwrestler]

and then guide its evolution until the creature's offspring develop into a thriving civilization with cities, religion, and spaceships.

Game sponsored by the Intelligent Design Network.

Re:Now YOU can be the FSM

[eddy]

be the FSM... Is that the Finite State Machine or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

One can only pray

[kid_oliva]

I hope EA can pull it off. I remember when they were a young company and had some innovation. Now I pun there motto to "Crap! It's in the game." They have become the masters of cookie cutting. Although the game idea does seem to bear some resemblance to Seaman that Sega put out back in the day. let's see if they cann make a game with no cookie cutters included.

Good idea, misguided goal

[the grace of R'hllor]

"Innovative" and "franchise" are incompatible terms. A franchise, after all, is exploiting an existing idea, and is all about "same". A game like Spore, should it be succesful, will be succesful because it is unique, not because there are a zillion and one Spore-a-likes.

On whether the game will be succesful; it's essentially a new gametype (or mix thereof) by an industry vet, it's being hyped to hell and back, and it's got the backing of EA. I hear echoes of Black and White, and the echoes do not sound good.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[G)-(ostly]

The innovation creates the franchise. Try to keep up.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[catch23]

Spore is not black and white. Besides, given Will Wright's background, I don't think he will produce a failed game. Everything he has done in the past has been borderline amazing. He's one sharp cookie and although I don't think Spores will have the success of The Sims, it will still be at least as popular as his other Sim-type games.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"Innovative" and "franchise" are incompatible terms. "

Wrong. See Super Mario Brothers.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[Anonymous Coward]

This is Will "Everything I say, I will do" Wright, not Peter "Everything I say, happens in my mind" Molyneux.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[twosmokes]

I know sarcasm when I see it.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think that was sarcasm, I'd recommend you do a little more studying.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[Urusai]

Peter Molyneux had a good record, too. Yes, Spore is sounding like Black and White--where's the game? Well, I could ask the same question about the Sims, but I've never played it and never will.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm worried a bit about the contradiction + hype. It's a bit much. Not only that, but if it is so revolutionary, it's still a rev0 for that technology. From what I can tell, the details of the game are pretty dynamic based on user input, the end-game is flying saucers with ray guns. The gameplay changes in stages depending on how far you get. The game is also antisocial (in game), though I'm sure the bulletin boards will be on fire with guru pontifications and newbie begging.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[Fred Smythe]

You clearly have never played SimGolf.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[Anonymous Coward]

Molyneux had a good record in the Bullfrog days. I bought everything with the Bullfrog logo without reservation. Since then, it's been downhill. From flawed games like Black and White to mediocre games that don't live up to the hype like Fable.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[Eli Gottlieb]

Spore isn't Black and White. In Black and White, you couldn't design organisms. In Spore, you design everything. In Black and White, you had enemy gods. In Spore, you have natural selection.

They are different.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[KDR_11k]

If you don't see where the game is you haven't seen the demonstration. It can be like Pacman, a hack & slay, The Sims with aliens, Civ, SimEarth or Master of Orion. It doesn't have a point where it tells you "congrats, you've beat the game" but there is definitely always a task (expand) and challenge (don't go extinct) present.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[the grace of R'hllor]

In Black and White you have enemy gods, in Spore you have enemy cities, and in both cases your critters do battle. You have little direct control over your subjects, and the game is more or less open-ended. Designing orgamisms is a (fun!) gameplay gimmick, not in itself gameplay. I see parallels here, and it has me slightly worried, insofar as I worry about these things.

Mind you, I think it *appears* great, and the video demo was fun (had me in stitches a few times; that diplomatic 'first contact' bit was great, as were the creature designs), but there has to be gameplay. We didn't see a whole lot of the gameplay mechanics in the video, probably because they weren't done yet. Talk of 'procedurally generated' and 'emergent behaviour' is all nice, but such claims were made earlier.

I am also worried about the lack of (talk about) synchronous multiplayer. At some point I'd want to pop my civilization online, have colonial wars and biological exchanges with critters actually being watched by another player. Hell, leave the world available online for others, so that when I get back there might be a whole range of critters on my world I wasn't aware of. Just disable the planet-pounders.

Black and White was a great toy, but not a particularly good game. I wonder if Spore will do better. This mindless optimism, however, is never a good idea for any game, by any developer.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[ctr2sprt]

On whether the game will be succesful; it's essentially a new gametype (or mix thereof) by an industry vet, it's being hyped to hell and back, and it's got the backing of EA. I hear echoes of Black and White, and the echoes do not sound good.

That's exactly right. Any significant departure from what's been done a billion times runs the risk of being a dud. In fact, I'm sure that Spore will have a lot of annoying problems and frustrating bugs. Which I think is why EA sees franchise potential for it, perversely. The first Spore - sequels may not be called "Spore 2," they may just be similar in terms of gameplay and approach - will help future developers identify things that need to be improved and expanded on. Subsequent games can address Spore's inevitable shortcomings until they get it right.

For example, the multiplayer aspect of Spore seems very MMO-like. I can definitely imagine a galactic conquest metagame being built in or added on later. What EA's after with its franchises are a steady, recurring revenue stream, and MMOs sure give that. With the added bonus that all the new content is designed by players!

Mainly what Wright needs to do is make a game that's good enough that people will buy it, which will demonstrate to everybody that his basic idea is sound. From there he and others can just keep working until they get it right. I very much hope they're successful. Spore is the game I've wanted since I first started playing computer games. Which I guess is the source of the hype: it's the game everyone's always wanted.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[Wes Janson]

You seem to be the only other person here who actually watched the video with an eye towards gameplay.

In my estimation, there's several big warning signs that Spore is going to be a disappointment once people start playing. First, those procedures Wright kept talking about in the video had better be both damned detailed, and broad enough to allow serious innovation. He shows us that the engine can handle a three or four legged creature, but can it cope with one leg? None? Crawling mechanisms? Wings-for-legs? More importantly, can it do each of those things in a reasonably convincing manner? The crux of the early game is going to be its capacity for creativity, and Wright's previous games may not provide an accurate scale for comparison, because I don't believe anything he's ever produced has required anywhere near the level of complexity Spore will need.

At the higher levels, I fail to see how this game is offering us anything new. We've got some sort of cartoony small-scale RTS, followed by an open-ended space exploration. I'm sorry, but years and years of Starcraft, Command & Conquer, Total Annihilation, Age of Empires, etc etc have jaded the market. Wright's proposing that an entire segment of Spore consist of an ambiguous attempt at a genre that already possesses a very high standards level. How can this possibly be a good idea?

Once the player is finally set loose in the galaxy, the inevitable question is what they're going to do. This might have real potential, but only if the game designers prevent it from becoming stale. Allowing real-time multiplayer interaction would have to be on a non-competitive basis, but the question becomes what activities a fleet of Genesis-ray-equipped flying saucers can do together.

The definition of a good game is one that people can enjoy playing for a long time. If Spore can provide continuing entertainment value past the first few hours, then perhaps it might make for a great game. But based on what's been shown so far, with vague gameplay and questionable mechanics, I'm not holding out hope that Spore will be a success.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[DerekLyons]

Spore is not black and white. Besides, given Will Wright's background, I don't think he will produce a failed game.

On one hand he has produced two sucesses (Sim City and The Sims) and a slew of derivative sequels... OTOH, he has a whole raftload of also-rans and failures, SimFarm, Sim Earth, Sim Health, Sim Isle...

Everything he has done in the past has been borderline amazing. He's one sharp cookie and although I don't think Spores will have the success of The Sims, it will still be at least as popular as his other Sim-type games.

That's damming with faint praise given the full track record. His greatest sucesses lie in creating endless sequels to already sucessful games.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[skasingularity]

Heh, it's funny that you mention hype, because I heard about this from a friend, who heard about it from a friend, then saw other people watching the google video, etc. Basically, I've heard a lot of people really excited about this game, why? Because they've seen the video that makes it look like the coolest game ever. Might we be wrong? Perhaps, but this is still one of the first games in a while that makes me want to spend money, and that's all that really matters for a successful game.

Oh, and as far as multiplayer support, it might happen one day, but there are problems. If you watch the video to the end you'll see that you can eventually destroy planets... all it would take in a multiplayer is one jerk with that sort of advancement to ruin a whole lot of people's long work.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[prell]

In the video, I heard Will say that world/universe data from other users would be downloaded and then simulated on your computer. I actually like that idea, so you don't have to worry about lag and whatnot. And it can allow the computer to keep the game more balanced as you advance and do different things, which sounds like a fundamental game mechanic from what I understand. "Flashing" the universe would just keep things interesting and dynamic. I'm very interested to see how it works.

Re:Good idea, misguided goal

[DerWulf]

At the higher levels, I fail to see how this game is offering us anything new. We've got some sort of cartoony small-scale RTS, followed by an open-ended space exploration. I'm sorry, but years and years of Starcraft, Command & Conquer, Total Annihilation, Age of Empires, etc etc have jaded the market. Wright's proposing that an entire segment of Spore consist of an ambiguous attempt at a genre that already possesses a very high standards level. How can this possibly be a good idea?

Integration, the creation of meaning the spans the different mini-games. The reason why I like Rome:Total War better than C&C (strictly a better RTS than the RTW mini-RTS game) and Civ (strictly a better "world" game) is that your actions from one part carry over to the others. Battles become more meaningful when I *know* why I fight them instead of relying on a cut-scene General to inform me. Strategy becomes more exiting when I know that I don't have to rely on good odds but instead can counter superior numbers with better tactics.

Thats one of the reasons I think Spore will be awesome: Your actions will have far reaching consequences, some that might even enter into the game of other players (I intend to create the deadliest species in the galaxy ;)
Secondly, I think you underestimate how important customization has become. The possible choices shown in the spore video already seem enough to allow for millions and millions of unique species. People absolutely love to design something that is "their" own.

Cheat codes?

[dr_dank]

I wonder if Spore will have an Intelligent Design cheat code that would skip you right to homosapien and win the game.

Re:Cheat codes?

[semifamous]

Homosapien wins?

Huh?

What planet do you live on?

Have you seen what current homosapiens are doing?

Re:Cheat codes?

[retinaburn]

Maybe cheat codes like Flying Spaghetti Monster and Pastafarian ? ;)

Re:Cheat codes?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm on earth, and I'm pretty sure the homo sapiens have won. I haven't seen any other species build civilizations, archive history, or launch space flights.

Re:Cheat codes?

[PortHaven]

Actually, the whole game is an 'intelligent design' model. (Well, okay, maybe not when you're playing it.)

I think you want a God-mode where you simply go from dirt => to sentient species.

Probably...

Re:Cheat codes?

[Peteresch]

I think you want a God-mode where you simply go from dirt => to sentient species.

Get your own dirt. - God

Re:Cheat codes?

[MindStalker]

Depends upon what you call winning. On a primarily how many cells do I have scale barteria have won.. Game over. The multicellular life was an evolutionary mistake sadly it believes its won... :)

Re:Cheat codes?

[Gulthek]

Dude. Bacteria. The planet belongs to the microscopic.

They survived billions of years without us, yet we wouldn't last a minute without them. All macroscopic life is an evolutionary abberation.

Re:Cheat codes?

