Spore: spiritual sequel to SimLife?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

<jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:1117831886.421522.267510@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Never heard of this game, but it's Will Wright, and it sounds an AWFUL
> lot like an expanded version of SimLife.

It's been Will Wright's secret project that he's been working on since the
Sims. The gist of it has been known for some time, but the name seems to
have been recently released.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

jonahnynla@mindspring.com wrote in news:1117831886.421522.267510
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

> Never heard of this game, but it's Will Wright, and it sounds an AWFUL
> lot like an expanded version of SimLife.
> http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3140925&did=1
> http://spore.ea.com/

Agreed. But it also sounds like one of those games that I will be obligated
to buy just in CASE they finally created the game I want.

Gandalf Parker
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Jeremy Reaban" <jer@connectria.com> once tried to test me with:

>
><jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:1117831886.421522.267510@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> Never heard of this game, but it's Will Wright, and it sounds an
>> AWFUL lot like an expanded version of SimLife.
>
> It's been Will Wright's secret project that he's been working on since
> the Sims. The gist of it has been known for some time, but the name
> seems to have been recently released.

After ambitious titles like Black & White and such, I'll reserve judgment
for this after it's out. If it does what it's supposed to do it sounds
pretty wickedly cool.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <1117831886.421522.267510@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
jonahnynla@mindspring.com says...
> Never heard of this game, but it's Will Wright, and it sounds an AWFUL
> lot like an expanded version of SimLife.

I think it's more like Civ with a bit of Sim Earth.

- Gerry Quinn
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Knight37 wrote:
> "Jeremy Reaban" <jer@connectria.com> once tried to test me with:
>
> >
> ><jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > news:1117831886.421522.267510@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >> Never heard of this game, but it's Will Wright, and it sounds an
> >> AWFUL lot like an expanded version of SimLife.
> >
> > It's been Will Wright's secret project that he's been working on since
> > the Sims. The gist of it has been known for some time, but the name
> > seems to have been recently released.
>
> After ambitious titles like Black & White and such, I'll reserve judgment
> for this after it's out. If it does what it's supposed to do it sounds
> pretty wickedly cool.

There's a huge difference between Will Wright and Peter Molyneaux.

Jonah Falcon
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On 4 Jun 2005 01:02:46 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:

>After ambitious titles like Black & White and such, I'll reserve judgment
>for this after it's out. If it does what it's supposed to do it sounds
>pretty wickedly cool.

What Jonah Falcon said. If it was Molyneaux (or just about anyone,
really) developing this, I'd roll my eyes and not give it another
glance. Its just such an ambitious game that the odds of it succeeding
in any meaningful way are slim-to-none. The fact that its Will
Wright working on it gives me some hope because his track record on
ambitious games is simply amazing. SimCity and the Sims are the
obvious 'games that are too big/complicated to ever work' that Wright
has created and have worked brilliantly, but I'd actually say that
EVERYTHING he's ever created has at least been entertaining.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

drocket wrote:
> On 4 Jun 2005 01:02:46 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:
>
>
>>After ambitious titles like Black & White and such, I'll reserve judgment
>>for this after it's out. If it does what it's supposed to do it sounds
>>pretty wickedly cool.
>
>
> What Jonah Falcon said. If it was Molyneaux (or just about anyone,
> really) developing this, I'd roll my eyes and not give it another
> glance. Its just such an ambitious game that the odds of it succeeding
> in any meaningful way are slim-to-none. The fact that its Will
> Wright working on it gives me some hope because his track record on
> ambitious games is simply amazing.

You call The Sims ambitious?

Ries
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> once tried to test me with:

> SimCity and the Sims are the
> obvious 'games that are too big/complicated to ever work' that Wright
> has created and have worked brilliantly, but I'd actually say that
> EVERYTHING he's ever created has at least been entertaining.

Sim City was a fun toy (not really a game) for about 5 or 10 hours. Tops.

And The Sims wasn't even fun for the 2 or 3 hours I spent playing it. A
waste of my money.

