Spore Thread Vol. 2 - Instant Kingdom

GAMES ABOUT US DRIFTMOON NOTRIUM FORUM

Forum » Spore Thread Vol. 2

Spore Thread Vol. 2

Grim Reaper 17 years ago

SPORE RELEASE DATE ANNOUNCED!
September 7th (September 5th for Europe) 2008!

Just noticed that the Spore thread was BA-LEETED among a load of other threads, so I decided to restartimate it.

Now then, the basics can be found from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spore (video game) (for those who weren't around before the destruction of the previous Spore thread OR were living under a rock for the past four years or so).

A nice movie clip that has some Spore footage and an awesome discussion between Brian Eno and Will Wright can be found at http://www.fora.tv/fora/fora_player.php?c=355&u=0&t=55216.

Please, do try to enjoy this new thread even if it doesn't have all the sweetness from the old ones.

EDIT: Wiki link fixed, thanks Amarth.

Amarth 17 years ago

I'm pretty sure you meant <a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spore_%28video_game%29">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spore_%28video_game%29</a>

Well, it will be done when it's done I guess. Before or after Cormoon, that's the question.

EDIT: fecking URL encoding...

Grim Reaper 17 years ago

Holy crap, NEW VIDS!

Tidepool:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Col_TIlXALo">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Col_TIlXALo</a>
Creature:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojf9Tbjj-eE">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojf9Tbjj-eE</a>
Tribe:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6Q8iZWaJkc">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6Q8iZWaJkc</a>
Civilization:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h50Til09L8">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h50Til09L8</a>
Space:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCKQ8xrC-MY">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCKQ8xrC-MY</a>

MageKing17 17 years ago

"Grim Reaper" said:
Holy crap, NEW VIDS!

QFE

Grim Reaper 17 years ago

[OT]

"MageKing17" said:
"Grim Reaper" said:
Holy crap, NEW VIDS!
QFE

Quoted For Emphasis, right? [/OT]

MageKing17 17 years ago

[OT]

"Grim Reaper" said:
Quoted For Emphasis, right?

That would be correct.[/OT]

Pete 17 years ago

Tidepool: YUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The original one was SO much better!

Creature: The same.

Tribe: Yaaay blue flames! But seems to be good.

Civilization: Editors. Awesome.

Space: Not much new there.

Overall: Seems like theyre making progress, but I liked the style of the very first video much more.

The Gemini 17 years ago

Wonders if it is possible to create walkers. I'm kinda tired of wheels, its an overused mean of transportation.

Grim Reaper 17 years ago

"The Gemini" said:
Wonders if it is possible to create walkers. I'm kinda tired of wheels, its an overused mean of transportation.

It IS possible. There's a picture somewhere on the Internets of a four legged walker.

Murska 17 years ago

The sea creature with the water filled domes is quite cool.

MageKing17 17 years ago

"Pete" said:
Tidepool: YUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The original one was SO much better!

Wanker.

The Gemini 17 years ago

"Grim Reaper" said:
"The Gemini" said:
Wonders if it is possible to create walkers. I'm kinda tired of wheels, its an overused mean of transportation.
It IS possible. There's a picture somewhere on the Internets of a four legged walker.

Yaey! My superior walkers will crush ALL RESISTANCE!!! MUHAHAHHA

Murska 17 years ago

Maybe they'll crush resistance, but they themselves will BECOME resistance, which will be crushed, against my army of whatever is the most effective, hopefully hovering.

Crazy 17 years ago

Tadpool stage != cellural stage.

I guess tadpool is what's between 2d and 3d.

Amarth 17 years ago

"Murska" said:
Maybe they'll crush resistance, but they themselves will BECOME resistance, which will be crushed, against my army of whatever is the most effective, hopefully hovering.

But since there is only passive multiplayer, no one will ever know it.

I don't see it, Wright. What's wrong with normal competitive multiplayer? Why won't I be able to pit my creations against those of someone else I know?

Grim Reaper 17 years ago

It'd be fun if there came a mod or an expansion to the game where you can play different multiplayer game things.

Zombie 17 years ago

"Amarth" said:
"Murska" said:
Maybe they'll crush resistance, but they themselves will BECOME resistance, which will be crushed, against my army of whatever is the most effective, hopefully hovering.
But since there is only passive multiplayer, no one will ever know it.

I don't see it, Wright. What's wrong with normal competitive multiplayer? Why won't I be able to pit my creations against those of someone else I know?

Maybe you will. I think that, right now, they're concentrating on making the game work in massive singleplayer (passive multiplayer) before even worrying about how to balance active multiplayer. I mean, did it ever occur to you that in active multi, a spacefaring civ could just blow your planet up? What then? It's game over for you. Restart from square one.

Defeat in Spore is meant to be ultimate defeat. If you are defeated, that is IT, especially in a multiplayer situation. The nature of the game would call for a persistant multiplayer "area" as well. It is probably do-able in the form of sending an "expedition" or "colony pod" or somesuch to a MP area (which would be created between your computer and your friends' computer) that starts both species off at any level wished. I would like to see human civ-vs-civ battles as well as tribe-vs-tribe and possibly even planet-vs-planet battles. I do think, however, that vehicles, weapons, and many other things would need to be fleshed out a lot more that we've heard they will be so far. Saying, "Oh, they could do active MP if they can do passive MP" is all well and good, but it doesn't make it true.

I think they WANT to make Spore active MP and might hope to eventually get there. Remember that, lately, Will's creations tend to end up with many, many expansion packs. For now just remember that Spore is only passive MP for a reason: Human-vs-human interactions are usually much more advanced and complex than human-vs-AI interactions. AIs do not get bored of fighting humans, yet. Humans like many ways to kill varied enemies and I don't know if Spore has balancing and components necessary to facilitate how intense human MP gaming can get. After all, what fun would MP be if all we can do are build units that all use the same weapon, essentially, and have little to no differences in defense against said weapon? If it's a battle of pure numbers, I doubt anyone would have much fun as it would degrade into "the most persistent one wins" or "the most numerous one wins" which would be very boring.

Stop complaining about spore and, FYI, I think the tidepool phase is probably going to look different to US than it did in that video. Keep in mind that the GDC is made to show off game DEVELOPING, not market games or show off new products in gaming, really. It's a conference for game developers so showing what a procedurally generated creature looks like and moves like is very important. We will be able to zoom in and out, as has been demonstrated in a number of situations, and that video was likely zoomed in a lot to showcase the procedurally generated movement of a small creature with many small, moving parts.

On another note, I am now very sad because I almost had a chance to attend the GDC this year and I definitely would have if I would have known that Spore would be shown there. ;-; [quote="Amarth"][quote="Murska"]Maybe they'll crush resistance, but they themselves will BECOME resistance, which will be crushed, against my army of whatever is the most effective, hopefully hovering.[/quote]But since there is only passive multiplayer, no one will ever know it. I don't see it, Wright. What's wrong with normal competitive multiplayer? Why won't I be able to pit my creations against those of someone else I know?[/quote] Maybe you will. I think that, right now, they're concentrating on making the game work in massive singleplayer (passive multiplayer) before even worrying about how to balance active multiplayer. I mean, did it ever occur to you that in active multi, a spacefaring civ could just blow your planet up? What then? It's game over for you. Restart from square one. Defeat in Spore is meant to be ultimate defeat. If you are defeated, that is IT, especially in a multiplayer situation. The nature of the game would call for a persistant multiplayer "area" as well. It is probably do-able in the form of sending an "expedition" or "colony pod" or somesuch to a MP area (which would be created between your computer and your friends' computer) that starts both species off at any level wished. I would like to see human civ-vs-civ battles as well as tribe-vs-tribe and possibly even planet-vs-planet battles. I do think, however, that vehicles, weapons, and many other things would need to be fleshed out a lot more that we've heard they will be so far. Saying, "Oh, they could do active MP if they can do passive MP" is all well and good, but it doesn't make it true. I think they WANT to make Spore active MP and might hope to eventually get there. Remember that, lately, Will's creations tend to end up with many, many expansion packs. For now just remember that Spore is only passive MP for a reason: Human-vs-human interactions are usually much more advanced and complex than human-vs-AI interactions. AIs do not get bored of fighting humans, yet. Humans like many ways to kill varied enemies and I don't know if Spore has balancing and components necessary to facilitate how intense human MP gaming can get. After all, what fun would MP be if all we can do are build units that all use the same weapon, essentially, and have little to no differences in defense against said weapon? If it's a battle of pure numbers, I doubt anyone would have much fun as it would degrade into "the most persistent one wins" or "the most numerous one wins" which would be very boring. Stop complaining about spore and, FYI, I think the tidepool phase is probably going to look different to US than it did in that video. Keep in mind that the GDC is made to show off game DEVELOPING, not market games or show off new products in gaming, really. It's a conference for game developers so showing what a procedurally generated creature looks like and moves like is very important. We will be able to zoom in and out, as has been demonstrated in a number of situations, and that video was likely zoomed in a lot to showcase the procedurally generated movement of a small creature with many small, moving parts. On another note, I am now very sad because I almost had a chance to attend the GDC this year and I definitely would have if I would have known that Spore would be shown there. ;-;

Idiota 17 years ago

What if they just made the universe REALLY big? As in, so REALLY big that the chances of a higher level civ findig you are really small, until you start spacefaring yourself?

But I like sandbox games. I don't need this game to be a multiplayer.

Crazy 17 years ago

Aye, same here.

But i guess there's always the possibility that they include a feature that allow you to load a specific creature into you world. That would allow you to pit your creature/tribe/colony/UFO against your friend's, though indirectly.

MageKing17 17 years ago

"Idiota" said:
But I like sandbox games. I don't need this game to be a multiplayer.

QFFE (Quoted For F***ing Emphasis).

Grim Reaper 17 years ago

Not saying that it NEEDS multiplayer. It's just an interesting idea thing.

Zombie 17 years ago

"MageKing17" said:
"Idiota" said:
But I like sandbox games. I don't need this game to be a multiplayer.
QFFE (Quoted For F***ing Emphasis).