[Yst]

I believe what sets it apart from an intelligent design situation, and one of the reasons Will Wright isn't wrong to refer to it as an evolution game, is that the player cannot really know that his designs are intelligent. You might start to see patterns and start to use them, but as the god of this god game, you start out rather naive. Almost completely naive, regarding the potential benefits of various characteristics, beyond the level of "legs make things walk" and "mouths let things eat," etc, and even those assumptions are likely to be inadequate or confused. You're really just trying things and seeing what happens. And you can learn from your mistakes.

So I consider it either the game of a god who is exceptionally stupid and impotent, or an evolution game.

Re:Cheat codes?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if Spore will have an Intelligent Design cheat code that would skip you right to homosapien and win the game.

I know nothing of the game, but it would be REALLY cool if regular gameplay provided an evolution path beyond homo sapien.

Re:Cheat codes?

[AniamL]

It's homo sapiens, which is Latin for wise man. Homosapien doesn't even really make sense. (Sorry, I need to make my study of classics useful)...

Re:Cheat codes?

[Jerf]

All macroscopic life is an evolutionary abberation.

If you get right down to it, "evolutionary abberation" is either an oxymoron, or redundant, depending on your definition of abberation, but at no point is that a useful statement.

It's important to realize that humans aren't the absolute unparalled masters of the living world in every conceivable manner. It's equally important not to make the opposite error. Macroscopic life is Mother Earth's only significant hope of actually getting off the planet on a big scale, for instance, and "macroscopic life" is only a hair's breadth on the cosmic scale from effectively enslaving microscopic life. (Even if we humans muck it up, I'd bet somebody or something cracks the problem before the sun wipes life from the planet.)

Macroscopic life exists because it works.

Re:Cheat codes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Homosapiens?

If it has an ID cheat code it will create heterosapiens!

Re:Cheat codes?

[Vicissidude]

"macroscopic life" is only a hair's breadth on the cosmic scale from effectively enslaving microscopic life

Why? Because we use them to make our pharmaceuticals, convert biomass to fuel, etc, etc? Considering we're supplying the microbes with food and energy, it sounds more like we are serving them! We just find something useful to do with their waste...

Re:Cheat codes?

[Gulthek]

Check out ye olde tree of life. We macro creatures are a paltry, small piece. We beat the odds for existing in a big, big way.

Now, as far as getting off the planet and anthropomorphizing Earth by giving it the desire to spread its apples: we already have Mars rocks on Earth, why not microscopic life bearing rocks from Earth on other planets?

Yes, macroscopic life does indeed exist because it works. Obviously. But you must recognize that our existence is not a pinnacle of evolution, not a spire, not even a foothill.

Now to your big, big flaw. We and no other macroscopic lifeform on Earth are in any way even remotely by any measurement of any kind anywhere close to "enslaving microscopic life." Not even on the cosmic scale. Not in a thousand, million, or billion years.

Retake an intro Biology course. We completely depend on microscopic life to LIVE. They don't just make life more comfortable, or easier, or help us along in a small way; we are utterly dependent on our symbiotic relationship with bacteria to support us.

But, for the millions of years on Earth before we macros came onto the scene microscopic life puttered along quite well. Sure they've adapted to exploit the chemical and biological riches that our bodies offer, but they are not dependent on us in the slightest.

Lesse, maybe I can provide you with some intro material...

Ah! Stephen Jay Gould's "Planet of the Bacteria".

Some quotes:


Bacteria exist in such overwhelming number and such unparalleled variety; they live in such a wide range of environments and work in so many unmatched modes of metabolism. Our shenanigans, nuclear and otherwise, might easily lead to our own destruction in the foreseeable future. We might take most of the large terrestrial vertebrates with us--a few thousand species at most.

I doubt that we could ever substantially touch bacterial diversity. The modal organisms cannot be nuked into oblivion or very much affected by any of our considerable conceivable malfeasances. ...

The accompanying chart, adapted from the work of Carl Woese, our greatest pioneer in this new constitution of life, says it all, with the maximally stunning device of a revolutionary picture. We now have a system of three grand evolutionary domains--Bacteria, Archaea and Eucarya--and two of the three consist entirely of prokaryotes: that is, "bacteria" in the vernacular, the inhabitants of life's constant mode. Once we place two-thirds of evolutionary diversity at life's mode, we have much less trouble grasping the centrality of this location and the constant domination of life by bacteria.

For example, the domain of Bacteria, as presently defined, contains several major subdivisions, and the genetic distance between any pair is at least equal to the average separation between eukaryotic kingdoms such as plants and animals.

Note, by contrast, the restricted domain of all three multicellular kingdoms. On this genealogical chart for all life, the three multicellular kingdoms form three little twigs on the bush of just one among three grand domains of life. Quite a change in one generation--from my parents' learning that everything living must be animal or vegetable, to the icon of my mature years: the kingdoms Animalia and Plantae as two little twigs amid a plethora of other branches on one of three bushes, with both other bushes growing bacteria, and only bacteria, all over. ...

Consider two aspects of ubiquity:

1. Numbers. Bacteria inhabit effectively every place suitable for the existence of life. Mother told you, after all, that bacterial "germs" require constant vigilance to combat their ubiquity in every breath and every mouthful, and the vast majority of bacteria are benign or irrelevant to us, not harmful agents of disease. One fact will suffice: during the course of life, the number of E. coli in the gut of each human being far

Re:Cheat codes?

[AutopsyReport]

If you think humans are at the top of the food chain, I suspect if you haven't been outdoors very much in your life. How powerless we really all is due to perspective, and thinking the opposite is due to a lack of.

Re:Cheat codes?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have seen what they are doing... KILLING EVERYTHING IN SIGHT! If that's not the mark of an (admittedly unwise) victor, I don't know what is.

Re:Cheat codes?

[KDR_11k]

That's because you haven't spotted the Vogon demolisher fleet yet. (Spore allows you to interact with other planets, another race may send its fleet over and destroy your planet)

Re:Cheat codes?

[Jerf]

You're assuming a much smaller time scale than I am. Ultimately, intelligence will beat microbes, in the sense that we will use them and they won't be able to harm us. Failing to specify what you mean by "significance" is disingenuous here. The idea that they are infinitely adaptable has attained "dogma" status... but it's not true. They have limits, and those limits are less than the limits of intelligence.

We completely depend on microscopic life to LIVE.

We won't be. At least not bacteria we don't intimately control every abspect of, in pontential if not in fact. As our knowledge frontier advances, we are increasingly less tolerant of anything that can reach out and smack us unexpectedly. This trend will not cease anytime soon.

Besides, "mass" is an incredibly stupid measurement, chose deliberately with agenda-a-forethought to downplay the significance of humans, not because it actually means anything. You want to play with "mass", well, I'll trump you and point out life is an anamoly; non-living mass grossly outweighs living mass. But... who gives a shit about that measurement? Are bacteria our masters because they're going to smother us or something?

I suppose I'll apologize to our bacterial overlords when they get around to asking for one.

Re:Cheat codes?

[Peldor]

Have you seen the world-destroying violence the Spore video shows?

Seems a perfect match for Homo sapiens.

Re:Cheat codes?

[WillAffleckUW]

Maybe cheat codes like Flying Spaghetti Monster and Pastafarian ? ;)

I think you mean using -pasta when you start it.

Just rememember, He is Invisible. And Flying. And Noodly.

Re:Cheat codes?

[WillAffleckUW]

Have you seen the world-destroying violence the Spore video shows?

Well, actually that was Will Wright doing the world-destroying.

And they fired first!

Re:Cheat codes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Once the first AI is completed, we can all rejoice for there will be plenty of servings of annihilation for all!

Re:Cheat codes?

[modecx]

ltimately, intelligence will beat microbes, in the sense that we will use them and they won't be able to harm us.

I'm glad to say that day has come and gone, and now we have fun things like beer, nachos and frozen yogurt as a byproduct! Yay beer!

Re:Cheat codes?

[ChocoBean]

well Will Wright did demonstrate modelling critters silly-putty style and pulling meat chunks (ribs, limbs etc) off of critters.

Re:Cheat codes?

[Bahumat]

I assure you, there will never come a time in human history where we will be able to "beat" bacteria. Look at pennicillin; we've had it for less than a century and already resistant organisms are reducing the effectiveness of pennicillins dramatically. Most medical sources are predicting that, functionally speaking, pennicillins will within the next century become relatively obsolete.

Not because we have anything better, or will develop it. But because bacteria get so, so many more rolls at the dice than we do. Give a bacterium species a one in a million chance at surviving the best technology you have. That still leaves you, in a single kilogram of dirt alone, millions of survivors.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

Ultimately, intelligence will never get the chance to overcome bacteria, because bacteria will overcome us first.

Re:Cheat codes?

[Gulthek]

So when I say:

Not even on the cosmic scale. Not in a thousand, million, or billion years.

I'm assuming a much smaller time scale than you are? Wow. Well guess what, not even in a trillion years will we live life without needing bacteria.

Re:Cheat codes?

[PortHaven]

There are many non-judeo/christian ID'ists who believe that's exactly what happened. And after viewing a duckbill platypus you kinda come away thinking that maybe they're right.

To me, the duckbill platypus is proof either that

a) God was learning as he went

b) God has a sense of humor

When the evolutionist shows me evidence of transitory forms for a duckbill platypus and explains it's varied characteristics and derivation. Then I might be more accepting.

Re:Cheat codes?

[ePharaoh]

Macroscopic life exists because it works. I think the original poster's point was, Microscopic life works better. It has survived longer, it can work independently of us, and not the other way round. Moreover, some believe that planets do get pollinated with microscopic life through comets and other cosmic debris, and this is how Mother Earth was perhaps impregnated. Though, I agree with you, that the planetary pollination has a better chance if macroscopic life attempts it. Yay, to sex!

EA changing tactics?!

[sunwolf]

"EA's ambitious goal is to create more such innovative, internally developed games while lessening the company's dependence on professional sports and Hollywood movie franchises."

Creativity from EA?! NO WAY!

Re:EA changing tactics?!

[shawb]

By "Create more such innovative..." what they mean is back a dumptruck of cash up to someone with a history of making innovative, popular and profitable games and then saying "We'll unload this if you make us an innovative, popular and profitable game."

All that money can help the process along by allowing the designer to hire competent programmers, artists etc, but working within the rules set forth by a large company can erect other roadblocks to creativity as well.

WHOA

[Mad Ogre]

This is just the game I was waiting for! I was wanting to spend my gaming money on Hellgate London... but screw that. I want SPORE! This is exactly the thing that will pull EA away from the brink! No, really. /I don't think my sarcasmkungfoo is strong enough for this one.

Deja vu for Black & White

[Astatine210]

...having seen the demo video on Google video. Not so much in the structure of the game itself, but because I keep thinking

“It's all very pretty, there's nice graphics, an impressive grand concept and whatever... but is there a compelling game in there?”

And given the state of reviewing these days, a glowing review from a "reputable" source means nothing to me any more.

Re:Deja vu for Black & White

[Edgewize]

You could make the same argument against SimCity, The Sims, etc: "That looks like a lot of cool technology, and there is a huge degree of player freedom, but is it a compelling game?"

Maybe Spore is just doomed to repeat the failures of SimCity and The Sims ;) Or maybe we have a very narrow-minded stereotype of what actually makes a game compelling.

