[HN Gopher] Spore Stats
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Spore Stats
        
       Author : DangerousYams
       Score  : 148 points
       Date   : 2023-06-11 08:17 UTC (14 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.spore.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.spore.com)
        
       | cynicalsecurity wrote:
       | Spore was kind of a disappointment.
        
       | MagicMoonlight wrote:
       | I want a modern sequel for this. It was so good. Making your
       | little wigglebugs and then conquering the other wigglebugs and
       | burning their towns and taking their women.
        
         | samstave wrote:
         | Spore with Subnautica style graphics would be nice.
        
           | smoldesu wrote:
           | Kinda what No Man's Sky is, but with more of an emphasis on
           | creature discovery than evolution.
           | 
           | I guess it's not _exactly_ the same thing, but I always look
           | forward to the shitty RNG-based plants and animals it cooks
           | up. It feels right out of a Will Wright game.
        
       | actionfromafar wrote:
       | Last time I played Spore a long time ago, it was very limited and
       | linear.
        
         | DonHopkins wrote:
         | Will's original intention, which didn't really come to fruition
         | in the final game, was that Spore would have a "T" shaped
         | structure, where you start at the base of the "T" and work your
         | way up to the top bar, like a guided tutorial.
         | 
         | The top bar of the "T" is is a horizontal intergalactic
         | storytelling game spanning all the other levels, that lets you
         | swoop back down to the lower levels.
         | 
         | But the swooping down part didn't really work, because it was
         | hard to come up with scenarios, missions, and stories about
         | unicellular organisms that were relevant to intergalactic
         | civilizations (or players).
         | 
         | So the layers tended to be isolated from each other, and not
         | have direct or interesting effects on each other, because of
         | their different physical and temporal and technological scales.
         | 
         | The fact that each layer was developed by a different team also
         | caused dependency problems that limited the possibility space,
         | the way each layer had to made its own assumptions that would
         | constrain the adjacent layers (a problem you wouldn't have if
         | they were all independent games).
         | 
         | And the storytelling aspect didn't work as well as it did with
         | The Sims, which let you simply take screen snapshots and write
         | captions and publish them on The Sims Exchange. That was
         | because people know more about the interpersonal dynamics of
         | families (or even cities) than unicellular organisms or
         | intergalactic civilizations, so players have their own stories
         | to tell and don't need much support from the game simulation
         | itself.
         | 
         | For example, there is no need to actually simulate or model the
         | motivations or feelings of Sims characters when you're writing
         | or acting out a story about them: That's all up to the player
         | to use their imagination to fill in.
         | 
         | But there just aren't as many interesting topics to write
         | stories about in the higher and lower levels of Spore, that
         | aren't focused on individual people or communities.
         | 
         | https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-future-of-content-will-wri...
         | 
         | >T shaped game.
         | 
         | >The base of the T is a goal oriented gaming.
         | 
         | >The player first goes through a tutorial and sandbox to learn
         | editing tools and game play at each level.
         | 
         | >Player can eventually surf down to the lower levels.
         | 
         | >Goal oriented game trains you to use all the editors and
         | teaches you the simulation dynamics at every level, from bottom
         | to top.
         | 
         | >Once you get to the top you can surf vertically down into the
         | other games, that you've learned to use on the way up.
         | 
         | >At the top of the T is a collection of science fiction story
         | genres, that take place on top of all of the lower levels.
         | 
         | >Once you make your way all the way up from unicellular life to
         | intergalactic civilization, the storytelling begins.
         | 
         | >Pull out to galactics level, 10's of thousands of worlds.
         | 
         | >Like the movie Powers to Ten.
         | 
         | >Always wanted to roll this into a game.
         | 
         | >SETI: Drake's equation: N = R fs fp ne fl fi fc L.
         | 
         | >Each term of the equation correspond to different power of
         | scale.
         | 
         | >"Wright linked Drake's equation, which computes the
         | probability of life occurring in the universe, with the long
         | zoom of Eames' Powers of Ten film." -Chaim Gingold, A Brief
         | History of Spore
         | 
         | Chaim Gingold, A Brief History of Spore:
         | 
         | http://www.levitylab.com/blog/2011/02/brief-history-of-spore...
         | 
         | >Story
         | 
         | >Spore's early concept had no structured sense of time or
         | sequence. Would players begin by forming a stable galaxy,
         | stars, planets, and then set to creating life? Or perhaps they
         | would evolve life on a planet, hit it with some asteroids, and
         | try to get panspermia to happen? Like a universe before a
         | creation myth, Spore had no obvious beginning, middle, or end.
         | Deciding the game would move through a handful of stages, from
         | cells to creatures, up through civilization, and then into
         | space exploration, was crucial to getting the game concept to
         | gel, at a high level.
         | 
         | >Structured narratives are unusual for Maxis games, but Spore's
         | vast scope required a skeletal structure to hang the game off
         | of. Besides, what story could be more appropriate than the
         | evolution of life, and development of civilization? The story
         | allowed both the developers and players to locate themselves in
         | a narrative about the growth and expansion of life. It became
         | possible to inhabit one phase of the game, and think about
         | where you were coming from, and where you were off to. As
         | developers, we could divide our efforts, and think about how
         | the design grew out of the previous level, through this one,
         | and into the next phase of the game. Even with this high level
         | linear structure, Spore was still a monster project, in terms
         | of scope. And, of course, by dividing our production effort
         | into level based teams we set up any kind of inter-level design
         | tradeoff and coordination to be an organizational hassle.
        
           | slfnflctd wrote:
           | I really like that T shaped concept. It almost seems familiar
           | to me, I may have ran across something about it at the time.
           | 
           | I remember looking forward to the game for quite a while--
           | then after release, when the reviews were so mixed, I lost
           | interest. It didn't sound close enough to what I'd been
           | reading about.
           | 
           | This part seems key to me:
           | 
           | > the layers tended to be isolated from each other, and not
           | have direct or interesting effects on each other
           | 
           | If that could be looked at more closely, reworked & resolved
           | better, another attempt at executing the original vision
           | might turn out to be worthwhile. I would love to see a team
           | with enough expertise (and budget) give it a try.
           | 
           | After seeing how No Man's Sky has evolved, it seems to me
           | like Hello Games might be one possible strong contender. Or
           | at least someone who was heavily involved with working on
           | that title.
        
