Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
PC Games (Games) Entertainment Games

Spore Editor Available June 17th 119

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the get-yer-spore-on dept.
Dr. Eggman writes "Ars Technica heralds the coming of the creature editor for the highly anticipated Spore. A previously promised downloadable demo of the creature editor from the game, due on September 7th, will be available June 17th. Furthermore, a full version of the creature editor will appear as a standalone product at the same time for $10. According to EA: 'The demo lets players shape, paint and play with an unlimited number of creatures, using 25 percent of the creature-making parts from Spore. Gamers can then share these creations with their friends, including seamless uploads to YouTube.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Spore Editor Available June 17th

Comments Filter:
  • by cliffski (65094) on Monday April 28, 2008 @08:54AM (#23222526) Homepage
    No mention of it, so it sounds like you will be paying this as a premium just to try out the editor before the game is finished, which doesn't appeal.
    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by Rogerborg (306625)
      They're getting people to pay them to beta test their junk? Insert M$/WhackO$ jibe here.
      • by CogDissident (951207) on Monday April 28, 2008 @09:20AM (#23222844)
        Actually, they have said that the reason they're releasing the creature editor early, is to populate the game with creatures (that we make) before the game comes out. So non-networked players will have species to play against from the start.

        So they're actually being paid by us, to make content for their game. Which is actually kind of the premise of this game (for good or for ill, they count on people making their content for them).
        • I pass.

          If I create, I expect to get paid.

          Oh well, I guess piratbay will have it.. The full game, I mean.
          • The irony in your statement is astounding. Do you think the full game is just going to appear magically? If not then someone has to create it and you've just said that you expect to be paid if you create so I guess you're fine with your hypocrisy in wanting to download it from TPB instead of paying them?
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              I guess you've never heard of sarcasm.

              Take a look what I posted prior to this (article about anti-copyright getting removed from Canadian copyright discussion).

              I'm for fair compensation for creators. I dont necessarily think it needs copyright. However, Spore-creators want to charge people to create content, which they will turn around and sell back to the creators.

              I dont think what they are doing is right either.. unless they are paying people back for good content (heh heh hardly).
          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by Toonol (1057698)
            I would get whiplash if I expressed that strong of a self-contradiction so clearly and in so few words...
        • It's nice that they're trying to populate the game for offline players...

          but is anyone else concerned that all the creatures will end up looking the same?

          In particular the tribe and city levels seem to not care about initial creature design, the cities look the same for every kind of creature.

          It looks like the only game components that reflect the creature editor are the first few stages. If only one or two stages rely heavily on the creature editor we might see a bunch of identical user created desig
          • It is my understanding (from watching some of the GDC videos) that in the later stages of the game, the creature editor is replaced with a unit/building editor. It seems like you will be able to continue to create custom content throughout the game - they've just focused on showing off the creature editor thus far.
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by OzRoy (602691)
          I hope they are moderating it then. Otherwise I'll probably load up the game and the first creature I meet will look like a mouse with a penis grafted onto its back.
          • I thought it was a penis with a mouse grafted onto it.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by CogDissident (951207)
            Its always easier to moderate than to create the content yourself... (+3 insightful)
          • by steveo777 (183629)
            You mean like the PSA movie shown in Johnny Dangerously [wikipedia.org]? If you haven't seen it, you should. It really is a good mob spoof with clever humor. Johnny's brother is about to quit his job so he can get married (and subsequently consummate the marriage ASAP). His mom doesn't want him to and begs Johnny to talk some sense into him. Johnny takes his little brother to his brothel and shows him a movie about sex making your testicles explode (not in a good way). It's done in the very old cartoon PSA way, so e
        • Actually, they are pregenerating creatures on their own as well (and include a whole lot of them on the CD). This is just to add more variety.
    • by patio11 (857072) on Monday April 28, 2008 @09:21AM (#23222856)
      No offense to the starving college students in the audience, I was one once and I've been there, but: $10 is far, far below my care threshold these days. I'm a grown-up, I earn a salary, and $10 for an oodles-of-enjoyment toy is an absolute no-brainer for me even if it doesn't come with a discount for the actual game. Typically, nothing I buy for $10 is intended to last, anyhow. That doesn't even cover a sandwitch or movie ticket these days, and I can virtually guarantee that I will get more child-like glee out of that critter editor than I did out of seeing, e.g., Jumper.

