Spore-Inspired Action RPG Darkspore Announced 86
Today Electronic Arts announced Darkspore, an action RPG in development from Maxis that is inspired by Spore's creature creator technology. The game is due to launch in February 2011, and a teaser is available on the official website. A more descriptive video is available from EA's live demo (start at 8:25). Quoting Joystiq:
"...Darkspore will let up to three players traverse 'several' planets cooperatively, and while there will be PvP in the finished product, Maxis isn't providing details just yet. The basics will be the same whether going in solo or as a team: You'll be able to choose from a number (again, no specifics yet) of pre-created melee, ranged and support creatures that can have their stats and abilities augmented by equipment. ... When choosing to beam down from your starship to a planet, you will see a lineup of enemy types that you'll encounter. This gives you and your friends enough information to decide which three characters from your collection you'll want to deploy. The trio can then be switched between on the fly, albeit with a brief cool-down period afterward. The idea is to use the characters' various abilities strategically against what the Left 4 Dead-inspired 'AI director' decides to toss your way."
It's illogical captain (Score:5, Funny)
If it really takes after Spore, galaxy upon galaxy, planets filled with walking cockmonsters..
I got yer PvP right here buddy...
For those who modded informative... (Score:1)
"P" doesn't stand for player.
Use your imagination, and then mod as "funny."
Make Sim City 5 Already! (Score:4, Insightful)
Maxis please for the love of everything good in gaming make Simcity 5.
Re: (Score:2)
With the craptasticy SC4 I'm not sure I'd want to see it come to the light of day.
Re: (Score:2)
What didn't you like about SC4? The transportation systems, and that you could click on a building and see all the commuter routes, were awesome. It seemed like a worthy successor to SC2000 to me.
Re: (Score:2)
The city area was far too small, even with the neigbouring cities, and laying highways was horrible.
Apart from that, I wish they'd make a more detailed economical simulation. For example, if the industrial zone has a car factory, it needs to import steel, right? And that should prompt someone to make a steel mill to manufacture it in the city, undercutting imports by price, helping the factory make more profits, and generating tax revenue. Similarly, a burger place needs to get raw materials from somewhere,
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that the area was too small -- I'd really like to have several cities with full transportation/economy simulation on a single map. Your ideas on a more detailed economy sound a bit like Transport Tycoon (and related games) -- I guess SimCity could work with a similar model, even though the player influence is only indirect.
Modern machines are fast, but SC4s simulation engine -- the transportation engine in particular -- can still slow down a fast computer down to a crawl. Too bad SimCity 4 isn't mul
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I liked that! SC2000 just stopped feeling like a challenge. If I can walk away from a game for an hour and it be fine when I get back, what would have been the point of me sitting in front of it?
Re: (Score:2)
It really wasn't that bad. The only thing that really required micromanagement was the funding of individual schools and hospitals. That really was handled poorly; both should have defaulted to auto-adjusted funding according to the number of pupils/patients, with some kind of manual setting in cases where you do want to override. The economy was pretty stable if you build the city in a sustainable way... Of course if e.g. pollution is continually rising, you can't expect things to go smoothly while running
Re: (Score:2)
Really I couldn't figure it out. I enjoy sc, sc2, sc3, but sc4 for lack of a better word always rubbed me the wrong way and I've tried several times to replay it over the last few years.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not sure what you don't like about SC4, but its reception was quite positive. It certainly improved on SC3k in many ways. Of course it's difficult to repeat the jump from the original SimCity to SimCity 2000. SimCity 2000 was just stunning at the time (for a 12 year old, at least).
Anyway, I really want to see a SimCity 5 with an improved transportation model (the heart of a city sim), a better representation of regions; ideally with modding capabilties up there with Civ4. As far as I understand it, SC4 wasn
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
SC2000 was a great game, probably the best (that or Civ2) , but of course it can be improved!
- Not being able to build on hills always seemed silly, and ruined the looks of many cities.
- Commercial buildings were too short, you never got the feeling of skyscrapers popping up, that was a shame.