Re:Deja vu for Black & White

[Intangion]

did i misread that? doomed to repeat failures of simcity & the sims?

perhaps youve been living under a rock but those were some of the most successful games in history ;)

also will wright isnt in love with himself and can't sustain himself on nothing but his own hefty ego like peter molonox or whatever his name is..

Re:Deja vu for Black & White

[shawb]

Honestly, this sounds like they take the addictive game play and soup it up with the addictive nature of an MMO. There seemed to be a large emphasis on 1)unlocking new tech and 2)the ability to explore user created content.

Re:Deja vu for Black & White

[localman]

I think he was being sarcastic :)

Re:Deja vu for Black & White

[jamiethehutt]

Maybe Spore is just doomed to repeat the failures of SimCity and The Sims ;) Or maybe we have a very narrow-minded stereotype of what actually makes a game compelling.

Maybe it's just that my sarcasm detector isn't on but The Sims is by far the best selling computer game of all time...

Re:Deja vu for Black & White

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, I guess the smiley was too subtle ... I guess that report was true, people only think that they are communicating effectively via the internet!

To hell with Spore...

[SaDan]

FIX BATTLEFIELD 2!!!

hmm..

[xWastedMindx]

This sounds a lot like the game E.V.O. for the SNES. you guide a little fish through the trecherous waters and eventually evolve into the fish or land creature of your choice..

Re:hmm..

[mvsmo]

I remember at one point you can become a dragon or dragon-like creature at some point and explore this cloud like realm. I always tried to model my dinosaur creatures as much like this dragon as I could, so impressed was I. Great game.

Article title pisses me off

[Spiffness]

Its not EA's new ace. I dont give any credit to a company that BUYS good ideas and claims them as their own.

Will Wright is the mastermind of this one. Its Will Wright's next smash hit.

Screw EA, if they had their way, we'd all be buying 6 sports games a year, every year, and thats it.

EA is doing its part to provide slashdot with the weekly 'video games in a slump?' stories.

Will Wright is like a recently eaten explorer trapped inside a monsters body.

Re:Article title pisses me off

[Anonymous Coward]

How is this any different than if some unnamed employee of EA came up with the idea? The company is always buying the ideas of one or a few people; sometimes they are on the payroll, sometimes it's 'outsourced' to someone else, doesn't matter really...

Re:Article title pisses me off

[gunmod]

That bothered me too. EA is not making SPORE. EA is packaging it, marketing it, and selling it. EA doesn't have game programmers. EA buys programs from Developers and PRODUCES (provides) the game for the masses.

for those that don't have flash: screenshots

[pimpimpim]

Google video is nice and all, but eats my cpu. So, here some screenshots for the people with underpowered pcs:

http://www.thesporezone.co.uk/screens/index.php?ID =1

http://www.spore.com/screenshots.php

Re:for those that don't have flash: screenshots

[Palshife]

Or simply download the video and play it back without flash. The link is on the right hand side of the Google Video page.

Sim Earth meets Civ

[Bombula]

Sounds like Sim Earth meets Civilization. Could be cool. Here's hoping we see a cameo from the monolith again.

Re:Sim Earth meets Civ

[Yusaku Godai]

As I recall, at one point in his demonstration Wright does actually mention the possibility. The most advanced part of the game involves whizzing around the universe in a UFO and mettling with the affairs of other planets. One way in which you can mettle probably will be tossing down a few monoliths.

Outragous! I must protest!

[jandrese]

Hmm, this game sounds like Evolutionay propaganda to me. I demand that the game include a "truth" mode where your civilization simply appears as fully developed humans (minus one rib in the male model) and goes from there. :)

Actually, that would be a clever little joke on the creator's part. Perhaps include a "-dogma" commandline switch that does just that. If they really wanted to get some reactionary types mad, they could even include various modes for all of the crazy creation myths from various world religions.

Riiiight.

[bluemeep]

"EA's ambitious goal is to create more such innovative, internally developed games while lessening the company's dependence on professional sports and Hollywood movie franchises."

But when questioned about the recent exclusivity rights to NFL teams and the James Bond franchise, the PR rep paused briefly before screaming "Look, behind you!" and bolting out the door.

Article is marketing spin

[skeller]

This is complete PR fluff for EA. Nothing in this article suggests EA is actually doing anything differently. Yeah, they're hoping an interesting game like Spore will make them money -- but that's nothing new. They've been milking Will Wright's Sims franchise for years.

If you look at the other new game they mention, it's yet another Medal of Honor game. Wow, a company like EA is really innovating by changing the way its employees work to churn out the fiftieth iteration of a proven franchise! How wonderful.

In reality, EA has Will Wright so they're guaranteed at least some innovation. Aside from that, I see nothing to suggest they're actually interested in innovating too much.

You know what EA should do?

[Mad Ogre]

Another game like Undying. Maybe even an Undying II. Because that game is really and truly fantastic. Except for the very end, which is really and truly ghey... but the rest of the game was great. /FPS Horror Fan

So, an enthusiastic preview?

[Winlin]

Didn't we just go over that concept on /.? But I'm sure THIS time the preview is totally accurate :)

A Good Example of Intelligent Design

[geoffrobinson]

And you get to be the Designer.

Re:Damnit

[Aqws]

It may be EA, but it is also Maxis, wich is cool. Btw, Maxis are the cool guys who did things like sim city, not pump out lame shooter after lame shooter.

Videos are old

[Guspaz]

The video links people are posting are about a year old. So yeah, they're cool, but they're nothing new, and we haven't heard a peep about the game since then.

Re:Videos are old

[Anonymous Coward]

Three words: Duke Nukem Forever.

Not hearing anything is probably a good thing.

Re:Videos are old

[Swift(void)]

That is because it wasn't even a game when it was first displayed. It was a proof of concept of the particular progamming style he chose, and one that he admitted was very patchy and only just held together. EA didn't officially start backing the game for a good 3 to 4 months after GDC 2005, and it still probably isn't ready to set the hype machine loose on.

Spore-like flash game (Flow)

[Andorion]

This feels like some early level of Spore, very fun game.

http://intihuatani.usc.edu/cloud/flowing/

Enjoy :)

Re:Spore-like flash game (Flow)

[szembek]

So who's going to sue who for copyright infringement?

FUN TIME

[SandMonkey]

I know it's a tenuous link at best... but this game really reminds me of "EVO Search for Eden" which was an old game on the SNES with a similar concept... You start out as a fish, and you eat smaller animals to gain points, you then use these points to evolve your character. The game went through several stages (Fish/Dinosaur/Bird etc) and was great fun! Hopefully SPORE will be just as - if not more -fun!

Re:FUN TIME

[Z0mb1eman]

Not at all tenuous... when watching that video, the first parts of the game reminded me very much of an Evo with updated graphics. Which is a great thing - Evo was pretty addictive! I'm looking forward to that part of Spore.

The sandbox mode at the end - with the UFO and all that - seems to be designed to let you replay the parts you enjoyed the most... also great, don't need to start a new game to play around in the single-cell mode, for example.

The only part I'm not very sure of is the "RTS" mode, and the city building... not sure how compelling that'll be... from the video it didn't look like the creature design affects this part that much - the changes seemed mostly cosmetic (ohh, look how easy it is to make a mushroom-shaped building.. now let's put it down... uhhh, they seem to like it... it doesn't affect the game world in any way, but it's mushroom shaped!).

Re:FUN TIME

[Anonymous Coward]

See Wikipedia for more information.

Re:FUN TIME

[tukkayoot]

It was a great game until you get to the queen bee. She kicked my proto-lizard ass. Apparently the trick to beating her and other difficult opponents is repeatedly evolving and de-evolving your form, which has the side effect of restoring your health. Or maybe I just suck. Meh.

Thank the friggin' Lord (or maybe FSM)

[coinreturn]

I quit playing games awhile back because I was sick of the selection being limited to Hollywood Crap, Sports Crap, and tired FPS. Let's get back to the innovative games that are fun to play instead of just franchising the same old shit.

Re:Thank the friggin' Lord (or maybe FSM)

[Attrition_cp]

RAmen.

Sim Earth ?

[aepervius]

In other word this will be roughly in concept Sim Earth 2, where you would start really low (well maybe not spore but nearly) go up to develop new species, up to one getting sentient and at the very end the city go into space. Also you could turn the sun up, make some experiement in climat etc... Certainly not inovative, but if really well done (GOOD GAMEPLAY without too much accent on big flashy grafrics) then I see it as a hit.

Re:Sim Earth ?

[TimmyDee]

Indeed it does sound a bit like a rehash of SimEarth. If that's the case, I hope it is to a T. I hope the include all of the biosphere, atmosphere, etc. controls so we can play around with the many potential outcomes our planet may encounter. I for one learned a truckload from playing SimEarth as a kid.

On another note, the real innovative part of this game (which is clear if you want the video), is that the components of each environment, biome, society, civilization, and planet are all procedurally generated. Hundreds of artists are no longer required to flesh out a realistic looking world. The real benefit here (in addition to the rebirth of SimEarth) is that each planet you visit will be strikingly complete and unique.

Re:Sim Earth ?

[Yaztromo]

My thought exactly. And it's about time -- Sim Earth was long one of my favorite games. I still have it somewhere -- what I lack is a system capable of playing it (as it was a DOS VCPI game, and I run all Mac and Linux now).

One comment however -- in Sim earth you could start off without even a spore. You would have to bombard the planet with comets in the hope of eventually evolving a primitive bacteria, and then work your way up from there.

Sim Earth had some rather fun elements to it that went beyond reality as well. You could spawn sentience by using a Monolith (ala 2001: A Space Odyssey). I was once able to (very briefly) create sentient dolphins. Through high technology, you could create sentient robots (which had a tendency to completely obliterate life on the planet). I once tried to cool Venus by setting off hundreds of nuclear explosions.

It was great stuff back in the day.

Yaz.

Re:Sim Earth ?

[Yusaku Godai]

It's not exactly like Sim Earth. I don't believe you have any direct control over the climate of the planet or any other properties. The only things you directly control are the living things (at varying scales from single-celled organisms up through entire intergalactic civilizations). I know that later in the game you can develop a variety of terraforming tools, so in that respect it is like Sim Earth. But I'm pretty sure that's the only way you can directly affect the climate and biosphere of a planet.

Also, Spore goes well beyond Sim Earth in terms of scale. Sure in Sim Earth you also had just single-celled organisms in the beginning, but the entire game was just played on that one scale of viewing the entire planet from above. In Spore, the scale you play at develops along with the creature whose evolution you follow. It would really be better descrived as Sim Powers of 10, in that, as I said, you eventually can develop intergalactic and possibly even inter-species civilizations.

Can't wait for the expansion packs

[dalleboy]

Spore: Hot Date
Spore: Bustin' Out
Spore: Nightlife

Re:Can't wait for the expansion packs

[dr_dank]

Spore: Hot Date

The shortest game in history, lasting only until somebody turns the autoclave on.

Re:Can't wait for the expansion packs

[ChocoBean]

hehehe will single-celled sex with oneself type of graphical depiction get people upset, i wonder 8D

revive Sim Mars

[stubear]

I was an avid fan of Outpost but the game had some serious bugs that were never fixed. Outpost 2 came out and killed the game concept, turnign it into an early Age of Empires like RTS. Maxis had, at the time, a new game under development called Sim Mars whichi looked like what Outpost was supposed to be only better. I was exicted and couldn't wait to play the game then it was quietly killed. Apparently Maxis was developing this new game, the Sims, and Sim Mars got the axe. The Sim franchise had some very fun alternatives that never really caught on (Sim Ant, Wim Earth ayone?) but with the recent interest in sending a manned mission to Mar, perhaps EA coudl revive this game.