So I don't have a whole lot of hope for anything else Wright does. But if
it turns out great, fine. I'm not expecting much so it shouldn't be hard to
exceed my expectations.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On 5 Jun 2005 19:10:37 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:

>Sim City was a fun toy (not really a game) for about 5 or 10 hours. Tops.
>
>And The Sims wasn't even fun for the 2 or 3 hours I spent playing it. A
>waste of my money.

The tens of millions of people who spent thousands of hours playing
the above two games disagree with you.
 
W

Werewolf

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2004
58
0
18,630
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

drocket wrote:
> On 5 Jun 2005 19:10:37 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Sim City was a fun toy (not really a game) for about 5 or 10 hours. Tops.
>>
>>And The Sims wasn't even fun for the 2 or 3 hours I spent playing it. A
>>waste of my money.
>
>
> The tens of millions of people who spent thousands of hours playing
> the above two games disagree with you.

You mean the same tens of millions of people responsible for the dumbing
down of PC games, the proliferation of mindless hand/eye twitch fests
and all the assorted dregs you can find in any MMORPG???

Those folks aren't much of a recomendation for the quality of any PC game.

Werewolf
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 17:23:13 +0200, Ries <ries2@cistron.nl> wrote:

>You call The Sims ambitious?

Yes, I do. In fact, I would say that the Sims is one of the most
ambitious games ever conceived. To attempt to semi-realistically
model everyday human life and behaviour - seriously, what game would
you consider more ambitious?

If there's one thing human beings know, its human beings. Human
behaviour is the most complicated and random thing you can possibly
attempt to simulate, while at the same time being one of the things
where players can easily spot 'errors'. Action games boast their
ragdoll physics, but if the corpse of someone who had their head shot
off bounces down the steps slightly wrong, how many people are
actually going to be able to tell? If, on the other hand, Sally
doesn't react to her boyfriend's cheating in the way we expect - yes,
we notice, quite easily.

90% of games have no real ambition in them at all - the shooters and
action games rarely have much more ambition than pushing as many
polygons as they can. The remaining games, strategy and simulation
games mostly, I would say, are usually so abstract that its impossible
to really tell when something is 'wrong'. The Sims tries to model the
most complicated behavior possible, and puts it front and center in
the game, where you can easily spot anything that's wrong. If that's
not ambitious, I don't know what is.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> once tried to test me with:

> On 5 Jun 2005 19:10:37 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Sim City was a fun toy (not really a game) for about 5 or 10 hours.
>>Tops.
>>
>>And The Sims wasn't even fun for the 2 or 3 hours I spent playing it.
>>A waste of my money.
>
> The tens of millions of people who spent thousands of hours playing
> the above two games disagree with you.

I love it when someone pulls out this old chestnut. And then I counter with
the old "millions of people bought and played Deer Hunter, too, but that
don't make it good." Sim City and the Sims cater to casual gamers. That's
okay fine, but that don't make it a great game in my book. A billion people
play card games over the internet but that doesn't make them great games
either. Popularity != Quality.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> once tried to test me with:

> Yes, I do. In fact, I would say that the Sims is one of the most
> ambitious games ever conceived. To attempt to semi-realistically
> model everyday human life and behaviour - seriously, what game would
> you consider more ambitious?

IF the attempt was to model human behavior, even semi-realistically, it
failed miserably. Adult humans don't wet themselves if you don't tell them
to go to the bathroom.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <Xns966CB540CB6B1knight37m@130.133.1.4
>, knight37m@gmail.com wrote:

>IF the attempt was to model human behavior, even semi-realistically, it
>failed miserably. Adult humans don't wet themselves if you don't tell them
>to go to the bathroom.

Depends.

Jim
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

bombelly@wahs.ac (foamy) once tried to test me with:

> In article <Xns966CB540CB6B1knight37m@130.133.1.4
>>, knight37m@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>IF the attempt was to model human behavior, even semi-realistically,
>>it failed miserably. Adult humans don't wet themselves if you don't
>>tell them to go to the bathroom.
>
> Depends.