DFMMFEB (Ditto For More Mother F***int Emphasis, B****)

I agree. My post above was merely to offer a point of view on why active MP is probably not going to make it into the initial release and why it might actually never be fully implemented. There are simply far too many variables and being able to account for them all would take some serious programming, IMHO. There would be nothing to stop someone from rushing up to sentient beings and civilized life just so they can roll over your tribe with tanks. While I'm sure that, if enough demand for active MP was presented, they'd figure it out... The fact that they're basically saying, "Here's your world. It'll learn from the worlds of others. Have fun and do what you like." is simply amazing. It will hopefully offer an unprecedented amount of freedom and creativity in a game, and you want that freedom with active multiplayer? You do know that if it is unbalanced and not that fun that you will likely complain about it to no end and might even demand it be fixed? I think Spore is super-hot anyway, and its passive MP concept has my interest because it allows constructive display and contest of creativity.

I do think a really awesome MP possibility that should be considered are creatures that are symbiotic in nature or creatures that group together for mutual benefit. Like the species of bird that perch on the back of hippos to clean off the crap. The hippo gets clean and the birdie gets food. Relationships like that between two players or even just in the sandbox would blow my mind. It would be totally rockin'!

Barebones 17 years ago

I've just recently discovered that, instead of players being updated with the statuses of other creatures, what you do instead is decide what creatures can enter your world by downloading them off the interwebs, or off a server accessed in-game. So technically its still VERY sandbox-like. There is no real multiplayer element so to speak of.

Crazy 17 years ago

Wait... so you download these manually?

Amarth 17 years ago

"Crazy" said:
Wait... so you download these manually?

No, the game does it for you. It searches around for what elements your ecosystem needs (as in, we need a slow prey animal, a flying predator and a couple of small thingies) and then searches a central database for these creatures. As each creature is procedurally generated, they are only a couple of KB to download.

Same thing, it downloads the planets of other people for you to explore, but you have a local copy in your own sandbox galaxy. So you can destroy the homeworld of another species, but that species won't suffer on any other computer it is found.

Very nice, all of this, but I'd still like a bit of more competitive multiplayer

.

Crazy 17 years ago

"Barebones" said:
I've just recently discovered that, instead of players being updated with the statuses of other creatures, what you do instead is decide what creatures can enter your world by downloading them off the interwebs, or off a server accessed in-game. So technically its still VERY sandbox-like. There is no real multiplayer element so to speak of.

Amarath, that's what the videos say, but Barebones here tells otherwise.

Amarth 17 years ago

Oh... Got any sources, Barebones?

Grim Reaper 17 years ago

I'd say the manual downloading would be available, mostly for those people who have, say, Dial-Up or otherwise do not wish to have the internet connection on all the time.

Also, providing that you have a constant internet connection, you can't really "choose" what enters your realm, at least not before the Space stage. When you get that far, you can say "I don't want any creatures from this player" or "I want all the creatures from this player" and so on.

Barebones 17 years ago

"Spore Illustrated" said:
There will be a local database solution to everything. If you have no internet connection you can still play the entire game. However, you will not be able to access content from the web.

http://spore.strategyplanet.gamespy.com/info.html

I assume that this theory you have of creatures being downloaded to fit an ecosystem's needs is handled locally. I'm not denying that there's a possibility however. There's just too many sources one could cite for different information considering what the topic is about.

Amarth 17 years ago

Will Wright's keynote on SXSW. Interesting read, of course, but it's quite high-level about Spore.

Grim Reaper 17 years ago

Just updating the thread with something we already know:

Spore delayed. Again. Likely release date sometime in late fiscal 2008 or early fiscal 2009, or in calendar time, sometime in spring 2009.

Murska 17 years ago

Blah. A year more of waiting.

Quanrian 17 years ago

The only thing I'm sure of, is that by the game comes out it's going to be far more structured. This sounds pretty negative, but with projects like this, they tend to get watered down greatly from the concept to final phase of development. I remember how Gene Wars for example was 'supposed' to be, and what we got... not so kewl. So I'm going to reserve my doubts, but it's not like this game wont sell purely based on hype alone.

Grim Reaper 17 years ago

"Quanrian" said:
but it's not like this game wont sell purely based on hype alone.

I second that, 'specially if they're gonna be pushing the release date farther and farther away.

Hopefully Spore won't go DNF (Duke Nukem Forever or whatever it was) on us.

Quanrian 17 years ago

I love the concept, don't get me wrong. I just have a real goat's attitude when someone tells me they're going to create something so open ended. Truely open ended up stuff simply doesn't work without a truckload of glitches, so they always trim it down. Once they make something that actually works you end up with something that tends to severely limit your variations in meaningful ways.

While the cosmetic look may vary, I have my doubts that it'll have the drastic effect on gameplay that they imply it will. Simply look at any game that offers variation and you'll often see people settle in common nitches simply because they work so well or better than everything else. If and when I get something workable to test 'and' it runs on 98SE, than I might change my view, but not until than.

Forum » Spore Thread Vol. 2

Post Reply