I think that boycott comes on other terms

[Opportunist]

I mean, after all, this game is about EVOLUTION! The horror!

Unless of course there is some way to do god-like things like planting an Adam and an Eve somewhere... which, of course, would be kinda blasphemous...

Guess EA can't win that one 'gainst the religious right, huh?

Re:I think that boycott comes on other terms

[Inkieminstrel]

Actually, the game is pretty much about intelligent design.

Re:I think that boycott comes on other terms

[visgoth]

Nah, that implies that we players possess intelligence.

Me, I'm gonna design a race of five assed monkeys as the 1st thing when I get the game.

Re:I think that boycott comes on other terms

[Inkieminstrel]

I want a pot-bellied elephant.

Re:I think that boycott comes on other terms

[iamlucky13]

Guess EA can't win that one 'gainst the religious right, huh?

If you want to speak for the religious right, you should first consider joining it. I personally think it sounds like a cool idea for a game.

Re:I think that boycott comes on other terms

[KDR_11k]

No, it's about intelligently designing evolution!

Re:I think that boycott comes on other terms

[Anonymous Coward]

Not voicing an opinion on this debate one way or the other, but that was a restrained yet brilliant reply.

Re:I think that boycott comes on other terms

[statusbar]

Actually, the FIRST video game that the guys behind EA ever made was called 'evolution' and it ran on the apple 2 originally.

--jeffk++

A creature evolves and then forms a relgion!

[fak3r]

I love the dicotamy of evolution leading to religion! That's gotta rub a ton of religious folks the wrong way, but file me into the camp that says this is EXACTLY how it happened in the real world. Kudos to EA!

Re:A creature evolves and then forms a relgion!

[Lord Bitman]

What part of your designing something is evolution? I was actually put off by some of the previews of this at the complete lack of evolution in this game. Would have much preferred to see computer extrapolations of where some of the evolutionary paths I chose to ignore would lead. (if I used to make a creature which was exactly the same, but had four arms, and later I decided to turn the arms into legs, I'd love to someday find a colony of four-armed beasts which then evolved on their own and built their own societal thingy)

The whole game seems abysmally static and linear. I'm sure that contradicts everything everyone else is thinking of this game, but it seems like such a shallow attempt at letting people make their own fun. "This is how you will make your own fun. This is the exact way your own fun will be made and this is what it will consist of" Nevermind if I don't actually want my creatures to live in a bunch of seperate tiny cities, nevermind if one day I think it would be fine to stay underwater, Will Right has declared that no matter what you can think of, there is only one evolutionary path beyond the merest physical eye-candy which is at all viable.

And I came to that conclusion based on one article and one video. I'm so advanced!

Re:A creature evolves and then forms a relgion!

[mmalove]

So this is unconfirmed, but I heard that you actually can develop civilization under the waves instead of evolving to a land creature. Much like land civs can create "bubble cities" under water, your water civ would be able to create "aquarium cities" on the land.

Re:A creature evolves and then forms a relgion!

[Lord Bitman]

From the video I saw, this one also does bubble-cities. I think it would be impractical and over-complicate things to try to add 3d to such a 2.5d environment. Still, this is only from one video. But the whole thing seemed like a collection of disconnected mini-games. "Here's the single-celled organism game. And once you're done with that, it never effects anything again, and here's the fish game, and once yu're done, it's gone forever, and now you crawl on land and that's the only part of the game that does anything, and then you get a spaceship and can stage battles between civilizations, but it doesnt actually effect anything, and neither does thhe part on land, for that matter."

It's like playing with pla-doh, only you can't be as creative about what happens.

Re:A creature evolves and then forms a relgion!

[cynicdave]

That's a bit misleadig. In no case do you actually HAVE To expand out to the universe. Or leave the ocean. or whatever. Doing that just opens new doors and pathways. Just like sim city. You don't really HAVE to do anything because you can't really "lose". Or the Sims or Sim2, you don't HAVE to buy a new house or get a new plasma TV.

Wil Wright isn't making a judgement call on values. He's making games.

Re:A creature evolves and then forms a relgion!

[Lord Bitman]

You don't need to leave the difficulty selection room in Quake, but the game designers haven't built any incentive to stay and have built the entire game around the supposition that you will eventually leave. No matter how long you stay, once you have the ability to leave there is nothing there for you. That's what linear gameplay is.
He isnt making judgement calls on values, he's making a half-assed game because it's easier than making an in-depth game. That's not a put-down, that's just a fact. I seriously doubt we'll have a game which can really let you choose your own path for another ten or twenty years.

Yeah, I'm going to buy the game, but I'm a Moron.

Re:A creature evolves and then forms a relgion!

[cynicdave]

A good point. I really would like an ultra world reality simulator too but that's far away. The scope of what Wright has in Spore far out classes anything out there. I'm not sure "half-assed" describes what Wright is doing justice. Maybe Wright Jr., or Jesus Wrighst in about a dozen or a hundred years will create what you envision (and then the emerging ethical issues-- is it okay to kill fully sentient sims?) . But then again, the word 'game' is fast becoming obsolete isn't it? I, too, would like a Reality Simulator where you can do anything you want. kind of like in Ender's Game AFTER he defeats the giant or whatnot. But lets give the guy some credit.

Re:A creature evolves and then forms a relgion!

[fak3r]

Wait, you read the article before commenting on it? What's wrong with you? You must be new here!

Re:A creature evolves and then forms a relgion!

[Lord Bitman]

I reserve final judgements until after I play for a while, of course. But I think I'd just prefer a nice physics simulator. I've said before that a really good game is going to be one where you are free to not actually play the game- that's why I liked San Andreas so much, but I'd prefer to not even need to us a car, whatever.

What I really want is a "game" which is dynamic enough that nobody looks down on you for releasing only modules for the game. A game should be like an operating system- a world where you can create whatever fun you want. Right now they're more like high-level frameworks- an abstraction of how to create specific types of fun.

As for Ender, I'd like to believe that we'll come up with a dynamic game sometime before we create God.

History & Anology

[sm284614]

As I recall, there was a SNES game named EVO that featured the exact same evolutionary concept. Though I decided not to evolve past the 'massive deadly dinosaur' stage and was eventually made extinct by superiour beings just as I realised it was time to move on. Hey wait, that reminds me of...

Re:Outragous! I must protest!

[binkzz]

If anything, the game promotes Intelligent Design. Depending on who's playing, though.

This is bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

It will mean EA will rush the title out before it's as finished and polished as it should be. Giving us another Black and White 2 fiasco.

it's about damn time

[rayde]

while i dutifully buy an EA football game once a year, i really think EA needs to move away from its dependency on existing franchises and follow Nintendo's lead by innovating into new gameplay ideas. Let's hope it's not just lip service.

so here is my idea for EA. I think they should change madden releases to bi-yearly, with a $5 or so roster update/patch in the off-years. The huge pool of resources poured into madden every year could be directed into these smaller home-grown projects.

Will they lose money? I dunno. They'll make money on their roster update, that's for sure. And if they create a few gems with those reallocated resources, they're opening up loads of future franchise possibilities.

so the choices are to continue to cash-in now, or to plant these seeds for the future.

Re:it's about damn time

[bprime]

I heard that Will Wright was already working on another franchise.

Re:it's about damn time

[ThinkWeak]

The reason why they won't move to a bi-yearly model is that it would result in a loss in profits. They can keep cranking out the same game each year, having people like yourself shell out the $50 or $60 for it, and all they do is update the graphics engine a little and tweak a game aspect here or there. It doesn't require a whole lot of effort, they aren't really creating something revolutionary, and they already have an adequate demand on the market. Do you think EA bought out the NFL licensing rights so that they innovate gameplay? I'm sure that was their plan when they pushed Sega's 2k series out of the picture. It would be up to the consumer to force them to switch to this bi-yearly model. So go grab your brethren and boycott the "next version" of your Madden game. They won't chance until you give them a reason.

Re:it's about damn time

[Turn-X Alphonse]

I think most of Slashdot would like to know this.

Why the fuck do you buy a game series you're unhappy with? At what point in the sale do you think "This is identical to the game I already have 3 versions of. Why am I buying another version?"

It's like buying Tetris over and over because they change the name of the blocks and add more eye candy for each line being removed.

Re:it's about damn time

[JaxGator75]

Call me crazy for admitting it, but I like the Madden games and play them until a new one comes out. And for what it's worth, the last 3 versions have been markedly different from one another in more ways than you might care to know. Hardly a simple tweak to a graphics engine... But don't let that stop you from repeating what your older brother said in front of a chick one time!

Re:it's about damn time

[HunterZ]

i dutifully buy an EA football game once a year

...
they should change madden releases to bi-yearly

...
Will they lose money? I dunno.

I think you answered your own question. Unless a radical shift occurs at the executive level, EA would never throw away a good 40% of their guaranteed profits, must less invest additional resources in more risky games.

As you can see, the only way they're willing to publish something "original" is if - for example - it's made by a famous game designer.

Re:it's about damn time

[spoogle]

Some people who follow sports like football are insane.

They are the people who will buy the next version of Madden http://www.easports.com/games/madden2005/, because it has some new guy who is playing halfback for their team, because they made a subtle change to the colour or shape of the ball (for example making it round), or because they started requiring that the ball actually be struck with the foot.

Re:it's about damn time

[rayde]

i think the biggest draw honestly is that you want to simulate the game you're following in real life each sunday. If you play as the Dolphins this year, you're going to want to have Daunte Culpepper as your quarterback if you want to simulate the real game. But if you are still using Madden 06, you're going to have to manually redo the roster to get it accurate. And if you just move Culpepper to miami you'll have to redo the Viking's roster in order to balance that team. Which involves more moves, more balancing, until basically, if you would like any semblance of the real players, you have to redo the entire roster of the entire league. We're paying EA for making those decisions. (Plus, typing in the names of all the rookies using a PS2 controller isn't exactly easy). There are people out there providing updated rosters online, but not everybody has a gameshark or whatever other devices can plug your memory card into your pc.

furthermore, playing online basically requires you to have a recent version of the game, because you're just simply not going to be able to find other players who are online with an older version.

it's not a situation i'm exactly happy with, but i don't see it ending anytime soon.

Re:it's about damn time

[Y-Crate]

"... i really think EA needs to move away from its dependency on existing franchises and follow Nintendo's lead..."

That's where I stopped reading and started laughing hysterically.

Re:it's about damn time

[rayde]

i do see your point as nintendo does use a lot of their franchises... however, that hasn't stopped them from continuing to innovate. that was my point.

Re:it's about damn time

[Chibi Merrow]

His point was that EA will never do that. You'd just as likely see Microsoft embrace Open Source...

Re:it's about damn time

[Chibi Merrow]

We are talking about the same EA, right? The guys that got their business model from the aliens in ID4?

Flow

[Lord_Dweomer]

I am one of many who saw the Spore video and nearly wet himself. If this game lives up to the hype (well...if you can call a very in-depth live gameplay demonstration hype) it will be a major blockbuster.

One of the things I am concerned about is that while it is absolutely fantastic how they plan on integrating the content of other players into your worlds....I want a method to limit the inclusion of that content to just my friends. Which sounds more fun to you....having a little "survival of the fittest" contest with random creatures from people you have never met, or having a biological death-match against the creations of your circle of friends? If anybody knows of the details of this aspect, please by all means fill me in.

Also, recently on Fark I saw a game posted that bears a striking resemblance in gameplay to the first level of Spore (as demonstrated in the video). This is called Flow and is quite excellent...albeit not finished. Still very fun to play through though.

Flow

Re:Flow

[Kaimelar]

One of the things I am concerned about is that while it is absolutely fantastic how they plan on integrating the content of other players into your worlds....I want a method to limit the inclusion of that content to just my friends. Which sounds more fun to you....having a little "survival of the fittest" contest with random creatures from people you have never met, or having a biological death-match against the creations of your circle of friends?

I showed the video of Spore from last year's GDC to my wife, and this is the first video game outside of Bookworm that she expressed any interest in whatsoever. She didn't care for building huge, star-spanning empires . . . she liked how cute Will Wright's creature was in the demo, and that it acted very lifelike. And then she wondered aloud if we could both be playing, and pitting my creatures vs. her creatures. I really hope that feature is included in the final product. In The Sims, you could have different players have houses in the same neighborhood and interact with them, right? I seem to remember friends doing that, but I never played the game myself.

Great news

[JustNiz]

> EA's ambitious goal is to create more such innovative, internally developed games while lessening the company's dependence on professional sports and Hollywood movie franchises."

This is great news. EA is massive and their focus affects the whole gaming industry. I always hated all those boring EA sports titles and dull titles that just cashed-in on having the same name as the latest movie.

Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

It's been done.

Bullshit.

[Telastyn]

I don't see how this is anything new. EA's "time-tested strategy" (if you can somehow call a mere decade time-tested; completely ignoring the previous decade of the company's existance) is going safe for things. Sure, the context might be slightly off, but the gameplay itself isn't exactly new. Further, betting that the designer of the highest selling computer game ever is going to produce a winner (even on name recognition alone) doesn't strike me as a terribly risky call.

Spore = Snore!

[Anonymous Coward]

EA, yeehaw, gonna ruin yet another genre!

Portable Power

[Karelian]

EA really neeeds to get serious about PSP and DS. The latest North American console numbers show rough unit parity for XBOX360, DS and PSP in February. In Japan, PSP & DS combined are now hitting 170 K weekly sales, towering over PS2 around 25 K and XBOX360 at 1 K.

The Japanese portable mania means that local software companies are about to pour huge R&D resources into PSP and DS development - this in turn will drive further sales in Europe and USA. If PS3 gets delayed to 4Q 2006, the Xmas sales of this year will be dominated by portable titles. EA shouldn't concede this market to Japanese houses - low development costs mean that portable hits are wildy profitable.

More Info

[Alphager]

More Info can be found at gamingsteve.com . That guy was one of the firsts to report about this game, has a section in his podcast dedicated to it and Will Wright even posts in his forum.

Spore......

[MBraynard]

It's Black & White for 2006!

EA best stick to shoveling out more sims expansions. Spore is _not_ going to be a mass market hit.

Re:Outragous! I must protest!

[Carthag]

If so it would be hilarious if they included the Norse mythology. Giant cosmic cows & people coming out of salt/armpits/etc & skulls being used to create the firmament!

Or.....

[edmicman]

I think that while, yes, they are taking a "chance", they are betting on something big and innovative coming from someone who has already proven himself, Will Wright. It's not like they're banking on some indie-born game from some students who have no track record. It's like saying a studio is gambling on Steven Speilbergs latest project even if that project is a little "out there". It's different, but it's friggin' Steven Speilberg, so odds are it will be good.

Regardless, I think I'll be looking forward to Spore - it looks very interesting!

System Requirements

[Anonymous Coward]

For those of you who never played Sim City (> 1), you may not understand/agree with this post...

Anyone care to guess what the system requirements will be for gameplay that doesn't blow? Seriously, I can barely tolerate Sim City 4, on an AMD64 3500+ (2.2gHz), 2GB RAM and a GeForce 6800 (ultra? Don't remember).

1.) I cannot run at the resolution of my monitor (1600x1200)
2.) At the next lower resolution, it takes about 2 seconds to re-draw the screen when I zoom in or pan.

The game is not that computationally complex. It is simply poorly coded. Compare the graphics of any current FPS game or MMRPG. The math behind the city isn't (or shouldn't) be that significant either. *REAL* world modeling, yeah, thats a bitch of a linear algebra problem. But for a game? No.

I dunno. The game looks cool enough (Spore). If they make it playable I might even buy it. But I hold no hopes.

content does not make a game?

[xipho]

If you watched the Spore intro at the (developers?) conference (check for google video) you'll notice the lead programmer mention the problem with content, how much it costs, how much people demand etc. etc. He goes on to say that content is not the solution to making a game good. Fast-forward to the end of the talk- all he can talk about is content, how the game will be incredible because of all the user content, content stored in small procedures, content shared instantly, etc. etc. I thought he said content wasn't the answer? Found that odd.

I'd predict that the 12th time you fly off and nuke/capture/(insert ability from ladder here) another planet of mutant chickens/care bears/t-rexes that someone else created, that the game gets old- fast.

How about making the *rules or mechanics of the game* procedural, and creatable/modifiable by the user?

Re:content does not make a game?

[Anonymous Coward]

Watch the video again. You missed the point he was making about content. If you empower the USERS to make content, it makes game developement more tractable. So much money is spent modeling every chair, creature, and piece of dust on every table. But in Spore, (and in the Sims to a lesser degree) the content can be created by the players.

Re:content does not make a game?

[Anonymous Coward]

True, though I still feel that the general problem remains- (and I think he hints at this indirectly) that content will only take you so far. I love the concept- its excellent, but I'm skeptical about the hype. A shell for content creation is a shell of a game. Infinite content does not equate to infinite gameplay. Infinitely different mechanics on the other hand...

Spore is going to be a monster

[Deep Fried Geekboy]

Spore is going to be a monster hit. The video is from a year ago. Knowing Will Wright, it has probably evolved a long way since then.

Anyone else play SimLife, which was a kind of very primitive precursor to this? I bought it, along with all of the other Maxis sim-titles way back when, and spent a long while playing it, but found it frustrating in the end because the complexity was not well handled and every scenario seemed to decompose into a monoculture or a mass extinction. If Spore can nail all that, it will be a massive winner. It will also prove WW's point that procedural content is better than created content.

What I like about WW is that he seems to have thought more deeply about the concept of play than anyone else I can think of in the videogame realm. His are the games you don't feel bad giving to your kids (in fact I don't feel bad about giving most games to my kids).

Re:Spore is going to be a monster

[rkanodia]

SimLife monoculture? I strongly disagree. Although I was quite surprised (at age 8) when I discovered that Wolverines and Sabertooths had evolved away from their mutually-agressive relationship (I had been rooting for the Wolverines to win), it should have been obvious; top of the food chain predators don't really have anything to gain from fighting each other. Now, those poor Professorxes, they were a different story; they never really evolved to move more quickly, or have any defenses... only their insane birth rate kept them going...

umm... Video ummm.... Tanscript

[TrappedByMyself]

ummm... blah stuff blah, ummm..., blah blah stuff, ummm..., blah blah blah, ummm...

Re:Damnit

[jacksonj04]

I was hoping that Maxis would talk to Valve and get it out on Steam, but no such luck. Oh well, I'll buy it anyway.

Ok

[cubicledrone]

So their new strategy is to actually develop games?

The mind boggles.

Expect layoffs.

Re:Outragous! I must protest!

[sonarniche]

just wait until stephen colbert gets ahold of this video and applies some "truthiness" to it. maybe he'll invite will wright on as a guest. now that would be some good tv.

singapore??!

[okly]

spore = singapore?

game of evolution?.. or designed evolution?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Ironic thing about the evolution in this game is its guided by a creator (the user) so it doesn't really propagate evolution, but inteligent design.

SPORE!

[Intangion]

damn i cant wait for this game

ive been searching every other week for more information on it but they just havent told us much

they had a badass demo of it at GDC like.. a year ago now?

can't wait to see what theyve done with it and when it will come out.. i hope they work some sort of real time multiplayer into it, and more gameplay at the 'outterspace' level

EA is full of crap

[Anonymous Coward]

"EA's ambitious goal is to create more such innovative, internally developed games while lessening the company's dependence on professional sports and Hollywood movie franchises."

EA didn't do shit, they should count their blessings Will Wright chooses to keep them in his company, not the other way around.

Reversed traditional use of sandbox

[retinaburn]

The most interesting aspect I saw during the video was Wright's comment on the fact that traditionally in games you start off with a sandbox mode, or trial run through, which are used to learn the rules, and develop some strategies. In Spore though you work through the creature creation mode, then once you at the city and world management, the building and vehicle modes. Then finally after you have conquered your little world. You can use other planets in your solar system and then galaxy as your sandbox to try out new designs and just test what works, or as Wright shows take revenge on all those pesky critters that pissed you off in your early years. Its a family friendly version of Bully ;)

Been there, done that

[ryanvm]

Weak sauce. I've been doing this with the gunk that falls out of my keyboard for years.

Re:seems like a joker

[nasch]

I'm not very familiar with The Sims, but you should probably watch the video before declaring it the same.

EVO for SNES

[Anonymous Coward]

quite similar to this and a pretty good game. Get it!

Sounds a bit like Sim Earth...

[garylian]

To me, this game seems a bit like Sim Earth, a 1990 release by Maxis. In Sim Earth, you controlled a planet to develop various microbes into life forms, and see what life form became the dominant one.

Sure, this game is going to focus more on the life form than the planet, but it has a certain ring to it.

Sim Earth was fun, if tedious. The Maxis website has a tiny mention of it being released in 1990, but they don't list the game for sale today, even though it goes to the EAstore.com website.

Re:Sounds a bit like Sim Earth...

[micromuncher]

Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. Sim Earth was fun; especially when the robots or slugs achieved sentience.

I liked this game the first time i played it

[splinter]

when it was called SimLife/SimEarth

Original Content?!

[antigrimace]

Is Hell freezing over?

Re:ID

[Politburo]

It's a game. It doesn't demonstrate anything, pro-ID or otherwise.

Useless stats dept: 66,666 visitors! Yay! (pic)

[Anonymous Coward]

useless pic:
http://nosebreaker.com/66666_visitors.JPG

obligatory penny-arcade reference

[rizzy]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/05/27

EA Underpants Gnomes

[Sargeant Slaughter]

What a surprise!
EA is willing to break the mold to save a few bucks. Gee, I've never seen that on /. before.

Step 1. Steal underpants.
Step 2. Force salary employees to work long hours (70+wk), milk customers with expansion packs for every freaking game, and make games that don't require franchise fees.
Step 3. Profit!

Re:EA Underpants Gnomes

[Schitzoflink]

You missed step 2.5. ????

Christians? What about the homosexuals?

[n2art2]

This game requires one to mate to have offspring. What about artificial insimination*? What about adoption? Do the individual creatures have the ability to be "born with" tendencies to love one of the same gender? Can those homosexual creatures then be able to procreate with other means? I think the gays of the gaming world should unite and boycott the game because it does not seem to allow for their sexual preferences as well.