- The rail network would have been more fun if you could put different sized stations in, and trains couldn't turn at right angles
- The maps were too small, limiting gameplay (one you go
Re: (Score:2)
There are so many ways to improve SC2k (and SC4), it's not even funny. And I'm talking about raw gameplay here, not graphics. Whether it's a good business idea -- Maxis feels that SC4 is already too complex -- is another matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
This was improved upon. In SC4 if a building became too big for the current demand, it would be replaced with a half broken version of itself. If there was a large surge in demand in that area, it might upgrade itself, but you usually had to bulldoze it yourself.
As good as Spore? (Score:4, Insightful)
Oops, just kidding.
Re:As good as Spore? (Score:5, Funny)
Now you can do more than make penis-creatures. You can attack them too.
Re: (Score:2)
Or make a walking vagina, attack it with a penis-creature, and post an animated gif to various imageboards.
Coming to think of it, I suspect that at least some tabloids will do just this: "Maxis releases rape simulator!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not an RPG (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not an RPG (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
RPG erroneously seems to be defined as "upgradeable stats" whether it is by leveling up or equipping better items.
Thats not a bad description of the original D&D actually, which was itself an offshoot of tabletop wargaming. Now you can get that sort of experience from a computer game, since its mostly mechanics, what you are capable of doing is quite limited within the confines of the game. More recent tabletop RPGs however are a completely different level of enjoyment, not even for the amateur theatrics but for the endless possibilities they offer. Like a particular book or movie? Spend a few hours setting up a wo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Those were races. D&D Basic had the four basic classes. The role playing aspect was up to the DM and the players. If the DM wanted it to be super basic, then there would be few options, and the only real workable combat would be using the weapon in hand. A more creative group can use coercion, negotiation, bluffing,and if in combat, their surroundings to complete any encounter.
The scope of what can be done in the game goes way beyond that, but I will stop there.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and that was almost 35 years ago. The game's changed a bit since then.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that while most RPGs have "upgradeable stats", and they're indeed almost required to have an RPG, it does not go the other way around. Just because something has "upgradeable stats" doesn't make it a RPG. The same way having wheels doesn't make something a car, even though all cars have wheels.
Re: (Score:1)
RPG erroneously seems to be defined as "upgradeable stats" whether it is by leveling up or equipping better items. I'm also curious how modelling this game after the space era of Spore with precreated uneditable creatures is inspired from the creature creator...
Yeah, no kidding! I thought the actual creature phase with the running around and combat was really neat. I was hoping for something bigger with similar ideas. A 3d Evo [wikipedia.org] was really what I had hoped for, and this new one doesn't seem to do that either...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For the most part, I agree. Although property ownership, economics models, in-game reputation, character types, race, etc. play increasing roles. Freeform exploration is also a major plus.
Morrowind imho did a great job re: character types and freeform exploration. (Oblivion less so, imho because the world was more homogenous/uniform -- but that's just me, and many would disagree).
To date, no game has come close to Baldur's Gate II in my opinion. Where choice of party-members radically altered in-game c
Re: (Score:2)
Modern RPGs are still Role Play Games:
- You play the role of a Courier
- You play the role of a Pest Control Man (Dwarf/Elf/Whatever)
and if you're lucky you can even play the role of a junior hero in training tasked with dealing with all the pesky details real heroes don't worry about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
RPG has always been a term that covered a multitude of sins, though. My own experience of pen & paper or tabletop gaming is relatively limited (though by no means non-existant), but I can't help but feel that you are romanticising things here (and being a bit hard on CRPGs). I have certainly participated in pen & paper games that have been nowhere near the depth or sophistication of something like Dragon Age (or even of the average Final Fantasy game in some cases). Epic free-roaming campaigns do ex
Re:Not an RPG (Score:4, Interesting)
While the PC-xbox-what have you market may have hijacked the term "role playing game" for its own profit, it doesn't represent any actual role playing, which is where you sit around a table with your friends and pretend to be a someone or something else to whatever depth you feel comfortable. And until you have near reality physics engines and near human AI, as well as full facial/vocal/auditory interaction, you won't get that (really really fun) experience either.