         | vidarh wrote:
         | When my son plays it, I think he spends the majority of the
         | time on the creature creation rather than actually playing.
        
           | MattPalmer1086 wrote:
           | Same. The overall game itself is a bit meh, but it's fun
           | creating different kinds of creature.
        
         | __jonas wrote:
         | when I played it extensively a as a kid, it was never about
         | playing the actual 'game' part of it, the whole community
         | emerged around creating things in the in game editor and
         | sharing them.
        
           | DonHopkins wrote:
           | And that is the whole point, how you win the game: become
           | involved with the content creation community!
           | 
           | The powerful but easy to use direct manipulation editor
           | tools, the automatic content sharing system, and the online
           | community around user created content, were together the most
           | innovative and successful things about Spore. (As contrasted
           | with the not as well realized gameplay and storytelling
           | design goals.)
           | 
           | Direct Manipulation Interface:
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_manipulation_interface
           | 
           | Chaim Gingold, A Brief History of Spore:
           | 
           | http://www.levitylab.com/blog/2011/02/brief-history-of-
           | spore...
           | 
           | >Creativity
           | 
           | >Of course, these aren't any old aliens we ask players to
           | invest in -- they're your creation, your aliens. Once you
           | start customizing, and design your creature, emotional
           | investment is generated. It's magic. Even the ugly ones are
           | loved by their parents. Many games thrive on the interest
           | generated by players' creative investment. Console role
           | playing games, for example, get this effect when players
           | invest time in equipping and naming characters. I've always
           | felt more attached to my characters as I fuss over their
           | outfits and equipment. Creative interaction seems to always
           | generate emotional involvement and attachment.
           | Psychologically, it would seem that part of this stems from
           | the sunk cost fallacy -- we become attached to things we've
           | invested time and energy into. Of course, it's not just the
           | hundreds of hours invested in a World of Warcraft character,
           | their relationships, and possessions that generate
           | attachment, it's the sense that our fabrications are
           | extensions of ourselves. As recipients of our attention and
           | creative energy, our handiworks are reflections of who we
           | are, tangible manifestations of our personalities. It's no
           | wonder we become attached to what we make, and take the
           | success or failure of our own work and ideas very personally.
           | 
           | >Spore neatly solves the alien attachment problem by asking
           | the player to design them. If a player makes a creature, and
           | it's appealing, they'll be quite invested in it. Reflecting
           | on the success of The Sims Exchange, where players shared
           | stories, characters, houses, and objects for The Sims, Will
           | realized that shared creativity would give Spore a broader
           | appeal. Why not build creative exchange into the game, rather
           | than as a website that orbits it? Player created assets are
           | constantly being uploaded and downloaded by Spore, enough
           | material to fill a galaxy. There's nothing like taking home
           | your latest finger painting, and having mom hang it on the
           | fridge for everyone to see. Sharing not only fills up the
           | galaxy with cool stuff, but allows the entire world to see
           | your fridge, motivating you to continue creating.
           | 
           | >Of course, a lot of deep magic must work properly for
           | something like Spore's creature creator to function properly.
           | It must be natural to use, easily producing satisfying
           | results for anyone, from beginners to advanced users. And
           | these aliens, lumps of polygons that no animator has ever
           | seen before, must be brought to life. These are rather
           | complicated endeavors, from a design, aesthetic, and
           | technical point of view, but the player should never notice
           | any of it. The game design implications are also challenging
           | -- the game must be playable and interesting, regardless of
           | the creatures dropped into it.
        
         | ranguna wrote:
         | I replayed it a few weeks ago and in terms of linearity, that's
         | partially true. The game progress is pretty much set in stone,
         | but you can chose how you play each stage, by being a diplomate
         | or hostile (or a mix of both). Both options vary the game to
         | some extent.
         | 
         | I for one see this simplicity as a feature. Recent simulation
         | games are waaaaaay too complicated, and although fun, they
         | start to overload my head after a few 10s of hours played.
         | Spore on the other hand, is part of the classic game era where
         | the control nobs are simple, but the fun you take out of
         | rotating each nob is immeasurable.
         | 
         | If they do remake it, I hope they keep it simple.
        
       | TheCaptain4815 wrote:
       | People who aren't old enough won't understand how much hype this
       | game had. I'm in my 30's and still to this day no game has been
       | more hyped and flopped for myself than spore.
       | 
       | The interesting part is had they went ahead with the "scientific"
       | and realistic route, I'd bet the game would have sold so much
       | more.
        
         | ilyt wrote:
         | Yup. As teenager back then I stopped being hyped for video
         | games as much after that, such a disappointment.
        
         | Ekaros wrote:
         | Black & White is other one I saw hyped... Outside the hype, it
         | was at least somewhat interesting.
        
       | lightedman wrote:
       | Hey, the only game I sued over (and won!)
       | 
       | I wouldn't touch that game after the DRM in that garbage screwed
       | with my GPU (9800GTX+ suddenly no longer to utilize 16:9
       | resolutions) and my DVD drive writing capability was wiped out,
       | both immediately after installing the Spore Creature Creator.
       | 
       | EA got smacked really hard in that courtroom. They settled
       | immediately.
        
         | roughly wrote:
         | I'd forgotten about the DRM! I think that was another
         | significant contributor to the game's lack of commercial
         | success - it came with this horribly onerous & invasive DRM
         | system/root kit (that affected game performance too, as I
         | recall), and was naturally cracked and available unencumbered
         | online day 2. I know I'm not the only one who would've paid
         | money for it without that, but as was, I downloaded it.
        
       | Cupprum wrote:
       | Spore was the first game i ever played, so maybe thats why i
       | liked it that much. I was still a kid back then. I think the
       | target group of spore was younger than they originally planned
       | for.
       | 
       | However i must say, that i really did not like the DLCs, those
       | were just weird. It seemed like Spore thought the community is
       | going to create the content for the DLCs, which never happened.
        