ROFLMAO



--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <Xns966CCAA2D1B9knight37m@130.133.1.4>
, knight37m@gmail.com wrote:

>> Depends.
>
>ROFLMAO


Heh. <g>

You know, I really [ to my everlasting shame :) ], had high hopes
for The Sims Online. I thought if they could take the interactively
and ability to build and customize, and put that into a persistent
and seamless world, it could be amazing.

Of course 10 minutes after loading it, I realized it was nothing more
than a collection of chat rooms..........

Too bad they went cheap, it could have been a contenda..........

Jim
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On 5 Jun 2005 22:47:21 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:

>I love it when someone pulls out this old chestnut. And then I counter with
>the old "millions of people bought and played Deer Hunter, too, but that
>don't make it good."
Millions bought Deer Hunter, but I don't think anyone has ever
actually played it. Deer Hunter is/was in the same market category as
singing fish and socks with wildlife knitted into them - nobody
actually buys these things for themselves, they buy them for their
hard-to-shop-for uncle (who has 12 singing fish, 8 copies of Deer
Hunter (and no PC), 11 sweaters with a deer on the front, 38 baseball
caps with a deer on the front, 53 pairs of socks with deer knitted
into them, and 23 orange hats that they'll never wear because they
have pom-poms on them.)

Games like the Sims and Simcity are in an entirely different market
category, because people actually buy them for themselves and play it.

>Sim City and the Sims cater to casual gamers.
I'm trying to think of a polite way to respond here, but all I can
come up with is 'moron'. SimCity caters to casual gamers? Whatever.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Knight37 wrote:
> drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> once tried to test me with:
>
>
>>On 5 Jun 2005 19:10:37 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Sim City was a fun toy (not really a game) for about 5 or 10 hours.
>>>Tops.
>>>
>>>And The Sims wasn't even fun for the 2 or 3 hours I spent playing it.
>>>A waste of my money.
>>
>>The tens of millions of people who spent thousands of hours playing
>>the above two games disagree with you.
>
>
> I love it when someone pulls out this old chestnut. And then I counter with
> the old "millions of people bought and played Deer Hunter, too, but that
> don't make it good." Sim City and the Sims cater to casual gamers. That's
> okay fine, but that don't make it a great game in my book. A billion people
> play card games over the internet but that doesn't make them great games
> either. Popularity != Quality.
>
Huh. Personally, I never played Deer Hunter. Been playing computer
games since the days of the Commodore 64. One of the first games I
purchased for my Amiga was SimCity. Loved it. A fantastic open-ended
game. I also admit to loving The Sims. Its execution wasn't perfect,
but to me it was fun and--in my view--innovative. With the amount of
time and money I've put into gaming over the past two decades, I don't
consider myself a casual gamer (although the fact that that term has
become one of opprobrium is one that I have mixed feeling about).
Obviously, people's views on any game varies depending on individual
preferences.

I will say that the current deification of Will Wright causes me to
scratch my head. IMHO, he's hit two out of the park. But I didn't
particularly enjoy, say, SimEarth, SimAnt, or SimFarm. To me, some of
the comparisons between Wright and Molyneaux are apt...Populous was a
great game; since then...not so much. (Again, in my humble playing
experiences.)

Carl
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 09:10:25 -0500, Carl Lund
<copeknight@yahoodotcom.com> wrote:

>I also admit to loving The Sims. Its execution wasn't perfect,
>but to me it was fun and--in my view--innovative.
If you haven't already, you may want to give Sims 2 a try. Its not
perfect either, but its pretty dang close.

>I will say that the current deification of Will Wright causes me to
>scratch my head. IMHO, he's hit two out of the park. But I didn't
>particularly enjoy, say, SimEarth, SimAnt, or SimFarm. To me, some of
>the comparisons between Wright and Molyneaux are apt...Populous was a
>great game; since then...not so much. (Again, in my humble playing
>experiences.)