Of course, it would be hard to evolve without being able to produce offspring. Guess the gays are screwed either way.

Get off the right/left wing crap. It's a game. sarcasm implied

EA != Maxis

[OverDrive33]

I wish Maxis was still independent.
After playing many other EA titles I've come to equate EA with poor quality (Battlefield 2 was coded by monkeys I'm sure of it - lets check the game version the server is running *after* we take 10 minutes to load everything!). With the only exception being Maxis produced titles.
It's sad that EA gobbled up such a great little company and is now exploiting them to make money for themselves (although I'd bet they treat Maxis very well because they're a big money maker for EA ... see The Sims - and now Spore).

Will Wright should quit and start a new company. Or Google should hire him (Google Games!?).

Re:EA != Maxis

[Pearson]

Yeah, I love Will Wright...but it's a real shame he works for the Devil. I refuse to support EA in any way, as they embody all that is wrong with this industry. I'll probably just borrow a copy from a friend after they get bored with it.

Re:Damnit

[Perseid]

As much as I dislike EA, you have to remember that they ARE one of the old-school publoshers, and there was a time when they were the premiere game publisher - not in quantity, but in quality. They really are one of the companies that is responsible for making the game industry as big as it is now.

That being said, their dependency on Madden 25 and Medal of Honor 15 will only hurt them in the end. If they see that before it's too late, more power to them.

General thoughts about the game...

[AniamL]

I've watched the e3 video a couple times, and done some further research (although there isn't much to be had), but I'm still quite undecided about one of the game's aspects.

Personally, I hope the "sandbox power", i.e. the ability to completely shape the universe to your liking, will be rewarded very gradually. It seems kind of silly to play the first half of the game struggling to evolve and become the dominant species, then suddenly have the power to destroy planets.

Or, perhaps, allow two different modes of play: in one, you have ultimate power over the world from the start of the game, like in The Sims (where you can control nearly everything that happens in the world, and there are few outside forces to affect your changes). In the other, you have power over only yourself (and your race, if you're far enough in the game). You're not necessarily told what to do and how to do it, but failure to act correctly may slow your evolutionary growth. There are outside forces that can greatly hinder, or even terminate, the game.

I guess I'm just hoping one can highlight the action parts of the game, rather than let it turn into SimUniverse.

Re:Damnit

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but they also did things like SimCity 4.

whatever

[Anonymous Coward]

"EA's ambitious goal is to create more such innovative, internally developed games while lessening the company's dependence on professional sports and Hollywood movie franchises."

LOL! What a load of shit! I work there, it's not like that at all. Will had that deal when EA acquired Maxis. Basically he was in a position to get whatever he wanted and I chose wisely. That's why he and his team are off in their own little building.

OMG does this mean!?!?!?

[HerculesMO]

That there will be no more Madden games? I am always eager to spend about $60 for John Madden saying X more catch phrases and adding TWO PLAYS!

It's the indy game developers that will be benefitting shortly folks.. Nintendo has it right by releasing a CHEAP dev kit so that indy developers can get in on the magic. Additionally you have companies like id Software releasing GPLed versions of their graphics engines so that people can make games easily and while the eye candy won't be AWESOME, it will be the gameplay that finally makes a comeback.

It's why I'm looking forward to Nintendo titles for the Revolution. The concept for their controller and their games have always been fun, regardless of how bad the graphics compare to other systems. If it's one thing Dvorak said partially right, it's that graphics are going to plateau, and then companies like EA will start feeling the hurt.

Oh that's right -- they already have.

Re:Outragous! I must protest!

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, I will bite. This sounds like Creationist-y propaganda to me. I demand that the game include a "truth" mode where the game was never actually written and just appears on my computer as a side affect of the randomness there within.

About all I can say...

[SoulRider]

is, I sure hope they pull this off. Unfortunately the reality of EA being such a huge, slow moving, inefficient coroporation, they will probably end up writing a game where the goal is to raise a being from spore to a biped that is drafted into the NFL, likes to play golf on the weekends and is the worlds greatest Quidditch player.

FINALLY!

[ByteGuerrilla]

This game has hit the headlines. Been waiting for further news on this title for over a year now. Really is an awesome prospect. FTR, EA has very little to do with the game... they're just publishing it AFAIK.

Sounds a bit like Creatures 2.

[Anonymous Coward]

Creatures and creature 2 are the other evolutionary game.

Start the Procedural Revolution.

[tukkayoot]

I've said it many times, but I'm going to say it again ... Spore looks like it will be a fun game, but what's most exciting to me about it is the heavy emphasis it puts on procedural generation ... the way the game is smart enough to figure out how to animate the virtually endless variety of creatures you're going to be able to create ... and also because of how easy Wil makes it look to create content using the tools included as a part of the game.

Raph Koster outlines in his presentation titled Moore's Wall how, right now, the growing power of computers is making games prohibitively expensive to produce. As the power of the machine grows, there is pressure to utitlize the new power to improve on the presentation (mainly, the graphics) of the game, which makes the game a lot more costly produce without adding much in terms of gameplay, and usually resulting in a reduction in the amount of actual game content.

One way to break this trend is to utilize the increasing CPU power of PCs to procedurally generate content, or to assist the player in creating his their own content. Of course, our procedural algorithims and software have to improve a lot if it's going to be an important supplement (let alone replacement) to the traditional way of doing things, which is to have professional artists hand-craft everything.

In this regard, Spore looks to be a huge step in the right direction. We need more projects like Spore to mature the technology. The fact that EA seems to be recognizing Wil's genious and throwing their support behind his project is a good thing, if the suits at top see the promise of this kind of approach, it can only mean good things for the industry. EA was not exactly in love with the idea of The Sims before it was proven an unmitigated success, despite the fact that Will was already an acclaimed game designer well before that game's release. So, even if EA isn't entirely turning over a new leaf, at least they're trusting their golden boy enough to say that they're pinning their hopes on his newest experimental idea.

good concept != good game

[idlake]

Spore has a good (though not novel) concept and appears to have a reasonable design, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good game or a popular game. Whether a game succeeds or fails, you only know once it's in the market.

Re:Damnit

[Anonymous Coward]

But SimCity 4 is an excellent game, despite the fact it needs a Doom 3 speed CPU and GPU

Christian Backlash? I think not.

[DorkusMasterus]

Speaking as a full-on, 100% bible-believing Christian, I very very much would like to play this game. It's a game. It's not the real world. In that way, I see no reason to ban it, or whatever. Now, if the game claimed (which it does not) to represent the exact same structure as creation on Earth, then that's something else.

While I'm sure there will be some idiots out there who will not take a moment to review the game, and condemn it outright, I see no reason for this game to be "bad" or "threatening" to anything Christian. It's definitely NOT a booster to Evolution, in my opinion, because (1) behind it is an intelligent creator...you (2) it's very tongue-in-cheek in terms of characters, as well as colonization (3) it's very detailed for a game, of course, but compared to real life science, it's quite simplified, and (4) it's again, just a game.

So, just to once more try to deflate those who outright attack Christians because of some stereotypical pidgeonhole, allow me to be one of the first to say that I wholeheartedly endorse this game's innovative style, and will definitely be one of the first to purchase it (given that it won't require crazy-expensive upgrades to my hardware to run)!

So how about a Linux port?

[slashname3]

So are they going to release a Linux version of the game?

Over-hyped fanboys need to shush

[Jack9]

I've not seen a single thing that leads me to believe this is going to be a revolutionary or even GOOD game. Frankly, any game claiming to provide an all-encompassing open-ended experience is a pure unadulterated lie. Please, someone explain why this is getting any attention at all. The press releases and marketing machine of EA is in full swing, but /.'rs are actually believing it???

In my years I've seen too many examples of how to poorly implement a scenario to believe a complete evolution of a civilization into morpg would be possible. Sim Earth to CIV? Ask yourself, how simple the game has to be to make that work. It would be TERRIBLE. One of many unlikely scenarios is Spore will be a puzzle game to level abilities of a single genetic line then onto a tradewars-like environment with your planet serving as base. Not that that's going to be much more fun. In any case, the initial development is all Single-player grind to get to abilities. Yay? Then onto a new playfield that has to keep 1 played from growing large enough to stomp anyone else and has to be able to run 24/7. Good luck with that.

Spore forum

[Ender77]

I have been keeping an eye on this game since I first heard of it at E3. For those of you who want to keep up with this game, go to http://www.gamingsteve.com/ and check out the spore forum at http://gamingsteve.com/blab/index.php?board=12.0 , Will Wright and the developers often check what is written there.

Futurecasting story?

[Anonymous Coward]

So is it typical for businessweek to forward date its stories by a week, or have I stumbled upon some revolutionary new caching mechanism? The story's dated 3/20/06...

A God game about Evolution???

[RandomBitFlipper]

that ought to get some fundamentalists' heads spinning.

[ducks]

Can you smell the irony?

[Itninja]

Is it not laughably ironic that INTELLIGENT people were needed to DESIGN a game about the evolution of mankind? Now who's the monkey's uncle, eh?

Re:Can you smell the irony?

[Yaotzin]

Actually, it's not about humans. You could evolve into pretty much anything.

Re:Can you smell the irony?

[Tiny Elvis]

Oh I see the implication: this complex game needs a designer, likewise if you are intelligent enough to design a game like this you need a designer. But what about *that* intelligent designer--who designed him? Oh now the argument no longer is needed. Now can YOU see the irony?

Re:Can you smell the irony?

[Itninja]

Kind of like how if life requires energy to begin, then where did the energy come from? The Big Bang? Another dimension? Space monsters? And where did *that* energy come from?

Both sides ultimatly require a leap of faith. Both eventually end in a seeming paradox.

Re:Can you smell the irony?

[Tiny Elvis]

Yeah, it boils down to, "why is there something rather than nothing?"

Sounds like..

[necro2607]

Wow, is it just me or does the game description sound a lot like Maxis' old game SimEarth ?!

Re:ID

[Skreems]

What exactly are you saying? That because we have a cool computer game that lets you design creatures that would NEVER survive in the real world by dragging and dropping limbs and horns, this is somehow proof that God designed the flagella and neural structure and whatever other complex subsystem ID idiots try to use in their broken logic? THIS IS JUST A GAME. It does exactly nothing to promote the idea of intelligent design.

SimEarth 2.0?

[Syberghost]

Didn't he already do this?

Re:Outragous! I must protest with fish sauce

[WillAffleckUW]

Actually, that would be a clever little joke on the creator's part. Perhaps include a "-dogma" commandline switch that does just that. If they really wanted to get some reactionary types mad, they could even include various modes for all of the crazy creation myths from various world religions.

I for one am looking forward to the -noodly version, where Pirate Fish roam the seas, preventing Global Warming, as our Great Noodly One, the Flying Spaghetti Monster invisibly floats overhead.

My catma ate your dogma. Yum!

Not new...possibly not legal...

[UglyTool]

Having a small child in the house is one of the only reasons I purchased a Nintendo GameCube. There just seemed to be more family titles, and less of the blood and gore. Not that I'm against blood and gore, I just don't feel that my 5 yr old girl needs to be exposed to it right now.