      (Maybe I can mock up that Anakin Skywalker guy, just so I can feed him to hungry predators.)
      • by billcopc (196330)
        The $10 is peanuts, yes, but the premise that users are paying to create content that would normally be an in-house responsibility... that's the nasty part.

        If they gave away the full editor and not a 25% demo, they would have billions of diverse creatures ready at launch and most people would praise them for it, but having us pay AND do their job, that's just weird and sketchy.
      • And the kicker is that you can get the demo for free. You don't even have to spend the lowly $10.
      • I earn a salary too, and I'd be pissed off over the general principle of it if they only charged 50 damn cents. They're essentially asking the game playing public for $10 for the privilege of doing their jobs for them. I think I lost my faith in the future decency of the video game industry when Oblivion players started paying $5 (or whatever) to caparison their horses. Nevertheless, you seem to be confusing outrage over the practicality of the matter with outrage over the principle of it.

        tl;dr version

      • And really, it is like paying a measly $10 to completely pwn other Spore players who do not for the first 3 to 6 months of the game.

        I got to do this kind of thing (pre-release Beta- keep your characters) on a MMorgg. Even folks putting in 20 hours a day didn't catch up for months because I was always in empty areas with a few other experts to group with while they were in zones so packed you could barely move, got hideous lag, couldn't find any resources/mobs, and had to deal with a bunch of other clueless
        • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Except that you'll never be able to pwn any Spore players, as it is a single-player game. Unless you count contributing to the creature-library as pwning them.
          • Competition is a squirrelly thing.... in this case, you would be able to create certain types of creatures (and maybe name them or get credit as the creator?) before other players.

            You might be able to found successful blogs/websites about the game that would earn you cash when later players came to read about your advance knowledge to save time.
        • by maglor_83 (856254)
          Ummm... you do realise that Spore is single player right?
    • Re: (Score:1, Redundant)

      by ZeroExistenZ (721849)

      it sounds like you will be paying this as a premium just to try out the editor before the game is finished

      It's a smart move though; let the 2.0 community enjoy themselves creating 3D, animated creatures to identify with, see how it's used and appreciated (or not) in the community and have them all move over to the spore-universe.

      Honestly, 10$ or 6euros, isn't really such a crazy amount I'd lose my sleep over. And if it allows me to immediatly dive into the game later on (instead of starting with the cre

    • Agreed - this would be more appealing if it worked as a pre-order for an MMO. Put a few bucks down for a reserved copy of the game, get a bonus item (or in this case, time to goof around with the creature editor) when the game launches, and have the pre-order price come off what I pay the day the game launches.

      Besides, it's a great way to lock someone into the game when it launches. Five or ten bucks is nothing for you (the amorphous, typical hominid "you") to put down for a game, but when the game laun

  • I see this game as one that "could" bridge the gap between "The Sims" crowd and the rest of us. Easy to pick up, fun to play around with, enormous levels of depth. IF it can live up to the hype which is going to come thick and fast as the launch date approaches. Some of the previews so far look promising though: SPORE Hands On: http://www.fracknaps.com/read/?p=LETTDC9B [fracknaps.com] http://www.fracknaps.com/read/?p=G21DY3W6 [fracknaps.com]
    • by pandrijeczko (588093) on Monday April 28, 2008 @09:08AM (#23222664)
      I see this game as one that "could" bridge the gap between "The Sims" crowd and the rest of us.

      You mean bridge that previously impassable void between adolescent giggling girl & overwieght middle-aged grumpy fat bloke? Impossible!

      • You mean bridge that previously impassable void between adolescent giggling girl & overwieght middle-aged grumpy fat bloke? Impossible!
        Nah, there are already plenty of middle-aged fat blokes who giggle like adolescent girls while playing The Sims.
      • by Sentry21 (8183)

        You mean bridge that previously impassable void between adolescent giggling girl & overwieght middle-aged grumpy fat bloke? Impossible!
        I thought Yahoo! Chat had bridged that gap a decade ago.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Wiseman1024 (993899)
      Rule of thumb: if they talk about an incredibly amazing AI that pretty much takes over your computer, checks your bank accounts and calls you a moron for having not invested in XYZ which has risen by 200% last month, and you think it may be true, you're in for a disappointment. See Oblivion.

      On the other hand, if you expect an above-average AI with good gameplay dynamics giving an overall very pleasant experience, perhaps with a bit more of creativeness than the usual, you're in for an enjoyable experience.
  • his is viral marketing at it's best: build up the excitement for years, finally announce another far-off release date and charge people for a preview of it.

