What we learned from spore
- Thread starter pieman11
- Start date
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
I thought the lesson would be not to try too much (since it was an ambitious game that was really two or three games in one). Also, since Spore doesn't really have a predecessor, it's hard to tell what it's dumbed down in comparison too.
StittsvilleJame
Warlord
The problem with Spore is that is isn't so much a game, as it is a simulator. And therefore, really interesting, but not much fun, per se.
That's why I'm glad the developers haven't listened to the whole "blah blah is more realistic than blah" crowd and have focused on creating a game and not a history simulator.
That's why I'm glad the developers haven't listened to the whole "blah blah is more realistic than blah" crowd and have focused on creating a game and not a history simulator.
brianshapiro
King
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2003
- Messages
- 775
SimCity is fun .. and I don't know about anyone else here, but Civilization has become kind of boring to me. There are so few ways you can play the game differently, so every game ends up feeling the same.
StittsvilleJame
Warlord
Simulator was a bad word. I really like SimCity too (except the driving feature in Rush hour, that was lame).
I will echo Dale's comment. Spore was a bunch of editors, but not a game. Which really really made me mad becaus eI was so excited for years for that game.
should change his name to Will WRONG!! brianshapiro
King
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2003
- Messages
- 775
Simulator was a bad word. I really like SimCity too (except the driving feature in Rush hour, that was lame).
I will echo Dale's comment. Spore was a bunch of editors, but not a game. Which really really made me mad becaus eI was so excited for years for that game.
Will Wright at some point got too stuck on his idea of creating "software toys" instead of games I think, at one point he was speaking out against any 'narratives' in games in all saying they were bad. The most successful of his games though do involve some narrative. In SimCity, you're a mayor who wants his city to succeed, and have to keep up with changing demands. In the Sims, you're a person who wants to expand their life and build up their house and have to deal with your cash flow. His worst games were the ones that lacked narratives.. SimLife, SimEarth, etc.. You need challenges.
ZimbuTheMonkey
King
Except Civ Rev was wildly successful.
It got great reviews and most people on XBLA loved it.
Skwink
FRIIIIIIIIIITZ
- Joined
- May 14, 2010
- Messages
- 5,688
Look at the Rev forum, it's nearly dead.
The Almighty dF
Pharaoh
Obviously 2K/Firaxis didn't. It undersold quite largely, and I'd honestly expect Civ5 to do the same at -best-.
The only thing I learned from spore is how hilarious it is to create monsters that one would have thought only an adolescent mind would be amused by.
I never played it though.
I never played it though.
The Almighty dF
Pharaoh
That part was fun.
The kicker? That part was released for free as a demo.
The best part of the game. Was released free as a demo. I think the full creature creation was sold for $5 even, with all parts.
$50 for a game that is largely boring except for cell phase and creature creation
$5 for creature creation
Cell phase also got sold off as its own handheld game.
mjs0
The 4th X
The heart of the vibrant communities built around the other civ titles are the mods.
The primary reason the Rev forum is dead is because you can't mod it!
I'm not convinced of that. I suspect the civ4 forum would still be doing reasonably well if it was not moddable. Most of the discussions in the general and s&t section are about the unmodded game after all.
IMO the simple difference is that the demographic for which civrev was popular is under represented on civfanatics. Lots of possible reasons for that. One being that it's a console game and there is probably some correlation with civfanatics being more into computers than consoles (possibly even because of the modding thing, bringing us back to where you started
)
A final thing. IMO civrev was much simpler a game and had significantly lower replay value. Those two things lead to there being much less to discuss, and less desire to discuss it, on an internet forum. Certainly it's not difficult for most civ veterans to beat Deity on civrev with one hand behind their back.
IMO the simple difference is that the demographic for which civrev was popular is under represented on civfanatics. Lots of possible reasons for that. One being that it's a console game and there is probably some correlation with civfanatics being more into computers than consoles (possibly even because of the modding thing, bringing us back to where you started
)A final thing. IMO civrev was much simpler a game and had significantly lower replay value. Those two things lead to there being much less to discuss, and less desire to discuss it, on an internet forum. Certainly it's not difficult for most civ veterans to beat Deity on civrev with one hand behind their back.
What I learned from Spore is that 5 different half-assed games do not equal 1 good game.
Schuesseled
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 2,081
spore wasn't dumbed down (it didn't have something it could be dumbed down from) it was just a collection of some utterly terrible minigames.
The creature creation and cell phase were okay, and they would have made for little addictive things to do on a bus ride, but instead they slapped on the front of copies of black & white (or maybe populous), civilization and startrek and called it a game.