         | pmarreck wrote:
         | I did not even know Spore had DLC's lol
        
       | pierrec wrote:
       | I love that the submission is a direct link to an API endpoint
       | serving straight XML and no one seems to even notice, never
       | change HN.
       | 
       | The API seems to be documented here:
       | https://www.spore.com/comm/samples
       | 
       | Conspiracy theory: the documentation I just linked uses
       | "MaxisDangerousYams" as an example user. The user who submitted
       | this on HN is "DangerousYams". I guess we have a Spore dev here?
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | pmarreck wrote:
       | How many of those creations were phallic though?
        
         | ilyt wrote:
         | 165M
        
         | NeoTar wrote:
         | This may be just a rumour, but I heard that there was a big
         | community of moderators on the search for penises for the
         | online interactions
        
       | gilbetron wrote:
       | No spore thread is complete without the video of Robin Williams
       | playing spore:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5TXEUiR1Xk
       | 
       | (although it makes me a bit sad to post it)
        
       | naillo wrote:
       | At this point I feel like people should just feel free to remake
       | clones (with improvements) of classic titles such as spore and
       | other games that for some reason hasn't gotten a modern version
       | or some kind of continuation. (15 years seems well outside the
       | time where if nothing like it has appeared again, making improved
       | clones shouldn't be discouraged.)
        
         | joshuaissac wrote:
         | For Spore, there is Thrive, an attempt at an open-source
         | replacement: https://revolutionarygamesstudio.com/
        
       | Pxtl wrote:
       | I'm always disappointed the tech behind Spore hasn't gotten more
       | use. I mean, Spore the game was bad, but Spore the system where
       | players could build any kind of animal and vehicle in easy user-
       | friendly tools? Why didn't that take off in other games? The only
       | spin-off was Darkspore which flopped.
        
         | ilyt wrote:
         | ...probably because the spin-off flopped
         | 
         | Also still need to invent fun game to do with your created
         | monstrosities.
        
       | PsylentKnight wrote:
       | I enjoyed Spore a lot. I never saw any of the apparently
       | overhyped marketing, so there were no disappointments for me
       | there. I will admit the gameplay itself was pretty flat - I
       | probably played through the whole game, which was pretty short,
       | only 3 or 4 times. But I'm surprised no one has mentioned the
       | creators, which I think were the really interesting part of the
       | game. They were essentially 3D modelers that were constrained
       | enough that a kid (and I was a kid) could easily use them. I had
       | a ton of fun pushing these creators to their limits.
       | 
       | The Galactic Adventures DLC had an "adventure creator" where you
       | could create simple scenarios with your other creations. I didn't
       | realize it at the time, but this was my first exposure to
       | programming. It really lit my imagination on fire and got me
       | interested in game development, and is ultimately how I ended up
       | as a programmer.
       | 
       | Such was my love for this game, I ended up getting involved in
       | the Spore forum ("The Sporum", ha). Strangely enough, one of the
       | official boards was "Creationism vs. Evolution", or CvE as it was
       | known by the forum's denizens. I grew up in a deeply rural and
       | fundamentalist area, so CvE was my first real exposure to the
       | beliefs of the other side, rather than the strawmen the church
       | presented. I argued sincerely on the side of Creationism and got
       | handily defeated by facts and logic many times. It didn't fully
       | change my mind at the time, but it planted the seeds of
       | deprogramming.
       | 
       | So in a way, this game that was so disappointing for many has a
       | lot of personal significance to me. It had a big influence on my
       | personal beliefs and my career. Thanks I guess, Will Wright.
        
       | i_am_a_peasant wrote:
       | I felt it was a bit underwhelming that when I traveled to the
       | center of the galaxy and got that staff of life thing that
       | instantly makes a planet level 3 habitable. The character that
       | gives it to you tells you to find the 3rd planet from Sol
       | (Earth). I found Earth, expecting another cutscene of some sort,
       | but nothing happened. Earth was just a level 1 (if i recall
       | correctly) habitable planet, so I used the staff to make it level
       | 3 and then I just colonized it and kept it as my main base for a
       | while.
       | 
       | I didn't bother trying to kill all the Borg but I did manage to
       | ally myself with them, which makes the rest of the galaxy your
       | enemy.
        
       | pipeline_peak wrote:
       | As dumb as it sounds, I think I didn't like it because it was too
       | "Will Wrightish". Felt more like Sim City than The Sims.
       | 
       | Sim City was too brainy, my 10 yr old self didn't want to do
       | homework about power/water resources. The Sims was a complete
       | sandbox.
       | 
       | Spore wasn't brainy, but I expected it to be more free form. The
       | 4 stage concept kills any reply value because there's not much
       | left to be curious about. The creature creation was fun, but I
       | don't remember my models having any unique behavior. At least
       | nowhere near like The Sims where I could make them pee and cry
       | >:)
        
         | Mezzie wrote:
         | > Sim City was too brainy, my 10 yr old self didn't want to do
         | homework about power/water resources.
         | 
         | Aw, I always thought those were the best parts (my 4 year old
         | self fucking _loved_ the SimEarth manual - the one that went
         | into detail about things like prokaryotes vs. eukaryotes - and
         | there was a giant SC2K strategy book that was The Best) and
         | didn 't like Spore because it wasn't Will Wright _enough_.
         | 
         | Which was probably the problem: It didn't know which audience
         | it was going for. The Sims was great because you could go as
         | deep as _you wanted_. Like in the Sims 2 I had about 200 unique
         | genetic markers all arranged in a very complex inheritance
         | system, but you didn 't _need_ to do that. Whereas with a lot
         | of the Maxis games you did have to and that 's what you've
         | identified here that I never really thought about.
         | 
         | Did you ever play any of the 90s Maxis Kids games? I'd be
         | curious what you thought of them - especially something like
         | Sim Town.
        
           | pipeline_peak wrote:
           | I guess to be fair, I was never a big Maxis fan lol.
           | 
           | I briefly played just about all of them, but not enough to
           | form an opinion.
           | 
           | I found Streets of Sims to be my favorite because I always
           | loved Twisted Metal and the extension to Sim city maps was
           | really cool. Sim copter felt like well...a Sim and I really
           | didn't know what that was when I was little, so they all just
           | felt like boring intellectual games.
           | 
           | I also touched Sim Towne, Sim Ant, and other weird stuff like
           | that. Again, same feelings.
           | 
           | It wasn't until I touched Roller Coaster Tycoon and Red Alert
           | 2 that I REALLY got into rts games more.
        