    Also, pun intended.
    • And the solution to viral marketing?

      Shut your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears and go "Bluh Bluh Bluh Bluh Bluh" very loudly for a few minutes.

      Agreed, it is the Apple Fanboi approach to dealing with critism but it does work.

      • by MouseR (3264)
        I'm actually waiting for this game on Wii, although I'm sick of hearing about it. I hope it'll be a good game. I'm just saying I wont bite on their 10$ add.
        • The Wii, for all that I love that precious gem of a system, is not going to be powerful enough to do much with this game, I suspect.
          • by MouseR (3264)
            The game was announced fore the Wii. Just not release date. For all intents and purposes, if a simpler version can dun on the DS, there's no reason a more decent version will on the Wii.
            • The Force Unleashed is also coming to the Wii, from another developer, with a different engine, and no impressive physics effects. The game has the same name, but is it the same game?

              That's like saying the GBA version of Madden 08 is the same is the PS3/360 version of Madden 08.
  • by Speare (84249) on Monday April 28, 2008 @09:14AM (#23222746) Homepage Journal

    Like many here, I have been waiting and watching all of the endless demonstrations of this game, because it really caught my attention. However, my interest is waning with each new demo.

    Am I the only one who doesn't like the direction the artwork is going? Maybe it's partly the presentation format but there's more to it. The early demos had a nice art style, realistic colors used in a gentle way, subtler textures. The more recent demos have shown the same super-saturated colors that plastic toy manufacturers (and Redmond OS designers) prefer to use. Even the space shots and primordial ooze scenes seem less realistic and more schematic in nature lately. In short, What was M. C. Escher is now M. C. Hammer.

    Maybe they're spreading themselves too thin with an insanely aggressive multi-platform release (hello, Nintendo DS simultaneous release with 2D pixel art!?). Maybe there are some real technical challenges to making this "pervasively online yet not at risk from griefers" panacea they appear to promise. But honestly, don't make it suck on purpose.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28, 2008 @09:21AM (#23222868)
      In short, What was M. C. Escher is now M. C. Hammer.

      *has visions of parachute pants that appear to billow both outwards and inwards at the same time*
    • Maybe there are some real technical challenges to making this "pervasively online yet not at risk from griefers" panacea they appear to promise.

      I never thought about it before but what's to stop a proliferation of goatse-inspired artwork appearing in your game? Is the user-generated content going to be screened?
    • by Clovis42 (1229086)

      The more recent demos have shown the same super-saturated colors that plastic toy manufacturers (and Redmond OS designers) prefer to use.

      If the game is anything like they are aiming for, this shouldn't be a problem. Just don't make your creatures like that! If you want subtle colors, use subtle colors. It sounds like you can modify just about everything in the game. The Sporepedia, or whatever, should allow you to download stuff from other users with the same asethetic. So you can probably find what you

  • Editor is cool and all, but what is the current ETA of the game iteself and what platforms will it be released for? PC?
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by kinoku (1259628)
      Xbox 360, PC, PS3 just like the Sims. And then maybe a retarded version for handhelds.
      • Spore is about gameplay and perhaps AI. It's not about OMG PIXEL SHADERS REFLECTIVE SURFACES LULZ. It could prefectly well develop in an entirely 2D world made of curves and vectors, see flOw, LocoRoco and PataPon. I see how Spore could be a perfectly successful game on PSP that looks like any of those three, as long as it incorporates the same complex gameplay to the degree/size/number of objects they can afford with the handhelds' more limited RAM and processing power.
        • Art Direction has nothing to do with eye-candy; it's about how you do it, not how you overdue it. I bought a PSP due to Patapon, its originality and style got me right on the spot. It has a consistent style throughout the whole game. And , unlike for example what Frank Miller's Spirit seems to do, Patapon doesn't resort to oversaturated, contrasting colors; instead it appeals to subtle gradients. Flow is another example. The point here isn't realism or special effects, but rather the art style. While supers
          • I completely agree. I was replying to "maybe a retarded version for handhelds", guessing it'd be your average "lol luk my rig omg 124875 gazillion polygons per second" gamer (I'm very sorry if this isn't the case).