Um, wow. Welcome to 20 years ago.
Seriously guys, we're limited by the technology. There's a reason CRPGs and JRPGs are what they are -- it's just not feasible to make the kind of experiences you are asking for. Consider Mass Effect or Dragon Age, games that have hundreds of thousands of pages of text. Even they feel "railroady" at times. You can't join the villain, after all, because they didn't have an extra 5 years to write, script, draw, program, etc that scenario and the 500 sub-scenarios involved.
Ask again in 20 years when the idea of having a true AI (or 100) in a computer RPG will be possible, and we're seeing "The Elder Scrolls 8" with actual open ended, emergent gameplay. When you don't have to have a human writing each line of text, then the ability to "role play" becomes a lot more feasable.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Seriously guys, we're limited by the technology.
The only technology I need to enjoy a better RPG experience is a pencil, paper, and some dice. Don't get me wrong, computer games are great, MMO games even better, but its a very different sort of experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously guys, we're limited by the technology. There's a reason CRPGs and JRPGs are what they are -- it's just not feasible to make the kind of experiences you are asking for. Consider Mass Effect or Dragon Age, games that have hundreds of thousands of pages of text. Even they feel "railroady" at times. You can't join the villain, after all, because they didn't have an extra 5 years to write, script, draw, program, etc that scenario and the 500 sub-scenarios involved.
That's the problem with modern games. They assume the player needs to be inundated with pages upon pages of mediocre fantasy guff to keep them engrossed in what is otherwise a plastic and unconvincing game world that has an economy entirely run on monster loot.
Make the game world logical if not realistic, fill it with NPCs that act like you would expect them to, and allow the PCs to act in meaningful ways with them. The players imagination can fill in the gaps and come up with a great story. Darklands mig
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously guys, we're limited by the technology. There's a reason CRPGs and JRPGs are what they are -- it's just not feasible to make the kind of experiences you are asking for. Consider Mass Effect or Dragon Age, games that have hundreds of thousands of pages of text. Even they feel "railroady" at times. You can't join the villain, after all, because they didn't have an extra 5 years to write, script, draw, program, etc that scenario and the 500 sub-scenarios involved.
Try Fallout 1&2 sometime. You can
Re: (Score:2)
Ask again in 20 years when the idea of having a true AI (or 100) in a computer RPG will be possible
20 years? Try 2000, you'd need a holodeck for what you're talking about.
Well, first off, I tend towards believing Kurzweil as being right [wikipedia.org] (or at least close), which would put the technology closer to 20-80 years out. Is he right? Who knows? You're missing the point if you're asking that question -- the point isn't "are we going to see a singularity" but rather "are we going to be surprised by future tech when we're old and retired and think we know better?"
Secondly, the actual media/UI is irrelevant. We don't need holographics, a monitor would work just fine -- and we're fa
Re: (Score:2)
By creating something like this, you could set up 50 - 100 semi-unique simulated personalities and give them semi-realistic responses to stimuli, such as the PC turning traitor or the big bad surrendering unexpectedly.
I suppose if you wanted to get in on this field early, teaching a computer how to write short fantasy novels would be your best bet. 10,000 words, or somesuch.
You genuinely have no clue what you're talking about. The level of AI needed to write a comprehensible, original novel is so far beyond our grasp at the moment that it may as well be impossible. We don't fully understand the bare concept of intelligence, let alone are able to simulate it. So no, you won't be seeing human level AIs in 15-20 years, or even a decent simulacrum thereof, if you said that to a real AI researcher he'd laugh his ass off at you.
Just like how the "real researchers" laughed their ass off at the human genome project?
Again, not talking about real AI here. Just talking about procedurally generated dialog trees and the like. Glorified chat-bots in order to facilitate the writing of large swaths of text really quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Just like how the "real researchers" laughed their ass off at the human genome project?
