It's getting pretty close to 2000 one-star reviews. xP
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Spore
It's getting pretty close to 2000 one-star reviews. xP
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Spore
I didn't think it looked all that interesting, but from what you all are saying about building colonies and stuff, it sounds more interesting than I thoughtI don't feel like forking out $50 for a game right about now though.
im up to the space stage now (which didnt take very long, and i was trying to do as much as i could before advancing, ie. befriending or attacking as many creatures as possible, etc.) and i'm kinda over it...i almost can't be bothered doing what i have to...but i might keep soldiering on in the hope that it sparks my interest again, otherwise i'll just have to wait for Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3, which i am mega pumped for
This was my old smitten. ^__^
This is the one I've stuck with and it's so cute!
I never tried it out. Mostly because my computer wouldn't have been able to run it. And also because of this.
Yeah I work in GAME and we already nick name it Sporn.Originally Posted by Værn
So wait. Do you actually get to visit other player's planets and interact with them? Or is it just downloadable content that players upload to a server?
"... and so I close, realizing that perhaps the ending has not yet been written."
Both. You don't directly interact with the other players, but you do directly interact with the other player's creations as they download into your game from the server. I don't believe that it would be possible for every player to have their own planet, though - there are too few planets for that (assuming they want to sell a decent amount of games, which I'm sure they will).
As for people not wanting to "give in to the EA empire" I find it all rather silly. I can understand people making a protest by way of Amazon or whatever, I suppose - although it does just go to show that you can't rely on Amazon's reviews as they aren't basing their one-star reviews on anything but the fact it's an EA game with EA's anti-piracy measures. But I don't get why people simply don't buy a game because it's an EA game. I mean, can't you just hack it easily enough? If not, oh well, your loss. Spore - and Mass Effect even more so - is a quality game and anyone who doesn't play it just because it's an EA game is missing out.
Bow before the mighty Javoo!
The problem is that EA is essentially pissing all over their customer base. Imagine if you went out and bought yourself a movie from a shop. You take it home and play it in your DVD player. Everything seems fine. You then proceed to play it on your DVD player on your computer, and then the DVD player on your laptop. Then your friend wants to borrow the movie to see it. But when he takes it home, the movie refuses to play. You then find out that the movie can only ever be watched on the pieces of equipment you've got. To top it all off, any piece of equipment you've used it on now has software that is capable of logging your activities on those players by the company you bought it from.
This is essentially what the DRM on Spore and Mass Effect does. It prevents you from playing the games on more than three machines in total (this includes anytime you decide to upgrade your computer enough to warrant wiping the O/S, AND any laptops you may want to play it on), and in the long run means that when the time comes for you to possibly sell the game on you can't, because the copy you own is locked out and becomes a very expensive coaster. Also the software they use sits on your computer's hard-drive permanently even after you've uninstalled the game. Considering the software is designed to contact EA to register the game who knows what other data it could send? In computing parlance such programs would be trojans or spyware, but because EA can write it off as anti-piracy measures it's allowed to fly. But in reality it's an invasive violation of privacy.
No one should have to put up with this. The PC market is being artificially torn apart by these ridiculous anti-piracy measures. None of you console jockies have to put up with this and I don't see why we should. I'm hoping the gaming community sends a clear message to EA by not buying this game or downloading it instead.
There is no signature here. Move along.
DRM isn't to hurt pirates. They know DRM can't stop pirates, heck Spore was on the torrents within hours of its Aussie release. The very purpose of DRM is one of its supposed side-effects: Destroying the second hand market.
Publishers have hated that for years. In Japan the big guys have actually been trying to make it illegal since at least the mid 90s. Now they can dress it up like this - as a protection against lawbreaking - and the people who know the truth about how ineffective it is aren't that big a sector of the market anymore.
People talk about how DRM hurts legitimate consumers like that's not the point of it.
If you buy it, you're telling EA it's ok to do it, and that you don't mind being screwed over by overbearing DRM. The only way they're going to stop this is if it hurts sales.
Either way, it's just driving more people to pirate their games. People aren't just going to buy it and not resell it. They're not going to buy it in the first place.
No, if I buy it it means that I want to play the game. I don't give a crap about the whole 3-installs thing affecting second-hand sales, either. So you can't buy it second hand? Oh boo hoo. Couple of years in therapy, you'll get over it.If you buy it, you're telling EA it's ok to do it, and that you don't mind being screwed over by overbearing DRM. The only way they're going to stop this is if it hurts sales.
Basically if you want to play a game, save up the amount that you feel is worth spending on it. I just happen to believe it's worth the £27 or so I spent on it, and was more than happy to spend that amount. I'd have spent more if it wasn't that cheap at the place I bought it from. It's a fairly unique game and I felt like something different. I'm also happy to encourage EA (by giving them my money) to keep financing this sort of innovation.
Bow before the mighty Javoo!
Oh, completely agreed. If the only way someone can get the game is new, and the price doesn't come down, people might just end up pirating then, even years after the game comes out. But I just don't think DRM is about piracy, even though piracy is a consequence of both its stated purpose and what I think is its real purpose
It's not just about not being able to buy it second hand, it's about not being able to play the game you paid full price for brand new after a few installs, not to mention the spyware crap they stick on your PC in the name of protecting their intellectual property.No, if I buy it it means that I want to play the game. I don't give a crap about the whole 3-installs thing affecting second-hand sales, either. So you can't buy it second hand? Oh boo hoo. Couple of years in therapy, you'll get over it.If you buy it, you're telling EA it's ok to do it, and that you don't mind being screwed over by overbearing DRM. The only way they're going to stop this is if it hurts sales.
The whole point of commerce is that the value of items goes up or down depending on the worth and age of a product. By tacking on the DRM EA can artificially inflate the price of the game almost indefinitely. Also you have to keep in mind that not everyone is as privaleged as you to be able to pay full price for games. I myself haven't bought a game that's been priced over ten quid in the past few years simply because I can't afford to spend anymore. But I still like to play games and new games (I'm presently doing a degree in them). Everyone should have a right to the trade worth of a product, not have it perpetually artificially inflated.
You also don't seem to be thinking in the long run. Just recently I have started re-playing a lot of my older games that I've had for a number of years. How pissed off would I have been if I'd have gone to install these games which I paid for legitimately and found out that I couldn't play them any more?
EA don't develop games, they publish them. If you really wanted to help out you'd give your money straight to the development houses. A lot of the money you're giving them in an attempt to help out is only going to line the pockets of someone not even remotely involved in the production of games. Plus the main reason why Spore came as far as it did was due to the involvement of Will Wright, a man who has a proven track record of producing high-selling games (Sim series primarily). I'd doubt EA would invest heavily in a notably different game simply because they thought it would be innovative. Like every other company they're out to make money, and the vast majority of the time they'll just go with what works and sells. That's why they have such a huge thumb in the Sport games pie, because these games regularly sell like clockwork every year.
Take it from someone who knows; EA is not a very nice organisation. They have a track record being as greedy as you can get, aggressively driving their competitors out-of-business and essentially wanting to make a monopoly on games publishing. It heartens me that their present plans of absorbing every development house going hasn't worked out, because I'd rather not have a single giant entity with full control over not only the games we play but also have the ability to observe and track us in order to make even more cash. It's all extremely sinister and morally objectionable, which is what we're all trying to explain to you.
There is no signature here. Move along.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