            To me, all three gameplay, artistic value and technical quality are important, but they come in that order. I still play roguelikes, and I play some games which aren't particularly the bomb as games, but are beautiful. I don't play games who aren't too fun and aren't beautiful just because they're
            • by kinoku (1259628)
              Mate, by "retarded" I meant "scaled down". I don't think it's about the graphics, I think it's about the complexity of the game, the limited interface and screen real estate to convey information. Like "most" handheld ports, they'll strip it down to the bare basics - not just the graphics.
    • Editor is cool and all, but what is the current ETA of the game iteself and what platforms will it be released for? PC?

      A previously promised downloadable demo of the creature editor from the September 7th due game..."

      Hmmm, wish I could help you out with the first part. As for platforms, I believe it's definitely PC/PS3/360, with a possible Wii version(?) at this point.
    • by sabernet (751826)
      PC, Xbox, PS3 and DS

      DS version will be 2d vector based and far more....interesting looking(looks like those shaped felt cutouts you may have played with in Kindergarten)

      PC, Xbox and PS3 will be that 3D procedural thing you saw at those tech demos and talks.
  • Hmm, let me guess... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Kashgarinn (1036758)
    this is the EA side of spore showing its (dark) colours. Some executive going "OMG! this has taken too long, can't we sell something right now?"

    Who wants to play with just the editor??? I'd have thought the first stage of spore would have been a much more interesting as a standalone, buy the first part (for DS, PC, Xbox, PS3, mac) download the full game for just XX.99 extra

    The timing is just right for a "omg it's just around the corner", but the completely wrong part of the game is being sold off as a sta
    • You're right, but isn't that what MS Video Editor did for YouTube?
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Talderas (1212466)

      Conspiracy theory #2 is that they don't want to pay artists to create the models of things for the final launch, better to sell the useless editor and make people do the work for them.

      Am I right? Or am I right?

      I would assume that Maxis is going to pick and choose from the user-generated creatures to put in release. I suspect there will also be some sort of method to identify you to your submission so if they end up using it in the game your name gets plastered on the credits. Heck, if you're really good with submissions, Maxis might come out and ask you to work for them.

      People talk about how great OSS is, yet when the very same premise is put out there to develop content for game (albeit at $10 a participant), p

      • by SimHacker (180785) on Monday April 28, 2008 @12:12PM (#23225644) Homepage Journal

        I wrote The Sims character animation for Maxis, and also a tool called "SimShow [ea.com]" that we released before the The Sims release date.

        SimShow enabled players to view and create their own character skins, so that when The Sims was finally released, there were already web sites publishing hundreds of characters for the game. (Many of them would have been impossible for EA to legally publish themselves, like Spiderman, Star Trek characters, etc.)

        The Sims was much to complex to release a demo version, because it required a critical mass of objects to work. We could not release a stripped down version with only a few objects or levels, like most other video games. Instead, by releasing a tool to create content instead of a hamstrung demo, it improved the game when it was eventually released, instead of delaying it.

        That approach worked quite well for The Sims, so it's no wonder that EA is repeating it with Spore.

        -Don

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by canajin56 (660655)

      Conspiracy theory #2 is that they don't want to pay artists to create the models of things for the final launch, better to sell the useless editor and make people do the work for them. Am I right? Or am I right?

      No, that's completely right. The game uses fancy clustering stuff, sort of like "recommendation" algorithms on netflix etc. So you start designing your first creature, and it populates the world with various other creatures from the database, that its distance algorithm measures as "similar" to

    • by Snowmit (704081) on Monday April 28, 2008 @09:57AM (#23223458) Homepage
      Well, you're something.

      From day 1 Will Wright has been saying that the content would be user generated, it's kind of the point of the whole 'procedural world' game play. Whenever people connect to the Internet with the game it will pull creatures that fit into your environment from a database of created creatures.

      So where you see a conspiracy theory, I see a chance to mess around with the editor before the game comes out and for my creations to be some of the early creatures that are populated across the network.

      Who wants to play with the editor? Me and people like me who really enjoy the creation half of video game play. We're the same people who spent hours customizing CJ in GTA:SA despite that fact that no one but us would ever see him.

      We're not all of the players, to be sure. But we're enough of the players that this is probably a really great business move. EA gets more cash and I get something I want.

      No arguments here!
      • by Clovis42 (1229086)

        We're the same people who spent hours customizing CJ in GTA:SA despite that fact that no one but us would ever see him.