The human genome project was easy to scale up, the data was right in front of them, it was just a question of crunching it. And we still haven't a firm grasp of the complex interactions between genetic information, far from it.
Unlike such a project, we don't have the data in front of us to create intelligence, it would be as though there was considerable debate over the existence of genes in the first place. And even if we did, you'd still need an almost perfect physics engine to be able to do whatever you wanted, pretty much down to the molecular level. I'm not saying it will never happen, it probably will, but not for scores of generations at minimum. In the meantime you and your buddies can get a similar level of enjoyment with the abovementioned paper and pencil. I wouldn't see it as competition for online games, any more than I'd see football as competition for online games.
Ah yes, but do we have the data in front of us on what creates a good story? [tvtropes.org] Because before editing, that's all this kind of thing is -- data. And data can be procedurally generated.
I'm not talking about a simulated world or whatnot. I'm specifically talking about using an algorithm to create outlines of NPC interactions in a RPG, which would later be used by a professional video game scriptwriter to flesh out scenarios.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, Kurzweil is really jumping the gun here, but making predictions about 1000 years is a bit ridiculous too -- it's far too long a timeframe to be making predictions like that. A millennium is nearly incomprehensibly long. We just don't have any clue where we'll be in 1000 years.
If nothing else, given 1000 years we might brute-force simulate the input/output responses of individual neurons and hook them up with the same connections and feedbacks to get an artificial human-level intelligence without
Re: (Score:2)
Imagination is a good thing, but it doesn't replace a complete audio/visual experience. No one would ever leave their house if it did.
Re: (Score:2)
You had me at EA... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason they backed down from things is the uproar [theregister.co.uk] and being pilloried [penny-arcade.com] over what they did with Spore.
Don't kid yourself. They'd like to be that restrictive- because they went there and would've stayed there if consumers hadn't have so thoroughly rejected what they pulled.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and
Urban Rivals [urban-rivals.com]
Re: (Score:2)
FYI, on the video, they say that you can install it on as many PCs as you want. I don't know what other DRM provisions there are though. It may be just as simple as a CD check.
Re: (Score:1)
FYI, on the video, they say that you can install it on as many PCs as you want. I don't know what other DRM provisions there are though. It may be just as simple as a CD check.
I never purchased or played Spore because of the DRM. I'd rather not play a PC game than install DRM, especially one that requires network connectivity.
Re: (Score:2)
Its a real shame that these small studios were gobbled up by the corporate monsters. Back in the day we had Sierra, Maxis, Blizzard, Origin, and loads of other awesomeness. Now we have....EA, Activision, Ubisoft? Here's to hoping smaller successful startup companies like S2 continue to prosper, saving us from our corporate overlords.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds to me... (Score:2)
Like a rather desperate attempt to repurpose the rather nice technology they developed for a rather poor game and make it saleable.
One again (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Disappointing from the get-go (Score:2)
My first thought (since its based on spore) was you'd build completely custom creatures from the creature creator and then fight in a co-op game. Sounded like it had potential as players would race to create inventive designed and show them off to each other. That could be quite fun and different.
Then I read the summary and saw you would just be choosing from a handful of canned classes and some upgradable stats. While this isn't a horrible idea, its hardly a new one or really that interesting and I was imm
Re: (Score:2)
Ultima II, right?
Is this The Matrix or Starcraft? (Score:4, Funny)
Based on what EA did to C&C 4... (Score:3, Insightful)
Based on what EA did to C&C 4 - basically destroying the original concept of the C&C franchise - i.e. no tiberium harvesting and base building, I can only imagine that this will also be worse than the original Spore.
EA - frankly you are the worst software company in the world because you buy great software companies and take great games written by them - and slowly destroy the games.
Re: (Score:2)
Is that even possible?
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot about Activision. I think at this point it's a race to the bottom, and Bobby Kotick is winning.
Evolva? (Score:1, Informative)
I remember a game called "Evolva" sort of like this... 3 guys you controlled with different skills.
Yeah... (Score:1)