We tend to rent games before we purchase them, and we came across this game while waiting for a good game to get in. The system is very similar to what is discussed for Spore, including manipulating the critters, as well as the menus for adding feet, weapons, etc.

Not sure about the the status of EA v. Sega, but the first line in the "Features" list talks about the "Patented Monster Editing System". The gameplay and graphics for Spore are very different, but the editing system appear to me to be too similar to be coincidence.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[Manmademan]

Speaking as a full-on, 100% bible-believing Christian, I very very much would like to play this game. It's a game. It's not the real world. In that way, I see no reason to ban it, or whatever. Now, if the game claimed (which it does not) to represent the exact same structure as creation on Earth, then that's something else.

Why would that be "something else?" As you said this is just a game. Whether or not you agree with what it claims is no reason to ban it. The Bible Game claims that the biblical representation of Genesis is 100% truth and you don't see atheists storming the streets in protest. It's EA's right to make a game that claims whatever they wish, as long as that claim isn't outright slanderous.

Already Made?

[Ironsides]

Wasn't this game called 'Evolution' or something like that?

Re:Spore video - logins to pqhp

[necro2607]

err, registration?? pfff... no need to waste your time.

http://www.bugmenot.com/view.php?url=www.pqhp.com

have fun...

Haven't I

[Odin_Tiger]

Haven't I already played this? On the bright side, though, I -loved- EVO, so Spore should be quite enjoyable as well.

Only thing I can say

[shelterpaw]

after watching the video, it's friggin amazing.. Can't wait until it's released.

didn't even RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

[rant]

but when i hear EA this day all i think is
"EA it's in the game (and it should be fixed by the next update)"

The last 3 games that i have bought were all EA titles, and all contains serious bugs & issues (read online capabilities), and/or require too much work on the user side (read: the guy that play with you and suddenlty disconnect because he didn't/can't configure his router right)

i'm sorry but requiring the user to NAT TCP/UDP ports 8088 to 65535 (and beyond...) is not a solution for Joe Gamer.....

so before annoucing the next buzzword hit, fix your code and show some respect to your customers!

[/rant]

Prior art?

[theCat]

So long as they don't call the game "Magrathea" they'll be fine. And, who did they get to do the fiords?

Rated M for mature

[tecker]

Watching the linked to video There is a mating scene. How much do you want to bet that because of the Mating scene that it will be rated M for mature?

Look at About 8:30 sec into the video.

NFS

[Kirmeo]

NFS:Porsche is still my favorite driving game. The later NFS games are also good, but driving that '55 356 is lots of fun, even though it tops out at 90mph.

That game taught me how to do a 360 one evening. The next day I was driving to work in my Civic on the highway, and I was thinking, "I'm going fast enough to do a 360." Luckily, I know the difference between a game and the real world.. it would only work if I were driving a Porsche, of course.

LGP. I hope you're on this...

[sakti]

I really hope LGP or some other Linux porting company jumps on this one. It looks like an incredibly fun time sink.

Disaster waiting to happen

[The Fun Guy]

Having seen the Google video, I predict this will be a bust. The player goes from cellular life to primitive vertebrates to sentience to resource management to diplomacy to space exploration. Each phase is described as "a simple version of Populous" or "a simple version of SimCity" or "a simple version of Civilization", etc.

People who like to play SimCity are not necessarily going to be interested in playing SimAnt, Populous or Civilization, especially if they have to play games they don't like for 12 hours before they get to advance to be allowed to play the part of the game that they *do* like.

Besides, why would anyone spend a bunch of time playing a series of watered down versions of SimAnt/Populous/SimCity/Civilization when they can play the real thing?

Re:Disaster waiting to happen

[Dunbal]

I predict this will be a bust.

      Sim Earth (Maxis) and Evolution (Discovery) were also disappointments, and were pretty much along the same theme. Nothing new here, but that is hardly a surprise coming from EA.

Re:Disaster waiting to happen

[tolendante]

Nothing new here? Could you please point me to the earlier game that let you evolve a single-celled organism into a sentient being and then take the created race out into a universe populated by beings created by other users.

Re:Disaster waiting to happen

[leoPetr]

OTOH, it's a change from the usual theme of "shoot people with guns". Is that really so bad?^-^

Full video also on Google Video

[idontneedanickname]

The full video including Will Wright's remarks about the demo scene and the procedurally generated games and such is also available on Google Video.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[misleb]

Oh, I understand. I was was only being half serious. And even then, i should have been more specific. I should have said "creationists" or "fundamentalists" and not "Christians." There's a difference.

-matthew

Needs a random evolution "non interference" mode.

[Dillenger69]

I'd like to see them put in a "fishtank" or "ant farm" mode to this game.
Non-interference from the watcher with randomly chosen mutations.
Once they hit sentience, let them choose their own upgrades. ... and so on ...

Many sim games have had nice concepts, but all requre far too much intervention for my taste.

Dupe

[mpsmps]

Here

Not like Sim Earth

[djbentle]

Superficially it sounds like Sim Earth, but watch the video. It's not all macroscopic gameplay. When you start of as a tiny invertebrate, you are controlling one individual creature, not the environment. You are evolving that creature, not letting it evolve in response to your manipulations of the environment.

When it grows to sentience you are modifying it's immediate living conditions, it's village, town, city, etc... What you are controlling grows with the sphere of influence of the creature you create. Eventually when you are controlling things at a planetary, then inter-planetary level, you can seed other creature to other star systems and affect things much more macroscopically, but this is the end game, not the primary gameplay.

Re:Outragous! I must protest with fish sauce

[Anonymous Coward]

My karma ran over your dogma.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[HiThere]

Well, until you put a muzzle on your less tolerant "co-religionists" you can expect to have the most noisy used as a synecdoche for the whole.

It happens with every group. In FOSS the quieter members are seen as supporting the views of the noisy. (From inside it looks quite unfair, but I really don't see how those outside could do anything else.) Similarly, if you want Christianity to have a good public image, then civilize the noisy ones.

Actually, since "Christians" have started getting more political power I find myself less willing to cut any slack to some apparently reasonable person who proclaims "I'm what a Christian really is.". The people censoring books are what a Christian is. The fomenters of mobs are what a Christian is. I've seen them in action, so I recognize them. If you want to identify yourself as the same as them, then why should you expect any toleration?

Re:content does not make a game? (apples)

[xipho]

I did listen to it again and I while I agree with you I think my point holds. He really skirts the problem. The line that bugged me (paraphrased) "its (content) is trending way up... one problem - 2x the content = 2x effort, but *value to player is not 2x as much*, we're fighting a losing battle here". So yes, we can partially solve the problem by ignoring this problem and "scale the possibility space" but really more *content, by it self, is not addressing the issue, its passing the buck to the user. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, its just not a solution to guaranteeing the next great game.

You think this is a good thing....

[Tainek]

I can see it now, my world with creatures full of all the other players creations

by which i mean hundreds of clones of giant penis creatures, and the dreaded goatse monster.....

(dont mod this funny, im not joking...)

Buck Rogers

[jcorno]

They released Buck Rogers: Countdown to Doomsday, my favorite Genesis game of all time. That's enough for me to forgive any number of shitty sports games or indentured programmers.

Re:Buck Rogers

[Anonymous Coward]

WOW, that game is god. I didn't know anybody else knew about that game. Fucking sweet.

Watch out for the defective mutant spores!

[mnemotronic]

It's possible to create dangerous, mutant, cancer-like lifeforms. I created one that got elected to Congress, and another that is running the RIAA.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[cheezit]

Absolutely----I used feel that religion could be benign and that fundamentalists wack jobs would be irrational with or without it. Now I'm much more suspicious of anyone who claims religious motivations, even if they are doing clearly good things (such as Jimmy Carter's Habitat for Humanity efforts). It's not that I think the "nice" religious folks are in fact evil; it's that tolerance for them is the nose under the tent for the bigots, and more and more it seems the zealots are doing exactly what their religion tells them to,

I don't want my principled tolerance to be exploited.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[d34thm0nk3y]

Speaking as a full-on, 100% bible-believing Christian, I very very much would like to play this game. It's a game.

It's definitely NOT a booster to Evolution, in my opinion, because (1) behind it is an intelligent creator...you

100% leaves no room for interpretation. You are stuck with 7 days and humans put in place whole because thats what the thing actually says.

I consider this a huge distinction, but you may consider it a nitpick...

Exactly...

[ElboRuum]

And if it is SimEarth 2.0, will it suck twice as much? I have that old SNES cart somewhere, and from what I remember, the only real control you had was to move sliders and watch. It became very easy to advance your non-civilized organisms to civilization mode just by increasing the advance slider (mutations increase, I suppose). The only real thing you had complete control over was the terraform of Mars, but this was near impossible to do in the time allotted. At least screen savers can be entertaining.

EA is publishing this?

[ClamIAm]

I was excited for Spore. Now I realize that EA is publishing it. Looks like I won't be buying it.

Re:EA is publishing this?

[gunmod]

All a publisher does is SELL the game. EA is not DEVELOPING it.

Re:EA is publishing this?

[ClamIAm]

All a publisher does is SELL the game.

Well, publishers do more than that, but that's not the point. The point here is that EA gets a cut of the profit. I refuse to support a corporation that cannot compete based on the merits of its product, and treats workers' rights as unimportant.

he he, he thinks we like scientology

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody likes scientology, and I can't say shit about it because shit is to good for it.

Btw, pretty lame joke and I think the game looks cool too.

Primordial Life?

[homebrewmike]

Until Spore is released, give Primordial Life a spin: http://www.io.com/~spofford/

Your Mission ... to Explore Strange New Worlds

[WillAffleckUW]

mess with their evolutionary tracks, develop bigger brains, evolve their civilization, and buy a Giant Flying Saucer so you can Explore even more.

The video was very cool.

I for one, welcome our new world-killer bomb-dropping, species-mixing, world-transforming, spore-developed Overlords!

Obligatory Douglas Adams:

[Bloke down the pub]

I haven't seen any other species build civilizations, archive history, or launch space flights.

"It is an important and popular fact that things are not always what they seem. For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much - the wheel, New York, wars and so on - whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man - for precisely the same reasons."

Douglas Adams

Anybody remember Eco?

[Bertie]

I see much talk of how innovative and groundbreaking this game is. Well, I beg to differ. I remember a game very much along these lines on the Atari ST. It was called Eco, was written by a team called Denton Designs and released by the EA of their day, Ocean Software. Here's a write-up on it. I@m sure you'll see the parallels.

Now, remember, this was nineteen years ago. When those 16-bit machines came out, game design suddenly became hugely interesting and innovative, and to my mind we've been stagnating ever since.

Re:Outragous! I must protest!

[Bloke down the pub]

If they really wanted to get some reactionary types mad, they could even include various modes for all of the crazy creation myths from various world religions.

You're very clever for getting modded up, young man. But it's no use - it's turtles, all the way down.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[DorkusMasterus]

I do believe in the creation story as outlined in Genesis. I still don't see what you're trying to say. You are right, 100% bible-believing gives no leeway otherwise. What's your point? (I'm not trying to be offensive, I just don't understand.)

Slashdot games...

[Dunkirk]

The gaming site for members of the Democratic Underground.

You can have it.