        What are you talking about?? I think the old lady I beat down with a purple dildo probably noticed my sweet tats. And when I spent an hour running a chainsaw over a pile of bodies in the street, I'm sure the passers by noticed my red mohawk. I know my posse really loved my hockey mask; why else would they stick with me after I shot several of them in the face with a shot gun? Even all th

      • Who wants to play with the editor? Me and people like me who really enjoy the creation half of video game play. We're the same people who spent hours customizing CJ in GTA:SA despite that fact that no one but us would ever see him.

        Not to nitpick, but.. customizing CJ's appearance actually had an effect on your respect/street cred and determines how many friendly gang members you can recruit to follow you at a time.

        Anyways, gimme dem duckets!
      • You managed to completely miss the point. The point is that they're essentially requiring users to generate all of their content. To facilitate this, they announced some time ago that they would release a *free* (fully featured) creature editor. Today they announced that it will not in fact be free, and cost $10. The point of contention lies in that they're having users *pay* to generate content for their game, when they previously announced this would be free.
        • by Snowmit (704081)
          I don't recall them ever announcing that the creature editor would be free beyond it being free with the game. Which it still will be.

          When did you see it announced as pure free?
  • That editor would be free and fully functional if there were some smart people within EA. Imagine all those people downloading it to kill a few hours. "Oh wow, this so cool! Haha, look at that!". They end up getting hooked and then get curious as to how their creations will behave within the game. And there you go, sales stats +1. Given that you pay 10 bucks for the editor and probably 60 bucks for the full game, it seems pretty straightforward: The sales potential of a creature editor for 10 bucks is limit
    • by canajin56 (660655)
      Three words. Bit. Tor. Rent. If they felt like it, the bandwidth cost would be nothing. Or, if it was free they could just toss it out there and it would be on download.com and tucows and all the other free download sites. And that is how it will work for the free crippled version, won't cost THEM any bandwidth at all. Why they are charging for the full version I don't know...don't they WANT people populating their database so it can make better choices when populating new players' worlds? Guess
  • Spore Wife (Score:5, Funny)

    by hansamurai (907719) <hansamurai@gmail.com> on Monday April 28, 2008 @09:57AM (#23223456) Homepage Journal
    All my wife wants to do in Spore is make creatures, heck, all she does in the Sims is make us and then produce 10 spawns from "us". She's got a real bun in the oven now though, so maybe she'll get over this faze, but the whole point of this is: if I can spend 10 dollars to make her happy until we have to take care of a real spore, I'll take it.
    • by Chris Burke (6130)
      She's got a real bun in the oven now though, so maybe she'll get over this faze, but the whole point of this is: if I can spend 10 dollars to make her happy until we have to take care of a real spore, I'll take it.

      Yeah, I say go for it. She's probably going to be disappointed with the "real bun" when she finds out that it isn't very customizable -- you can dress it and style the hair, but things like skin color, sex, and number of limbs are all more or less fixed.
  • My big concern (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rAiNsT0rm (877553) on Monday April 28, 2008 @10:21AM (#23223830) Homepage
    I have been awaiting Spore for quite a number of years, since I saw it demoed the first time in person, even though it really isn't a game I would normally enjoy. Since then I have had one massive concern which is already proving out... that I am going to be totally brought out of the experience with stupid/inappropriate user generated creatures.

    Sure they can be marked offensive and eventually removed, but I will still have to play against boob-shaped creatures, and flying butts. Leave it to nerds to instantly go for the juvenile garbage. Even national gaming mags have pieces where they state they can't wait to make crap like that.

    Ugh, I've lost my interest. Sorry EA this is going to be the downfall. Guaranteed.
    • Re:My big concern (Score:4, Informative)

      by Dr. Eggman (932300) on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:16AM (#23224700)
      In demoing the Sporepedia, a card-like encyclopedia of user generated content, the creators have stated that creatures/veichles/buildings automatically added are based on a sort of dynamic filter created out of your own choices in creation/selection. So, if you do not want to see such things then you simply need not create/select them and they will end up at the bottom of the selection choices as more favorable selections are pushed up.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Liquidrage (640463)
      Oh noes! Flying butts. The horror.

      Seriously, who taught you to be so offended by such trivial things? It's not something you're just born being offended by, it's a learned behavior. And one we'd be better off without.
      • by rAiNsT0rm (877553)
        Because maybe when I sit down after a long day at work dealing with immature asshats, I don't want to have them in my game too (literally).

        Outside of that, it is not what I'd want presented to the masses who play a game I've spent the last few YEARS of my life working on with pride. Sure, it may be funny once or twice but after that it is juts lame and tired. Also, kids/parents aren't going to want it and they are a huge market for this game.

        People are people and online or not you're always going to have mo
        • by darkmayo (251580)
          So you wouldn't get satisfaction from destroying the home planet of a race of penis creatures?
    • by oracle128 (899787)
      Or, in putting two and two together, perhaps they're charging the $10 precisely so they can tie people to game accounts and moderate this kind of crap. Game accounts are useless if you can create an infinite number of them. But charge $10 for each account, people will be less abusive regarding the content they create, lest they get booted by an EA admin.
    • by goldaryn (834427)

      Ugh, I've lost my interest. Sorry EA this is going to be the downfall. Guaranteed.
      EA huh? Don't worry, there's always Spore '09, Spore '10, Spore '11...
  • by kellyb9 (954229)

    A previously promised downloadable demo of the creature editor from the game, due on September 7th, will be available June 17th, 2054.
  • A lot of people in the comments of the linked article are complaining/debating about the "cuteness" meter. I think it could be a rather fun feature. Have something that looks at-first-glance like a "cute, cuddly widdle kitten", but with an geiger/aliens-style secondary mouth or perhaps some freaky tentacles hidden away for unsuspecting victims.

    I wonder if creatures will be able to "mate" in the game. It would be rather fun to copy somebody's cutesy creature, but add a few surprises and then chomp on unsu
  • I can't find any details in the Ars Technica links about the creature editor regarding AI. Will this game involve people programming the creatures to do things and interact with each other autonomously? That would be really cool. I wouldn't even care about the graphics if it just had an accessible AI dev environment. Kind of like the old Apple ][+ game, "Robot Wars," but not programming in assembly.

    Seth
    • by Clovis42 (1229086)

      Will this game involve people programming the creatures to do things and interact with each other autonomously?

      You are, almost certainly, going to be disappointed. I've never read any indication of a scripting language, or even a Black and White like system of training the creatures. What I have read indicates that the creature's actions will largely be determined by what parts you give it. IE, if you give it teeth for hunting, it will hunt. If you make a really mean looking creature, but give it flat te

  • by imasu (1008081) on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:23AM (#23224850)
    This editor will allow is to finally reanimate Duke Nukem to kick some mutant ass, in... Duke Nukem SPOREVER!
  • So, lemme get this straight. You have to pay for an editor for the world's first "Massively Single Player Game" that mines it's install base for interesting content?

    They should be paying us as developers!

    No offense, Spore is the ONLY game I am looking forward to, but I just think this is pushing the definition of "demo"... Even if they gave it away, it wouldn't be freeee....
  • There seems to be some outrage at the idea of selling the creature builder for $10. People complain about the price of various things (gas, food, widgets) all the time, and the answer is usually the same. Why are they charging $10? Because people will pay for it. Why wouldn't they charge for it?? I think it's great that there will be a free demo, at least. As others have pointed out, $10 isn't much, and if the editor is anything like they've been describing, it will be worth it.
  • For only $10, I'll probably buy it, and not care if I get a discount on the final game. If they want to generate even more community content, they could offer to pay $20 to the creator of any creatures they incorporate into their game universe.

  • If no one used the editor prior to the actual release of the game, would there be no content? I think not. The public demos already show lots of creatures, and Mr. Wrights' public explanations of the game reinforce the fact that they do have pre-packaged content.

    So, you download the demo or pay the $10 for the 'full' editor or wait and buy the game itself, which comes with the ability to create the creatures.

    Where have you lost? Did you lose when the Sim you made and posted online got pulled down by someone
  • This just smacks of the hype surrounding "Black & White" when it first came out. I wonder if I'll end up with another retarded monkey that eats rocks and poop.
  • I'm sure this will start a flame war, but it really isn't intended to. I've seen Spore videos, and read Spore reviews -- and from what I can see, the game "may" be decent, and "may" not be.

    I can't understand all these people who are so certain that it's going to be the greatest thing ever. Do they not realize that they're just re-spouting the hype that's being fed to them by a multimillion dollar hype machine?

    I'm not flaming the game. I hope it's great. But come on people... it's not out yet, and we all

"Mach was the greatest intellectual fraud in the last ten years." "What about X?" "I said `intellectual'." ;login, 9/1990

Working...