Will Wright has only hit 2 out of the park (although if you count
SimCity 2000 and Sims 2, I would say that it would be 4), but I would
say that all of his other games were at least solid doubles or
triples.

Molyneaux, on the other hand... Personally, I would argue against
Populous as a great game - it was innovative for its time, but even
back then I got bored within 5 levels - but even if we give him that
one, that's 1. Everything else he's done has pretty much been poop.
Ambitious poop, but poop never-the-less.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On 5 Jun 2005 22:49:03 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> once tried to test me with:
>
>> Yes, I do. In fact, I would say that the Sims is one of the most
>> ambitious games ever conceived. To attempt to semi-realistically
>> model everyday human life and behaviour - seriously, what game would
>> you consider more ambitious?
>
>IF the attempt was to model human behavior, even semi-realistically, it
>failed miserably. Adult humans don't wet themselves if you don't tell them
>to go to the bathroom.

Neither do Sims with their AI turned on. Unless you move one of your
chairs and trap them in a corner, where they will stay until they starve
to death.

Okay, maybe it wasn't that realistic.
--
chuk
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 20:02:28 GMT, drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Will Wright has only hit 2 out of the park (although if you count
>SimCity 2000 and Sims 2, I would say that it would be 4), but I would
>say that all of his other games were at least solid doubles or
>triples.

I'd agree with that (although I never played Sim Farm or Sim Tower).

>Molyneaux, on the other hand... Personally, I would argue against
>Populous as a great game - it was innovative for its time, but even
>back then I got bored within 5 levels - but even if we give him that
>one, that's 1. Everything else he's done has pretty much been poop.
>Ambitious poop, but poop never-the-less.

I played Populous II more than one. But didn't he do Dungeon Keeper? That
was pretty good, until later in the game. And I loved Black and White,
until later in the game. Hey...I'm seeing a trend here.

Too bad Fable's not out for PC. (Yet? Or ever?)



--
chuk
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Chuk Goodin" <cgoodin@sfu.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:d82b7i$8vn$1@morgoth.sfu.ca...

> I played Populous II more than one. But didn't he do Dungeon Keeper? That
> was pretty good, until later in the game. And I loved Black and White,
> until later in the game. Hey...I'm seeing a trend here.
>

Magic Carpet wasn't bad either. Nor was Syndicate. Black&White is where he
dropped the ball, IMO.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 22:38:52 +0200, "Alfred Pum" <mooskugerl@DELETEgmx.at>
wrote:

>"Chuk Goodin" <cgoodin@sfu.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>news:d82b7i$8vn$1@morgoth.sfu.ca...
>
>> I played Populous II more than one. But didn't he do Dungeon Keeper? That
>> was pretty good, until later in the game. And I loved Black and White,
>> until later in the game. Hey...I'm seeing a trend here.
>>
>
>Magic Carpet wasn't bad either.

Can't comment.

>Nor was Syndicate.

Actually, Syndicate had one major problem - you can't see inside or behind
buildings.

While this isn't a problem in most situations, it makes the Atlantic
Accelerator mission theoritically impossible as the last opponent keeps
running in circles inside a building and miniguns any players that open the
door. (In practice, Gauss Gun or Time Bombing the door seems to work.

The expansion pack, American Conquestk, is difficult to complete. It's
worse on modern computers, as their monitors generally take 1-2 seconds to
switch video modes, and you need every single second to complete some of
those mission successfully.

>Black&White is where he dropped the ball, IMO.

Probably - even though Black and White seems to have a hardcore fan base.
I consider the game to have great potential, but the game mechanics didn't
really scale that well.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Jukka A. Lang <noreply@netikka.fi> once tried to test me with:

> Actually, that's the most fun I remember having with that game --
> placing Sims
> in unusual situations, and seeing how well their pathetic AI copes.
> Answer: not well at all.
>

Exactly. The Sims didn't behave like real people. It's a game, not a
simulation. And not a very fun game I might add, but that's MHO.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom