Talk:Spore (2008 video game)/Archive 2

message: Put the links to the movies back. They're a worthy source.
::You mean the 2005 GDC demo? Should be done. 220.237.189.218 07:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Links

message: Does the creature make up impact the level and type of technologies available to the creature race? Or once they hit this level, all technologies and research are achievable? If so, then it DOES NOT matter how your creature progresses, looks like, acts, etc. It would all be the same in the end.
:This, this is a good question. Not one that anyone here can answer, but still a good question. I would guess that the seperate stages all act pretty much seperate, giving what we've had to look at, but I have no real answer. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 04:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How you play the creatures will determine whether the civilization will be aggressive, social, etc., when it is uploaded to other players. --HeltenHelge 16:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: In a game where there's no way to "win", it hardly matters, does it? You might be applying habits of thought conditioned by Civ or Ages of Empire. — Saxifrage ✎ 17:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Tell that to all the people who bought The Sims and The Sims 2, two of the highest selling games ever.  Chris M. 17:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Besides slight societal differences, sounds like it. There's nothing solid enough to include in the article though. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 02:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Per the above 'Why bother' comment: the idea behind a 'software toy' (a game without a 'win' condition) is that it frees the player from anyone's arbitrary idea of what makes up a 'win' scenario.  'The Sims' (and most of Will Wright's 'Sim' titles) had what Wright termed 'failure space': the ability to see how the 'software toy' will react to certain events.  We've all heard stories about the kid that spent two hours finding every possible method of electrocuting, drowning, burning, and otherwise torturing and abusing his Sims.  The point is that a 'win' condition imposes an artificial limit on creativity, while a game that never ends can have almost infinite variations. DarkMasterBob 11:41, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:   Creature make up... who cares? 

message: I've moved this section to its own page: Talk:Spore (video game)/External Link Discussions and Disputes.
Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 06:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Spore (video game)/External Link Discussions and Disputes|External Link Discussions/Disputes]] 

message: Since no definite release date has been set, or release year for that matter, the article should reflect that, so I changed the publishing date from 2007 to "Q3 2006 to Q$ 2007 although no definite date has been announced." Also, it makes the main article match the quick stats bar on the right. -- Lu Yan 8:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would definitely help if you provided a cite for that. Otherwise it just sounds like guesswork, which is not encyclopedial. --Kickstart70-T-C 15:23, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the only info we have to suggest Fall '06 was from the Gaming Steve Interview with Will Wright 2005, which was just following E3.  The evidence for an '07 release is the Wired 14.04 Spore article.  which says "EA will release Spore next year."  The evidence for an early '07 release date is found in the Advanced Prototyping presentation given at GDC '06 by a spore developer.  I have it on my PC but can't upload it at the moment.  But it shows a graph of the prototyping schedule that goes until March '07.  So while it isn't DEFINITE that it will come out before March '07, there is no evidence to suggest it will be later then that. Chris M. 22:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Sure, E3 isn't over yet, but the EA press release (and I believe there is a webcast too) shows that it will not be released in this fiscal year, which means after March 2007 - April 2007 would be the earliest it could be released. Perhaps console/handheld releases would be simultaneous rather than later, but that's pure speculation.Robovski 00:16, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't that kind of thing have a source on the article itself?  Or at least a link presented to it cite it here? Chris M. 15:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, I think that's fair. I'm tracking down original source links now, but here's a report of the EA print press release as reported on Gamasutra: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=9162 I'll add material after I have it down to base (EA preferably) links. Robovski 23:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

text: OK, from the EA investor relations site:http://investor.ea.com/phoenix.zhtml?p=irol-eventDetails&c=88189&eventID=1306810 provides links for the May 3, 2006 earnings conference. Apparently it is hours long and mentions Spore the once as not comming out until the new fiscal year - which means at the earliest we will see Spore in April 2007. These links may be usefull for an inline cite, but's it's a lot of work to follow up on, so maybe the Gamasutra link should be provided as it is more easily accessable. Robovski 00:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

text:  Got this one tonight, from USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/gaming/2006-05-08-spore-played_x.htm?csp=34 says release will be "next year".Robovski 04:38, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release Date 

message: I have been thinking about the article a lot lately, and I think we need a overhaul of the article. I'd thought I'd discuss this first instead of just wading in and possibly irritating other editors. I think the leader section isn't very good for what it should be doing, that being a brief description of the game itself. Currently we cover development history first. The article as a whole seems relatively disorganized, and there is a lot of weak speculation and poorly referenced material. I've also thought that with all of the new video content out there, that maybe we are becomming a bit waterlogged with links to videos of gamplay. For example, from the current External Links section:
*2006 E3 Spore Video - Link to the 2006 E3 video of Spore. 
*detailed spore trailer - a trailer that shows you the creature, tribal and intergalactic elements of spore 
*Official Spore Trailer in HD & Spore G4 Video - High quality official Spore trailer and Spore featured on G4 
*Will Wright giving another Spore demo - 20 Min presentation of Spore at E3 2006
 