You know, I remember a time when there weren't a lot of politics on Slashdot. And, if anything, the stuff that was modded up was solidly libertarian. Eh, maybe I was just young and naive. Now it's gotten bad enough that I no longer browse Slashdot; I merely come over occasionally because of an interesting link from Diggdot. Now I'm finding that about half the time, I'm regretting even that.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[DorkusMasterus]

Oh, I see what you're saying.

You're saying that since we heard about more black people looting New Orleans during the flooding, then the TRUE representatives of black people in New Orleans must be looters. The people who WEREN'T looting must have been some wacko minority, cuz we don't hear about them as much.

Or I guess, since we've only really heard mostly about Nazi-ism in Germany, that Germans are all really Nazis.

Or another example: Since most media descriptions of gay people are all flamboyant and funny, or over the top "girly", then all gay people must be that way, as that is the loudest voice.

I could go on, but perhaps you would like to recant and rephrase what you meant? Cuz right now all I'm getting from you is that "well, the stereotype is what I've heard the most, and they're the most vocal of the group, so regardless of how gross and evil it is, I'm going with the pitchfork-wielding majority on anything."

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[DorkusMasterus]

I understand. I just wanted to point it out, as for many people (see the other posts I've written to elsewhere in this same thread) they DON'T know how to make the distinction between belief/faith and "agenda-leading-religion", and therefore condemn before seeing all who are associated with the major grouping.

Spore link here

[Anonymous Coward]

I am Spore, hear me roar!

www.sporeproductions.com

ha, an awesome idea

[hypergreatthing]

No idea if this is even thought about, but since this is a sim-life to civ type of a game, it would be cool if your "spore" evolved to a point where it could interact with other people's spore. Basically, when they have spaceships, you could fight other people's creatures since they should all be dependent on their initial development/evolution. Say your creature was more inteligent or stronger than another.

Maybe a mode where you could play vs. someone else on the same planet for domination from a microbe. That would be cool too.

My...uh....name...y'know...

[Colourspace]

...Is...uh.. will.....wright...uh...and...y'know....my....new.. .uh....game....uh....is...uh...............spore.. .uh...and....uh.....y'know..........I....think.... .uh.y'know........my....new......sig....is....uh.. ..y'know.....gonna....uh...be....SPORE

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[malex23]

So? What does it matter if the guy doesn't believe in evolution. I don't believe in the Greek pantheon, but I can still play God of War...

S'pore: theme for a game.

[Ivan Matveitch]

Great food and hot women---way better than pong.

Re:Typical

[idsofmarch]

You were modded troll because you deserved it.

Conservatives feel that Spore will open the way to fully immersing our youth into the Intelligent Design movement.
This is funny.

Liberals hope that Spore will open the way to fully immersing our youth into bi-transsexual organisms with no morals or values.
This is not. And it's not funny because you take the funny part: "bi-transexual organisms" and push it too far with the "no morals or values." You're not being funny, you're attacking.

As for your second comment, this is just typical "I'm being oppressed" from someone who doesn't like getting modded down for being an asshole while trying and failing to set up a joke.

Just think of it this way, someone marking you troll is just another joke, and you can take a joke right?

suuuure it is

[pyrrho]

no way do I believe EA is getting off the brand-lease crack... you must be nuts.

It's nice to say when you have a game like this to sell though.

Obligatory Sim Life quote

[Blaaguuu]

Ooh... Ooh.. Ooh la laa...

Re:Typical

[shelterpaw]

From Wikipedia: In Internet terminology, a troll is a person who posts rude or offensive messages on the Internet, such as in online discussion forums, to disrupt discussion or to upset its participants. -- So you're right and wrong.

The parent post would be considered the original troll and I would be responding with a troll comment myself in the context of the article, although were not attacking the article in anyway. However marking someone a troll is not what you say it is in this context.

I thought the original conservative comment was funny as was mine and I was disappointed, but not surprised to see it modded down (negative/troll). However my original comment even makes me laugh harder because it rings some truth, just look how personal you took it. ha!ha!ha!

Cheat Code discovered!

[DulcetTone]

Enter /IntelligentDesign and you're given all the upgrades that otherwise take days of evolution.

tone

EA is changing?

[swordgeek]

"EA is stumbling, and a big part of its time-tested strategy is about to change."

Ooh, this sounds good. Does it mean that they're going to write original, quality software?

"The company hopes that its next mega-franchise..."

Hmm. Apparently not. Pity.

Re:Typical

[idsofmarch]

I wasn't taking your joke personally, I thought it was just badly told, but what I thought needed comment was your follow-up which was a long "the liberals are oppressing me" bleat. Both comments were trolls or "disrupting the conversation" but they were also funny, but I can't stand it when people whine about comments, especially with some psuedo-political complaint as if the labels "liberal" and "conservative" meant anything.

Get this through your head, the joke was poorly told, that's why you got a troll. But, hopefully you can stop whining like a little bitch because you now have +4 funny as of this writing.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[Clockwork Apple]

Seems like the version of Intelligent Design that Spore depicts is a fairly ungodly one. I would imagine there will probably be a few theists pissed off. If the intelligent designer was once a single cell creture too, then why worship it? After that, its all turtles all the way down....

I hope there will be an option for random mutation play. I want to start a game up and just check it periodically and see how it's doing, what it has become. Not taking control until the tribal level of the game.

C.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[Txiasaeia]

As someone who believes that the Genesis accounts are as close to being literal as possible (inasmuch as it's possible to describe the creation of the universe using mere words), I'm very much looking forward to Spore. Yes, it's based on the concept of religion, but I've happily played games such as Mechwarrior 2, based on the concept of galactic warfare in the 31st century, or UFO, based on the concept that we're not alone in the universe and either we kill the aliens or the aliens kill us. It's a game, one that's not even particularly offensive, as far as I'm concerned. Somebody who plays Spore isn't being converted to believe in evolution.

I think that, if anybody plays the game (or watches the video), they'd agree with me regardless of their religious affiliation.

Talk about a remake

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see, start with primordial life, mess with it's evolution, evolve up to spaceflight... Hmmm, let's see.
Oh yeah, SIM EARTH!
Talk about DejaVu.

Re:Spore video - logins to pqhp

[RemovableBait]

Bah! No need to even waste time with bugmenot, you don't need email verification. I just mashed the keyboard for each field (alsuifdg@fdlgh.fd) and did pretty well. ;-)

News at 11!

[Anonymous Coward]

Water is wet.

SPORE UPDATE COMING SOON... *MARCH 23 2006

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't understand why this story was posted today.

On March 26, 2006 and March 23, Wright will be giving two seperate speeches on Spore and game design. This video is from a previous Game Developers Conference (GDC), so the coming event should be as surprising.

really looking forward to this game!

Re:Spore video - logins to pqhp

[necro2607]

rofl.. nice :D

Spore video

[EdMcMan]

This has probably been posted, but I didn't see it. It's a half hour video of Spore. It's old, but amazing.

Spore video

I see the MMORPG now.

[Anonymous Coward]

Grinding at the paramecium pool for days on end for the +6 cilia drop, only to be ganked by those anal pore virii.. and/or zerged by antibodies.

Procedural Generation

[Anonymous Coward]

It's nice to see developers finally taking up procedural generation, which David Braben pioneered 15 years ago in Frontier: Elite II.
That game had hundreds and hundreds of star systems, with full sized planets, to visit and yet fitted on one floppy disk on the Amiga (with additional save disk).
Some of the 'story' planets were predefined, but the rest was entirely procedural.
I miss that game...

Re:Procedural Generation

[jafuser]

I miss that procedurally generated universe as well. We still don't have an open-ended space game like it. Some come close, but you can't land on planets seamlessly, or the universe is pre-generated (and therefore limited in scale). The "wormhole" 16-bit overflow bug even added a whole new angle to it.

Frontier was an amazingly huge universe that fit on a single floppy disk. I hope the success of Spore will inspire a new generation of procedurally-generated game content.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[Thing 1]

Actually, since "Christians" have started getting more political power I find myself less willing to cut any slack to some apparently reasonable person who proclaims "I'm what a Christian really is.". The people censoring books are what a Christian is. The fomenters of mobs are what a Christian is. I've seen them in action, so I recognize them.

I created a new sig the other day. Literally, like 3 days ago. It's quite relevant to this discussion, so for those with sigs turned off, or if I change it later and this post doesn't make sense, here it is:

Religion isn't designed to benefit the religious leaders after their deaths. It gives them power while alive!

The whole point is to fool the audience into looking one way while you stick your hands in their pockets. "You" being the religious leader, of course.

So why do people get so up in arms defending the people defrauding them?

It's a weird fucking world, man.

Going to be awesome.

[Mathness]

It made me think of a game for the C64. It had simple vector graphics (Like in Elite).
The game consisted of looking for a mate, trying not to get killed and finding food.
If you managed to get a mate, you could change some parameters on the creature, resulting in a new creature with some altered features.
Great game, and I can't wait for SPORE.

Anyone remember the game for the C64? I can't find it on any of my working discs and tapes. :(
I am thinking of Alter Ego, but that is another game completely.

I'm interesting 1 year ago, and ...

[ChocoBean]

..and i'm still interested now.

This article actually is kind of dry and boring, but because the game looks like so much fun I think I do care that EA is doing it. As far as I can tell
--EA does franchises of popular games year after year.
--those franchises haven't been doing extremely well recently
--they cost a lot of licencing money
--they want more in-house hits

So...I'm really afraid that EA is going to chop up Spore from one giantic orgasmically good experience into several mildly orgasmically good games, to be released one each year or something.

Hence, if EA thinks this is going to save them, it makes me a lot more worried than if EA is only paying Will and his team a lot of money to "go nuts and have fun" like they're supposed to.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actully, E.A. is permitted to make a game about whatever they wish, even though E.A. isn't making Spore, they're distributing it. Will Wright also has the write to make any claims he wishes, and make any game he wants, because he's an American. If he makes something that's offensive, feel free to refrain from purchasing it.

Seems Like a Smart Move

[bluto00]

I'm impressed with EA for gambling on this move. Seems like they are trying to rework the traditional sequences of synergy in their favor. They probably realize it's a race to the bottom having to bid ever more money against an ever greater number of competitors to start or renew sports and movie licensing. Focusing on inhouse content is cheaper, and with hits successful enough to be flipped into other media (this is where the gambling comes in - will Spore succeed to the point of Hollywood scripts being commissioned for its movie?), the payoff is potentially massive.

ya EA

[tabby]

So does this mean I can look forward to:

Spore 2007
Spore 2008
Spore 2009
Spore 2010 ...

Downright LIE

[gunmod]

"EA's ambitious goal is to create more such innovative, internally developed games "

EA are game PRODUCERS.
EA does NOT develop games.
EA BUYS games from DEVELOPERS and PRODUCES them.
Developers write the game, provide and actual game, and then sell it to a producer.
A Producer markets, packages and sells the game.
So the above quote is a flat out lie.

Re:Christian Backlash? I think not.

[necro2607]

"It's EA's right to make a game that claims whatever they wish, as long as that claim isn't outright slanderous."

For some reason I started thinking of Postal 2... heheh ;)

Re:Typical

[Anonymous Coward]

What's funny is you saying a joke at conservatives is funny but a joke at liberals is not. That's hilarious. Haha, good stuff...

Oh wait, you were serious about being a hypocritcal dumbass. Ooh, ok then, nevermind.