       | pickingdinner wrote:
       | A few modern youtubers have great Spore videos. My 7yo wanted to
       | play and I assumed it was going to be in the app store, just to
       | find out it was a Windows game from 2012. An easy install through
       | Steam though.
        
       | JoshuaRedmond wrote:
       | Spore was especially interesting if you used the in game friend
       | list. I had a great time experiencing worlds full of various
       | creatures - a lot of which were from my artistically talented
       | friend playing around with the creation tools. His experience was
       | unfortunately ruined because the game decided that each evolution
       | of my creature was distinct and deserved to be shown to him
       | separately - it was like his whole galaxy was overrun with my
       | (admittedly unimaginative) "wobba-pods" with just different
       | variations of hats and facial hair...
        
       | haunter wrote:
       | The original demonstration from 2005 is one of my earliest
       | Youtube memory https://youtu.be/T8dvMDFOFnA
       | 
       | I wish we got this game, or at least they would release that
       | build one day...
        
         | tuukkah wrote:
         | Full talk: https://youtu.be/N4ScRG_reIw
        
       | hekec wrote:
       | This was the game of my childhood. I really hope someone creates
       | a remake
        
       | ur-whale wrote:
       | I think there's a huge opportunity to do a 2023 remake using
       | generative 3D AI.
        
       | guidedlight wrote:
       | Oh, Spore.
       | 
       | That game was hyped so much, given it was designed by none other
       | than Will Wright it previewed like it would be the most amazing
       | game ever made.
       | 
       | Despite it being reviewed every well upon release, gamers
       | expected even more.
       | 
       | It's a good example of how it is important to temper your
       | customer's expectations regardless if you believe you have a
       | solid product, as you may inadvertently set expectations higher
       | than you can possibly achieve.
        
         | FranzFerdiNaN wrote:
         | An evolution sandbox was promised in the early demo, a boring
         | railroaded game was delivered.
        
         | ChoGGi wrote:
         | > as you may inadvertently set expectations higher than you can
         | possibly achieve
         | 
         | The expectations were mostly from the GDC video, I believe?
         | 
         | Gameplay starts around 12:30:
         | 
         | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ofA6YWVTURU
        
         | dougmwne wrote:
         | For as ambitious as it was, it just didn't have any fun
         | gameplay loops. It ended up being a bunch of mediocre and
         | simplistic clones of much better games tied together with a
         | rather academic concept. It was absolutely innovative, just not
         | in any way that made it fun to play.
        
         | Krasnol wrote:
         | ....and then came Star Citizen.
        
           | Cthulhu_ wrote:
           | One day, maybe, as long as whales keep pumping money into
           | hypothetical ships that they might be able to use in a
           | hypothetical upcoming game.
        
             | geraldwhen wrote:
             | Star citizen is the most obvious money laundering scheme
             | imaginable. I await the documentary in 15 years.
        
         | ehnto wrote:
         | It's usually not the developers fault, games media exploits
         | hype from ferverent speculation to the point where even the
         | things unsaid become evidence for features that don't exist.
         | 
         | It doesn't happen to every game just like not every video goes
         | viral, but if the community picks your game to be next life
         | changing event in their lives you will 100% disappoint them.
         | It's been getting worse over the years and I basically don't
         | pay attention to negative reviews anymore.
         | 
         | It feels like an over-centre mechanism, games can't be "good",
         | they have to be the best ever or total trash, no in between.
        
           | acdha wrote:
           | The big game studios set that narrative entirely for
           | marketing purposes. They make hugely expensive games and
           | expect epic profits so they want things to be hyped up "must
           | buy" phenomena rather than slow growing, similar to how
           | Hollywood focuses on the opening weekend sales.
           | 
           | If they wanted to change this it'd be easy to fun smaller
           | games (or ones with less expensive assets), release them only
           | when they're completed, and pitch them realistically to the
           | press ... but then they'd be targeting modest profits and
           | their executives wouldn't be getting yachts. It seems similar
           | to how the VC model encourages failures trying to turn every
           | concept into a unicorn.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | delusional wrote:
         | Spore wasn't really a victim of high expectation, but rather a
         | cool ambitious idea that just didn't work as a game. Unlike
         | many others, I think the game they delivered matched very well
         | to what they demoed. The issue was that it just didn't congeal
         | into a game. The sacrifices they did have to make (making it
         | linear and limiting the freeform sandbox aspects) were
         | necessary to make it a game at all. The ambitious "this will
         | make you see the connection between all stages of life" goal
         | isn't achievable if the game you're building isn't going to
         | actually be a good game.
         | 
         | There just wasn't any good gameplay loop in there.
        
           | drones wrote:
           | Interestingly enough, I think the core gameplay loop of the
           | first cell stage has actually influenced gaming much more
           | than anything else in spore. All of the popular .io games I
           | know (Agar.io, snake.io, diep.io) all have some feature of
           | that stage as part of the game. Growing in size, fighting
           | other players, getting new abilities: it's all there.
        
           | Cthulhu_ wrote:
           | There was a lot of potential, and I think that if they did a
           | sequel where they added depth to every stage it would've been
           | a lot better. I mean the last part of the game is a 4x like
           | Stellaris, other parts are RTS / city builders, etc.
           | 
           | On that note, I wonder why there hasn't been anything like it
           | from the indie developer space.
        
             | cubefox wrote:
             | There was a community effort to make such a game since the
             | original Spore came out.
             | 
             | https://revolutionarygamesstudio.com/
             | 
             | Since this was too ambitious, they focussed just on the
             | cell stage. They are working on that to this day.
             | 
             | https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1779200?updates=tru
             | e
        
             | kevinmchugh wrote:
             | I think the fundamental creature tech was so expensive
             | (time and scale) to develop that indies couldn't possibly
             | replicate it
        
           | hutzlibu wrote:
           | "There just wasn't any good gameplay loop in there. "
           | 
           | Opinions differ, to me it _was_ a fun arcade game, with some
           | evolution theme. No more, no less. But I also did not read
           | anything about it before and had no expectations.
        
             | scheeseman486 wrote:
             | Until it turns into an action RPG, then an RTS, then a Civ-
             | like. Which all sounds cool on paper, but usually games
             | that stack on systems and genres like that end up cleanly
             | integrating them with each other. Spore treats them more
             | like they're a minigame collection, it never feels like a
             | cohesive game.
             | 
             | The building tools are great though.
        
               | hutzlibu wrote:
               | Ok yeah, I stopped at the civ like stage, where it was
               | too weird, that I can adjust the evolution of fighting
               | machines and make them fast or strong just as needed in
               | real time. That felt so half baked.
               | 
               | And the "action rpg" was also not very thought through,
               | but still enjoyable.
        
           | CoryAlexMartin wrote:
           | There actually were things of note from the early demos that
           | didn't make it into the final game. For example, the way you
           | created your creature had gameplay implications. Things like
           | limb length, limb count, limb placement, center of mass, etc
           | were going to influence the viability and pros and cons of
           | your creature. However, there were philosophical
           | disagreements between team members and ultimately the
           | decision was made that they'd throw the systemic approach out
           | the window in the name of cosmetic freedom.
           | 
           | Personally, that isn't the decision I would have made,
           | because I think the game is more shallow because of it. Maybe
           | it would have made the game less enjoyable for people who
           | just want to make whatever they want with no consequences,
           | but that could have been solved with a difficulty option.
        
             | Levitz wrote:
             | Entire sections of the game were cut. I remember a puzzle
             | section at the very start in which you had to combine
             | aminoacids to start creating life that never made it, for
             | example.
             | 
             | The option to be a water-based species didn't make it
             | either.
             | 
             | The game did overpromise and underdeliver, hard.
        
             | kevinmchugh wrote:
             | I've seen it hinted that the ~half dozen designers had
             | pretty different visions and that seems to have caused a
             | bunch of churn and disagreements.
        
           | jeroenhd wrote:
           | There were plenty of good gameplay loops, they just didn't
           | get enough time and development. Spore's biggest shortcoming,
           | in my opinion, is that there's not enough of it.
           | 
           | The creature stage is interesting and fun, partially because
           | it lasts long and there's an exploration element. Then you
           | get to the tribal stage and the second tribal stage but with
           | cars and honestly I kind of just rush through that. Then you
           | get to the end game which is the most interesting (but least
           | customisable) part.
           | 
           | The building blocks for two RTSes are there, but they've been
           | dumbed down so far that there's no fun to be had. With a tech
           | tree and bigger tribes, I think a minor Age of Empires stage
           | could be great. The city stage would have the same benefits,
           | but I can imagine a civ style game portraying the
           | technological and cultural progress from the bronze age to
           | the space age would be a nice intermediate. Instead of your
           | evolutionary tree picking one or two arbitrary flags in each
           | stage, you could keep the tech tree going for much longer.
           | Show me how I got that teraforming equipment, don't just
           | teleport it into the store because I traveled a thousand
           | spots!
           | 
           | The end game could do more. Perhaps a Stellaris style unit
           | distant unit control mechanic would allow for a more
           | realistic galactic simulator, with different ships of your
           | empire whizzing around while you go on your space adventure.
           | 
           | I have a feeling that if the game were developed by a Paradox
           | or a Firaxis, the later stages would be a lot better.
           | 
           | It would be fun if Paradox were to set up a system where you
           | can automatically launch the next game, all the way from Rome
           | Total War through Hearts of Iron, and maybe jump to Stellaris
           | from there. I know converters exist but it's not a perfectly
           | clean process with fan projects needed for some steps.
        
             | ethbr0 wrote:
             | The right way to do this is what Jane's / EA started in
             | 1999 -- individual games that contain code to hook into a
             | unified larger world.
             | 
             | It would have been branded "Jane's World War" and shipped
             | with every subsequent sim game, allowing different sim
             | gamers to participate in the same conflict at the same
             | time, from different perspectives.
             | 
             | https://www.ign.com/articles/1999/04/29/janes-world-war
             | 
             | Sadly, the sim market crashed around then, and/or EA and
             | Jane's parted ways over the trademark. Thus, it never came
             | to fruition.
             | 
             | But if the components of the metagame you want to build
             | each need to be games themselves... just build them as
             | individual games, and contain latent linking code inside
             | them!
        
               | Andrex wrote:
               | That idea is so cool. Eve and Dust got a lot of hype for
               | something similar but I never followed up on how it ended
               | up working out.
        
               | ethbr0 wrote:
               | I have a soft spot in my heart for ahead-of-their-time or
               | there-but-for-mismanagement game oddities. :-)
               | 
               | There's also an alternative universe where the Japanese
               | game industry cracked the MMO formula instead of Ultimate
               | Online / EverQuest. See Sega's Heat.net / 10six:
               | https://massivelyop.com/2016/07/23/the-game-
               | archaeologist-se...
               | 
               | As a beta player, it was hellaciously fun, in a very
               | similar way to EVE, even on dialup.
               | 
               | Other oddities:
               | 
               | LucasArts' 80s Habitat:
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_(video_game)
               | 
               | 3DO's pre-Niantic Meridian 59:
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meridian_59
               | 
               | Sierra's The Realm Online:
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Realm_Online (also
               | beta'd this one, which was really slick and well-
               | executed)
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | > Unlike many others, I think the game they delivered matched
           | very well to what they demoed.
           | 
           | That's not really enough. If you watch The Fountain, it's
           | pretty much the same as the trailer. But while it's a great
           | trailer, it's a terrible movie. There's an expectation that a
           | demo shows parts of a game, and the finished product will be
           | more and cohesive. Spore really wasn't cohesive, but
           | imagining the parts demoed as a cohesive game was super
           | compelling.
           | 
           | One of a couple lessons from that time that have me pretty
           | much sworn off pre-ordering things. Or at least pre-ordering
           | things without predicting my feelings if the product isn't
           | great and being ok with that (hello Looking Glass Portrait)
        
         | acdha wrote:
         | > Despite it being reviewed every well upon release, gamers
         | expected even more.
         | 
         | I don't think that's true - this review seems representative:
         | 
         | https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2008/09/spore-review/
         | 
         | > Perhaps the whole concept of Spore is just too high, when all
         | is said and done. I honestly had more fun with the rather
         | middlebrow The Sims series. But one also gets the uncomfortable
         | feeling that each phase is now just a shell to be filled in
         | with upcoming expansions and for-pay content packs. Imagine an
         | expansion pack release for each phase, adding in the depth
         | that's sorely missing. It's not a fun thought.
         | 
         | There was also a problem with the DRM system being buggy (the
         | iMac I installed it on had to be wiped to return to normal
         | system performance) and the whole game crashing too often.
         | 
         | Like others, I think it goes back to massively over-promising:
         | the amoeba game on the iPhone was the most fun because it was a
         | complete game. The full game was like they tried to make 4
         | separate games and made each one progressively less fun because
         | they just didn't have the resources to do any of them well. I
         | spent many hours playing Civ, SimCity, SimAnt, Railroad Tycoon,
         | Master of Orion, Master of Magic, etc. so I was expecting a
         | game with similar rewards for spending time on it but never
         | even completed Spore because my completionist drive couldn't
         | make up for the boredom.
        
         | dougSF70 wrote:
         | Funny story. I worked at a firm that was commissioned to do
         | some market research on Spore before its launch. We were given
         | some videos of game play elements to show gamers and get their
         | response to the game ahead of launch. We hosted the videos on
         | our company server and scripted an online survey with the
         | videos embedded in them. Participants could watch the videos
         | and then answer questions.
         | 
         | We launched the survey on a Friday to pick up responses over
         | the weekend. When I got to work on Monday I logged on to my
         | computer and noticed that everything was running really slowly.
         | Wasn't just me, my coworkers were experiencing the same network
         | issue.
         | 
         | We got out IT team to investigate...turns out our server (on-
         | prem) was busily handling a lot of network traffic, serving up
         | video links to folks. Someone answering the survey had copied
         | the links to the videos from the survey and posted them on to
         | Kotaku. Since the game was so hyped the post got a lot of
         | interest and our server got a lot of traffic.
         | 
         | As you can imagine, the next 24 hours was spent eating *@#t and
         | apologizing to the client....
        
         | etempleton wrote:
         | It was hard not to let your imagination run wild after SimCity
         | and then The Sims. Both games felts infinitely complex at the
         | time. The Sims 1 in particular had so many hidden interactions
         | and secrets.
        
         | ouid wrote:
         | No, it was not a good game, and it was not particularly well
         | received. The nigh universal hatred for the game was not
         | because the marketers did a bad job. It was because it was a
         | bad game that they lied about being a good game. It was a case
         | of fraud, and it was more or less repeated in exactly the same
         | way with Sim City 2013.
         | 
         | It's worth noting that these two games bookend the career of
         | John Riccitiello as the CEO of EA, and basically ever since
         | then he has been the CEO at Unity.
        
         | SilverBirch wrote:
         | It's funny I actually had it in my head that this game was from
         | Molyneux _because_ it so overpromised and under-deliverd. It
         | was a good game, but it essentially had 5(?) sections - amoeba,
         | hunter, community, city builder, and spaceship. Each of those
         | sections can be done as a single stand alone full budget game.
         | Imagine if Spore had released with FTL as it 's spaceship
         | stage? And Cities Skylines as it's city builder? The scope was
         | just way too big and the result was very thin.
        
           | lordnacho wrote:
           | That's what I thought as well. I thought it was a bunch of
           | little games glued together into a... little game.
           | 
           | I didn't quite understand what you were carrying with you
           | from one stage to the next, and why it mattered.
           | 
           | I ended up not playing it much after buying it, such was the
           | disappointment.
        
             | tharkun__ wrote:
             | Spore is the only game I ever actually sold. It was just so
             | bad and boring.
             | 
             | The first stage was the most fun and felt too short. The
             | space exploration part was so tedious and boring I just
             | restarted the game a few times to play the fun parts. Then
             | I sold the game.
        
               | Etherlord87 wrote:
               | I agree, I also likes the first part the most. But it
               | wasn't that amazing either, it was just barely good as
               | opposed to the rest of the game.
               | 
               | 1st part: Cell - on the level of free
               | Kongregate/Newsgrounds flash games, except with better
               | graphics. Later an online game agar.io came out which I
               | find better in regards to challenge, fun, replayability.
               | 
               | 2nd part: Evolution - Very basic MMORPG, except single-
               | player (the mmo part is being able to see other creations
               | in your world). Animal creation was quite innovative, but
               | also underwhelming, because it didn't affect the physics
               | of the animal... Something like QWOP would be nice, where
               | the computer would try to automatically convert simple
               | controls to animal muscles...
               | 
               | 3rd part: Tribe - Again, a simple flash game, boring
               | 
               | 4th part: Civilization - again a simple game, I think the
               | most challenging phase and quite fun, but building
               | designing being only decorative was again
               | underwhelming...
               | 
               | 5th part: Cosmos - it had a Star Control feel to me,
               | except it was simpler, and Star Control is a much older
               | game!
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | ilyt wrote:
           | That's why I'm always cautious when game developer advertise
           | "game within a game" like this.
           | 
           | More modern examples would be both Pathfinder games with
           | mediocre kingdom management minigame in first, and bad HoMM
           | clone in the second. Thankfully the main game was still good.
           | 
           | On other side there are games that successfully pulled it but
           | usually it's a some simple-but-satisfying minigame, not some
           | big element of the game.
        
             | starkparker wrote:
             | Sid Meier learned that lesson, though the game he learned
             | it in (Covert Action) remains one of my all-time favorites,
             | up there with XCOM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Meier
             | %27s_Covert_Action#De...
             | 
             | > The mistake I think I made in Covert Action is actually
             | having two games in there kind of competing with each
             | other. There was kind of an action game where you break
             | into a building and do all sorts of picking up clues and
             | things like that, and then there was the story which
             | involved a plot where you had to figure out who the
             | mastermind was and the different roles and what cities they
             | were in, and it was a kind of an involved mystery-type
             | plot. ... In Pirates!, you would do a sword fight or a ship
             | battle, and a minute or two later, you were kind of back on
             | your way. In Covert Action, you'd spend ten minutes or so
             | of real time in a mission, and by the time you got out of
             | [the mission], you had no idea of what was going on in the
             | world.
             | 
             | > So I call it the "Covert Action Rule". Don't try to do
             | too many games in one package. And that's actually done me
             | a lot of good. You can look at the games I've done since
             | Civilization, and there's always opportunities to throw in
             | more stuff. When two units get together in Civilization and
             | have a battle, why don't we drop out to a war game and
             | spend ten minutes or so in duking out this battle? Well,
             | the Covert Action Rule. Focus on what the game is.
        
               | ilyt wrote:
               | > In Covert Action, you'd spend ten minutes or so of real
               | time in a mission, and by the time you got out of [the
               | mission], you had no idea of what was going on in the
               | world.
               | 
               | But that works perfectly fine in XCOM! But there both
               | elements are build up to the level player will be using
               | it. The combat is main game, but while the "management"
               | certainly wouldn't be enough to make whole game around
               | it, for the few minutes between combat engagements it
               | fits just fine.
               | 
               | Spore problem was that you switched from one game mode to
               | another completely so it was essentially playing next
               | game for few hours.
               | 
               | I think it just needs to be balanced in effort to the
               | time player spends with it. Like players remember Gwent
               | or Triple Triad with fondness.
        
               | gs17 wrote:
               | Covert Action is also one of my all time favorites (I
               | bought an external numpad for my laptop to be able to
               | play it decently). I can fully understand why people
               | wouldn't like switching modes for so long so often, but
               | that was part of the charm for me. You got to play
               | detective, cryptographer, James Bond, and maybe could
               | catch everyone in time. Shadows of Doubt scratches a bit
               | of the itch for me, but ai really want a remaster of
               | Covert Action.
        
           | thom wrote:
           | Ha, seconded on the Molyneux thing.
        
           | Waterluvian wrote:
           | It was certainly part of the "Molyneux-like" genre.
        
           | raincole wrote:
           | Using FTL as an example of "stand alone full budget game" is
           | quite weird.
           | 
           | I mean it's a good game but...
        
         | mattl wrote:
         | I remember the DRM ruining it to the point where it was
         | unusable. Or was that the new Sim City?
        
           | acdha wrote:
           | That was Spore - and the DRM was an issue even when the game
           | wasn't running. I had an iMac I chose to wipe & reinstall
           | rather than play whack-a-mole deleting its kernel extensions
           | and background processes.
        
         | stavros wrote:
         | > Despite it being reviewed every well upon release, gamers
         | expected even more.
         | 
         | Gamers expected what was presented in the initial demo. A
         | really dynamic world that changed depending on your creature's
         | abilities, a sandbox game where you could affect things by
         | designing different types of creatures.
         | 
         | All this was scrapped, and what was developed was very
         | different than what was shown in the early prototype demo:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8dvMDFOFnA
         | 
         | No wonder gamers wanted the thing they got excited about in the
         | first place.
        
           | grubbs wrote:
           | I remember playing this game quite a bit instead:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_%26_White_(video_game)
        
             | Ekaros wrote:
             | And an other that hugely disappointed when compared to
             | hype. It had entire multi-year series of columns hyping it
             | selling all kinds of various ideas and other stuff. With
             | most of them ending half-baked and poorly done...
        
             | Levitz wrote:
             | One of the few games in which I couldn't for the life of
             | mine advance, even years later.
        
             | stavros wrote:
             | I really liked that one as well.
        
           | dicytea wrote:
           | I still sometimes dream that someone would leak the demo game
           | (if you let me be a bit more greedy, along with the source
           | code). Hey it might not be _that_ functional, but it would
           | still be awesome to explore what it was actually capable of.
        
             | stavros wrote:
             | Yeah... I just worry that it'll be very geared towards that
             | exact demo, and unable to do more or less anything else.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | The lessons from World of Warcraft and Doom are give your users
         | tools to write their own features/maps, then promote the best
         | of the best to be part of the game.
         | 
         | Just be sure to reward the winners with something, like a
         | lifetime subscription.
         | 
         | Spore tried to make everyone a creator, and "everyone" are
         | terrible people. In the YouTube Era he may have had more
         | options, like taking creations from popular streamers, or
         | highly upvoted contributions.
        
         | DonHopkins wrote:
         | Here are my notes and summary of the GDC 2005 talk where Will
         | Wright first revealed Spore, which I asked Will to review and
         | check for accuracy. It's interesting to compare the design he
         | described in the talk with what Maxis eventually shipped.
         | 
         | Video of the hour long talk:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4ScRG_reIw
         | 
         | One of the essential problems with designing a Massively Multi
         | Player Online Game like Spore is that players at different
         | levels of the simulation run at different time scales.
         | 
         | Maintaining time synchronization between players is also the
         | reason The Sims Online doesn't have a "Pause" button or speed
         | controls, or automatically pause in build and buy mode, like
         | The Sims.
         | 
         | So instead, Spore is a Massively Single Player Online Game.
         | Users don't interact with each other in real time, but instead
         | users can create their own content, and it exchanges that
         | content between users asynchronously.
         | 
         | That's also how The Sims Exchange lets players asynchronously
         | upload and download their Sims save files along with web pages
         | describing their house, sims, and photo album.
         | 
         | https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-future-of-content-will-wri...
         | 
         | >The Future of Content -- Will Wright's Spore Demo at GDC
         | 3/11/2005
         | 
         | >What I learned about content from the Sims.
         | 
         | >...and why it's driven me to procedural methods.
         | 
         | >...And what I now plan to do with them.
         | 
         | >Talk by Will Wright, Game Developers Conference, 3/11/2005.
         | 
         | >Based on notes taken by Don Hopkins at the talk, and other
         | discussions and review by Will Wright. The title of the talk
         | "The Future of Content" was purposefully vague, because Will
         | wanted to show Spore in public for the first time, but he had
         | to flat out lie about the title and send a fake set of slides
         | for the EA executives to review, so they didn't know what he
         | was about to do. A more accurate title for the talk would be
         | "What I Learned About Content from The Sims, and Why it's
         | Driven Me to Procedural Methods, and What I Now Plan to Do With
         | Them".
         | 
         | >Introduction
         | 
         | >Will Wright started his talk by saying that he wanted to show
         | this to the game developer community first, before a commercial
         | show like E3.
         | 
         | [...]
         | 
         | Here's my favorite feature that never made it into the final
         | game, which is still a hardcore AI problem ;) :
         | 
         | >Procedural Mating
         | 
         | >Mating calls. Listen for answers. Approach a compatible mate
         | (same type of body you just created) in a nest. Get a good
         | response.
         | 
         | >Procedural mating: Animals squawk and crawl over each other in
         | allkinds of ways, then find something that works, and start
         | humping.
         | 
         | >Rewarded for mating by laying an egg.
         | 
         | >Player rewarded for reproducing: the currency of the game. Go
         | into edit mode to spend currency to buy features and edit the
         | next generation. You have to start saving up for brains, which
         | are expensive. Think of it as a college education fund.
         | 
         | And I love his vignette through the lands of Pokemon, Neopets,
         | dinosaurs, and deep into the star-speckled, rainbow-trimmed,
         | cotton candy, cloud world called "Care a Lot":
         | 
         | >Make the editor a toy.
         | 
         | >Make portability of content transparent to the player. Game
         | downloads content automatically, without requiring user to
         | visit a web site or download it themselves.
         | 
         | >Most other evolution games don't make you feel like you own
         | the creature.
         | 
         | >Pokemon, Neopets, Care Bears. Give kids a sense of ownership
         | and mastery over the facts and details of the characters.
         | 
         | >Loved dinosaurs as a kid. Knew the rock-scissors-paper of
         | different species of dinosaurs, which was something his mom
         | didn't know. Mastery of facts.
         | 
         | >Which Care Bear are you?
         | 
         | >Care bears. Started as greeting cards. Found a web app that
         | categorizes your personality: Which Care Bear are you? Each
         | care bear has special abilities. Care bear have cousins, that
         | aren't even bears. Care bears live in a star-speckled, rainbow-
         | trimmed, cotton candy, cloud world called "Care a Lot". If they
         | fall out of the clouds, they land in the "Forest of Feelings"
         | (Kingdom of Caring). Forest of Feelings is over the earth. So
         | the Earth must be the "Kingdom of people who don't give a
         | shit".
         | 
         | Spore is an homage to many other games:
         | 
         | >There's a rule that you don't mix genres. Always wanted to
         | break that rule.
         | 
         | >Homage to many different games at different levels:
         | 
         | >Tidepool: Pacman.
         | 
         | >Evolution: Diablo.
         | 
         | >Tribal: Populous.
         | 
         | >City: SimCity.
         | 
         | >Civ: Risk/Civ.
         | 
         | >20% of the best of those games. 40% of the game experience is
         | really just aesthetic, appreciating the content.
         | 
         | >A different editor associated with each level.
         | 
         | Also:
         | 
         | >Wired asked for an illustration to print in the magazine,
         | anything he wanted. So he made a diagram of Spore that Wired
         | published, but he didn't tell them what it was. The design docs
         | for Spore have been out in Wired Magazine for a year now. (It's
         | in the Feb 2004 issue of Wired.)
         | 
         | Will's Secret Diagram of Spore published in February 2004
         | Wired:
         | 
         | https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:4800/format:webp/1*6s2...
         | 
         | And of course the 1977 film "Powers of 10" was a big influence:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fKBhvDjuy0
         | 
         | Will's advice for game designers and creative humans in
         | general:
         | 
         | >Advice: If you have a weird idea that's so outside of the box,
         | don't forget it. You should go back and revisit your weird
         | ideas later, because you can never know where they might lead
         | to.
         | 
         | >Epilogue:
         | 
         | >For more about how Spore was designed and developed, check out
         | A Brief History of Spore by Chaim Gingold:
         | 
         | >A Brief History of Spore
         | 
         | http://www.levitylab.com/blog/2011/02/brief-history-of-spore...
         | 
         | >This essay was written part way through Spore's development,
         | and summarizes one of the biggest transitions the project made
         | -- unknown to many -- from what could have been a SimEarth like
         | game/science toy to a capital-G computer Game. It tells how
         | Spore made some of its early, and most crucial, navigational
         | decisions down the branches of design possibility, to use
         | Will's own language. I feel like a discussion of how Spore
         | turned out versus audience and developer expectations is a
         | whole other story that should be distilled and told, but this
         | is not the place for that.
         | 
         | >There's also the Joystiq interviews Spore's Chaim Gingold and
         | Chris Hecker:
         | 
         | https://www.engadget.com/2006-11-13-joystiq-interviews-spore...
         | 
         | >On the first day of the Montreal International Game Summit,
         | Chaim Gingold and Chris Hecker presented a keynote on the topic
         | of "advanced prototyping," specifically as to how it pertains
         | to Spore, the game that currently occupies their time over at
         | EA/Maxis. The same talk, given at the 2006 Game Developers
         | Conference, was rated higher than any other presentation,
         | including Will Wright's, their boss's. Before the keynote,
         | Joystiq had a chance to chat with both Chaim and Chris, and
         | discuss their impetus for joining Maxis, the evolution of
         | Spore, and the relationship between Maxis and EA.
         | 
         | >And don't miss Chaim Gingold's talk about Spore's Magic
         | Crayons:
         | 
         | https://www.gdcvault.com/play/527/SPORE-s-Magic
        
         | qamorgan wrote:
         | A professor of mine once succinctly summarized that principle
         | as:
         | 
         | Success = Outcomes / Expectations
        
           | ilyt wrote:
           | game that was expected to be shit and turned out to be shit
           | is not a success
        
         | ilyt wrote:
         | That game stopped me from being hyped for video game releases
         | after.
        
       | Decabytes wrote:
       | I played spore a few years back for the first time and was
       | impressed by how well it held up. I had a lot of fun playing it
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-06-11 23:01 UTC)