I generally prefer to include material than exclude but we are covering some of the same ground here a few times. Perhaps some of this stuff would be better found in a development sub-article for Spore? So to summarize, I think we need to weed out some of the speculation, revamp the leader intro and maybe move some stuff into sub articles. What do you folks think?Robovski 02:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Added xSpore.com's site back into the external links section since it has been commonly agreed upon that it deserves a link (search this page for the proper evidence. WikiStylee 14:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revamp 

message: From sporewiki.com:
In this GameSpy article, Wright supports the above.
:WW: We're saying that Spore is coming out in 2007. The message that we are getting from [Electronic Arts] corporate is "Don't screw it up," which is great. What they mean is, "Lets get it right." This will be the game's last E3. 
:GameSpy: So it will come out in the first quarter of 2007? 
:WW: Probably just after that, though we are not being precise. What we are saying is just outside the fiscal year, which is March. 
:GameSpy: So April or early May? 
:WW: Yeah. Right.
So I say it should be changed to April or early May 2007, from the man himself. Chris M. 15:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release Date 

message: That screenshot was helpful to the article. Why was it taken away? 216.37.227.202 16:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Screenshot

message: I rearranged the order of the editors. I know they were in alphabetical order, but the creature editor should come first because (1) it is the main editor and (2) the building editor, which was previously before it, refers to it in its explanation. I moved the hut editor to directly below the building editor because it is very similar to it. Please object accordingly. 66.87.91.36 05:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Editor Order

message: Are we allowed to quote from it in the article? I'm not sure how those fancy laws work, but it's this month's issue.
:Quotes are allowed as long as it's a snippit and you give a source. Havok (T/C) 07:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Computer Gaming World Exclusive Preview

message: "This is apparently the final step before you lose control of your civilization. As soon as you build the UFO, you take direct control of it, and thats what you will have until you get bored of the game or stop for another reason, so make sure you are ready."
I know in the demo Will Wright did use the UFO for the rest of the demo when he go it. But it doesn't seem to be accurate that you lose contorl of you entire civiltion once you get it.  He did also show you building colonies on other planets and I think I was reading somthing where he said that you can unlock the creture editor again.--Scott3 01:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Scrap it. Will's presentation suggests that you continue as part of your civilization, as evidenced from his civ being attacked by the other that he assaults. This won't be solidly explainable until the game's release. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 01:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree.  I deleted it, with a comment referring to this talk page. DrIdiot 02:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this accurate 

message: I know the games in developement, but making statements like "if your species is solitary it will lay and egg and if its social you will need to find a mate" is just a wild guess, its reasonable to expect that if you need to find a mate as one species, you need to find a mate as any species.
Also any species that developes intelligence will most likely be social so all player species may be social.
Also from one of the mroe recent spore vids i saw (featuring robbin williams) when you use your "DNA" points to create an updated version of yuor creature, you start off after editing it playing as an infant.
:I agree with all of that, the first quote should be changed, there is no reference to asexual reproduction (or at least symbolizing that) in Spore, so you'll always need a mate when you get past the tide pool phase. 65.185.197.175 13:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some wild speculation 

message: I'm amused to see Spore is now confirmed for mobile phones; how about the other PC platforms such as linux or mac? With the spread of platforms it's confirmed for I'm surprised they aren't mentioned or rumoured at all, either for or against. I'd be surprised if they've gone to the extent to making it work on phone screens - low-power, low-res, multiple nonstandard OSes - without having done anything for linux and mac too... any information? -User:Firien §
:I would deduct that they would use the mobile phone version for the cards which you collect on the PC version. Havok (T/C/c) 10:14, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Rumours is all we have - nothing concrete, though there's a fairly large movement on the gamingsteve forums to pressure for a Mac version. --163.1.136.47 11:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Will wright said that they are talking to Asyper about porting Spore, since that's who they used to por the sims.  They are looking into it, and I'd consider it likely that it'll get to mac at some point.  When is the question though.  Chris M. 15:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Platforms 

message: The gamespy article here lists a June 2007 release date.  The latest news we have received "officially" was from another gamespy article:
In this GameSpy article, Wright supports the above.
:WW: We're saying that Spore is coming out in 2007. The message that we are getting from [Electronic Arts] corporate is "Don't screw it up," which is great. What they mean is, "Lets get it right." This will be the game's last E3. 
:GameSpy: So it will come out in the first quarter of 2007? 
:WW: Probably just after that, though we are not being precise. What we are saying is just outside the fiscal year, which is March. 
:GameSpy: So April or early May? 
:WW: Yeah. Right.
That news isn't exactly old.  Will Wright assured that there wouldn't be another E3 for this game.  I don't see why a retailer (EB) listing of a game release date should be taken as more official then the release date said from the guy making it.  Video game retailers are notorious for throwing up bogus release dates for sales, there is no real reason to believe that over what will said. So I think that line should be switched back to the April or early may comment. Chris M. 13:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have my doubts over the June date as well. I read the source article referenced, and I get a real impression of something not right about the dates. But then my hunch isn't anything to overthrow a reference over. Gamesspot is pretty decent for game stuff, but I can't help but wonder why the DS version would be available before the PC version, especially since it was being demoed on a PC at E3. If the dates were reversed, I'd see that as more plausible, but then we already new that the March 2007 date wasn't going to happen from the EA press release before E3. That leaves me thinking that your guess is as good as mine. The cited WW reference (that you quote above) gives the impression of April/May 2007 which fits with the EA press release (not this fiscal year) but then again a date of June 2007 would as well. Its not implausible for the date to be wrong (heck the Amazon(uk) site has it for preorder for January 2007, rather obviously wrong at this point), however the quoted reference is the most recent material we have to work with, and he's quoted the conservative end of the dates, so I suppose we should just go along with it until we hear otherwise in the future. Robovski 14:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no doubt about gamespot for being a valid source for info.  But they didn't get in from some inside maxis (or EA) source.  Their info came straight from EB, as trustworthy a source gamespot is, if they get their info from a game retailer it should be in doubt.  They have no real reason to state a true date and I dont' really think we have a reason to expect they are right.  If it wasn't for the fact that I have pre-ordered a lot of games and had the retailer switch the release date (because their guess was wrong) I'd trust EB on this, but since that has happened (to many peopel I'm sure), I think it's fair to trust WW on his 2 week old statement. Chris M. 17:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose we could disregard the Gamespy article and go with the WW interview seeing as thier basis is EB, and pre-release dates from retailers are notoriously bad (like the Amazon date I mentioned). Unless you want to "Be Bold", I think we should get one of the other editors to agree before we go ahead and change back to April/May 2007. Robovski 22:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was bold and I changed it :). Chris M. 01:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gamespy article 

message: Speculation From a 3rd party retailer is hardly solid material to change the release date to June 2007 just weeks after a different date was given by maxis. Should it be changed back?-Sgore 23:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is discussed in the section above. Yes, I agree that it should not say "June 2007" as well. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk |
Sorry. Must have missed that.-Sgore 19:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Change to June 2007 

message: As no one can be bothered to, I have copied the Spore hyped template from the spore wiki site, so if you are ridiculusly hyped about spore, there is the link. There are others, but i'll let you all find them on the spore wiki, although if you actually like Spore, you will want that template, and no other... Garfunkle20 21:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spore Template 

message: Will there be cool voclanos and other activities on planets? How does an underwater society develop fire teĉnology to warm up? Can you make tree-dwelling species?--Sonjaaa 17:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Volcanoes, yes (this is in one of the videos). They've said nothing on your other questions. I don't even know where you're getting the "fire technology to warm up" thing from, since there's no indication of whether that's a normal research item. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 03:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are concept images about improving technology to make better fire (or fire pits) but that was old and we haven't seen much about it although it seems that something like that is likely.  How this will translate underwater is beyond me, but they said underwater civs are possible.  Tree civs haven't been mentioned in any form though. Chris M. 16:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: questions

message: Please add this to the (semiprotected) article ... i cant :(
:  de:Spore (Computerspiel)  
Thanks, --Nyks2k 14:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Conti|✉ 14:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add to article 

message: Under the section "Creature Stage" it says "When you first move to another generation, you start life as a baby of your race. You must find other children and group together so that you can hunt some food." This not true, you can group up in any age. I have seen several examples in demonstration videos that adult creatures can do this too. It is also not a requirement to do this when in control of a baby creature.
BmB23 - Wikipedia non-user user. I.e. Not registered.
:Agreed. It's never been specifically states that you must do it. This might be fine with a rewording though. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 19:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faulty information 

message: I'm sure most of you have searched for Spore and ended up with the scientific Spore. I think things could be made easier by having Spore redirect to a disambiguation page, and the current Spore be turned into Spore (biology). Discuss on Talk: Spore —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrmoocow (talk • contribs) .
:I'm not going to bother posting there since consensus has been reached, but I'm strongly opposed to this.  Spore is an awesome game and WILL get A LOT of attention, but wikipedia isn't made for pushing out a biology article (or just moving it) because a video game article has the same title.  Besides the fact that very little actually links here in comparison, I don't see a reason to do the move. Chris M. 15:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. Someone added a direct link to the top anyways (for the video game Spore, see Spore (video game)), which I think is a perfect compromise. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 17:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Plenty of people will be looking for the game info, but more people will be looking for info on spores themselves. The link at the top of the article is a very good compromise. Robovski 01:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spore (biology)

message: I went ahead and removed the youtube video link of Robin Williams. That video has since been taken down for copyright infringement. Synystar 13:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Robin Williams Link 

message: Every creature seems to be a reptile or an insect - even the swimming animals. I have yet to see:
*Feathered animals
*Furry animals
*Flying animals
*Scaled swimming animals
Also, why is EVERY creature an egglayer?
:I think you've mistaken this for a fan forum. You might have more luck by going to one of the fan sites linked at the bottom of the article. This page is for discussing ways to improve the Wikipedia article, not for discussing the game itself in general. — Saxifrage ✎ 02:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have mistaken this for a fan forum, but I might as well answer.  Feathered furry and scaled animals are all possible (and the willosaur was scaled for example) through the texture section of the creature editor.  Flying animals were definitly possible at GDC '05, but may or may not still exist in the game as of E3 '06. Chris M. 13:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

text: He (/she) didn't necessarily mistake this for anything.  The tab at the top of the page says "Discussion" not "Discussion about how we should edit this wikipedia article but no discussion whatsoever about the subject of the article on penalty of EXCOMMUNICATION".  (I'm kidding, but the interface could stand to be clearer.) Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 05:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: And yet that information (existance of feathered, furry, etc, etc) is not in the article, and therefore, people might be wondering about whether such creatures will be included. IE. There's nothing about flying creatures, and there was never any hint of it that I could see from the videos I've seen. JAF1970 00:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The current edition of PC Gamer (UK) supposedly has a post-play article on Spore in which they made a character with wings so it could fly. I'll see if I can lay my hands on it - I'm dubious about the claim of having played the game outside of a demo environment. Robovski 01:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I can see the expansion now - Spore: Flying, Fur and Fun! JAF1970 15:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reptiles and Insects

message: "If there is a lack of predators in the ecosystem and weak herbivores are everywhere, the game will automatically download a new race of predators that another player has created and load them into the currently playing player's world."
If it's a massive SINGLE PLAYER game how is the game supposed to download new predators from "another player"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.81.227.133 (talk • contribs) .
: It doesn't download them from another player, per se.  It downloads them from a library server, to which the game automatically uploads all players' creatures and buildings.  This library is then accessed when you visit other planets or what have you and the planet is populated with stuff that other people have created during their playing. --142.68.220.135 17:07, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's single-player in the sense that you never interact with other players. But it is still networked ("online"), and it will use the creations of other players connected to the network to fill out the niches in your game world. — Saxifrage ✎ 18:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally. It's online, but you can't play against other people, just their creatures. -Garfunkle20 10:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget that if you aren't online it can still download creatures from the game's CD Xander 15:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Online or Offline? 

message: The citation for this phrase - "Wright said "I didn't want to make players feel like Luke Skywalker or Frodo Baggins. I wanted them to be like George Lucas or J.R.R. Tolkien." is from his 2005 Game Developer's Conference video, which can be found on google video, here. Although if someone could find a written source, that would be beter. --Garfunkle20 09:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Most Recent Edit

message: FYI, I removed the following sentence from release date: Some people have reported that Electonic Arts has condcted a meeting and has announced that the game will be released January 15, 2007.
The reason I removed this is because 1) it isn't cited, and 2) it uses the weasel word phrasing "Some people..." without saying specifically who is reporting this.  
Mind you, I'm not saying the sentence is necessarilly false.  I'm saying that it should be replaced by a sentence that says specifically WHO is reporting the details of this alleged meeting and include a verifiable reference.  Otherwise it's just an unverified rumor. Dugwiki 22:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed uncited "weasel word" release date sentence