Author Topic: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?  (Read 10838 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Flipside

  • əp!sd!l£
  • 212
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
I think I've got 'Family Fun Stuff' laying around somewhere, which came in at around 10GBP, and I agree, you can download better stuff for free.

Quote
That's never going to leave my mind, now. I hope you're happy.

You'll never look at Starcraft in the same way ;)

 

Offline Leeko

  • Computer ketchup
  • 27
  • Lurking since 2009
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Quote
That's never going to leave my mind, now. I hope you're happy.
We have a winner.
Sig'd :yes:

And yeah, I got Family Fun Stuff too...
Then I realized it was dumb.
Then more came out.
Then I started to hate EA.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2009, 09:57:37 pm by Leeko »

 
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Pets was bad, Bon Voyage was worse.  Seasons was one of the best ones.
That's cool and ....disturbing at the same time o_o  - Vasudan Admiral

"Don't play games with me. You just killed someone I like, that is not a safe place to stand. I'm the Doctor. And you're in the biggest library in the universe. Look me up."

"Quick everyone out of the universe now!"

 

Offline Leeko

  • Computer ketchup
  • 27
  • Lurking since 2009
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
BV was dumb, but I like Pets. Or rather I did... I usually don't get pets for my Sims anymore, they just seem a little tedious now.
University was realistic but unnecessary and it dragged on too much.
I like Nightlife for the cars and the house music, but that's about it.
Open For Business was a nice diversion at first, but ultimately it's expensive and a huge time sink. Though the ownership rewards are oh so nice.

 
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Pets would have been better if it was more than just cats and dogs LOL

Actually Nightlife was pretty good, dating & cars.

As for stuffit packs, the only one worth getting is Mansions & Gardens, which is more like a mini-expansion.

Edit: OfB was ok... definitely time-sink and money maker (provided you use business runs you)
Uni was ok
Apartments was another meh
Freetime was pretty cool
« Last Edit: July 24, 2009, 10:11:03 pm by Scooby_Doo »
That's cool and ....disturbing at the same time o_o  - Vasudan Admiral

"Don't play games with me. You just killed someone I like, that is not a safe place to stand. I'm the Doctor. And you're in the biggest library in the universe. Look me up."

"Quick everyone out of the universe now!"

 

Offline Leeko

  • Computer ketchup
  • 27
  • Lurking since 2009
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
I wasn't aware there was a Mansions & Gardens pack... I'll have to torrent that. Thanks.
The one thing Pets doesn't have that Unleashed had... iguanas. But I do agree, some variety would be nice. Turtles or a bunch of different themed fish tanks would be cool.

EDIT: Quick search on MTS2 found this
http://www.modthesims.info/download.php?t=108036
Fish tank coffee table, thought it was nifty.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2009, 10:13:05 pm by Leeko »

 
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
M&G runs it's own executablem so you might need some hack updates.  Finally they got real ceiling fans LOL
That's cool and ....disturbing at the same time o_o  - Vasudan Admiral

"Don't play games with me. You just killed someone I like, that is not a safe place to stand. I'm the Doctor. And you're in the biggest library in the universe. Look me up."

"Quick everyone out of the universe now!"

 
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Not liking multiplayer is a serious bias because you're judging the gameplay based on its worst parts. I never meant to imply you didn't like it because you don't like multiplayer.

On it's worst parts? Okay. Tell me, is Starcraft awesome because of it's "epic" backstory in the single player? Or because of it's multiplayer??? And I'm sorry, but if the SP is the "worst" part then the game sucks. Personally I enjoyed the Starcraft SP campaign, and I don't need multiplayer to like it more. Multiplayer is fun versus your friends sure, but against random people who cares???


Quote
I have no idea what you mean by "tiny dozen zerg suddenly turning into a thousand super creatures," but if you are referring to the way the Zerg build everything organically by mutation then that's an extremely petty criticism.

No. That's not what I'm referring to. Okay where's my dumb rulebook . . . okay the "Guardians". Right. So in the game, maybe you build 20 guardians or 20 of those other flying Dragon things. Cool. Onscreen, they're what smaller than even a Siege Tank right? Then you get a cut scene from the fall of the Protoss World, and suddenly these Guardians are like massive and there's thousands of them blotting out the sky and I'm like "hey, that's not what I'm playing."

Quote
And, by the way, FS2 came out in 1999. :wtf: And considering it was developed in a year, versus SC's three (four?) year development cycle, the one year difference between release means a four year difference from when development on SC started... which means a four year graphics gap. But aside from that, the RTS genre didn't enter the third dimension to stay until well into the 21st century, and with good reason.

Okay. So . . . SC took four years to develop. FS2 took one year. And FS2 is still a more "epic" game.

Quote
There's a big difference between the amount of stuff onscreen in FreeSpace and any RTS.
But that's comparing apples to oranges. That would be like saying "Sim City sucks because you can't see the people as clearly as you can in The Sims!" The gameplay depended on having huge ships like the Sathanas. In StarCraft having carriers twice as large as they are would impair the gameplay.

It would impair the gameplay as it stands. Of course if you had massive ships like that, you would need to alter the gameplay to accomodate. That's one thing I like about Dawn of War, everything  on the battlefield is to scale which each other. Dropship comes in, and it's massive. Too bad I lost interest in the story and never even finished the original campaign. . .

Oh the computer in Starcraft also cheats. It never runs out of resources. Which is another thing I find very annoying.

 
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Oh and btw, what's with the fanboys? Like "Blizzard can do no wrong" or "Valve is awesome" or whatever. Either you like a game and play it or you don't, who cares who made the thing. I dunno some people in this thread seem of the Blizzard can do no wrong camp, but whatever. They're just another company out to make a buck. Everything they do is in their interests, not their fans interests. They don't give a **** who plays their games as long as they pay for them. Of course loyalty is good and Blizzard seems to have acquired it in spades for some undefinable reason. It's good when you have people in your pocket who will buy everything you put out no matter what it is.

As for MMOs. Well, MMOs are just grinding grinding grinding. I dunno who really wants to pay 40 bucks a month or whatever to kill the same creatures over and over to get to that next level? Or to mine space rock and sell it at the space station? Wow joy!!!

Only multiplayer game I play these days is VGA Planets.

 

Offline Leeko

  • Computer ketchup
  • 27
  • Lurking since 2009
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Starcraft does have good SP, but it's still the worst part by comparison. It's like saying I like dark chocolate more than milk chocolate. Chocolate is chocolate! And, against random people is still fun, because they're usually better than your friends. :P

Guardians are actually about the same size as a siege tank, but the size of the units ingame shouldn't really affect the fun you're having. It doesn't impact the gameplay at all.

My point about the development time was that there was a huge graphical gap, so you can't really hold Starcraft's graphics against it. That would be like scolding Dawn of War for not looking like Supreme Commander. And Dawn of War came out in 2004. That's eight years ahead of Starcraft, and not a valid basis of comparison.

Oh and btw, what's with the fanboys?... They're just another company out to make a buck. Everything they do is in their interests, not their fans interests.

Of course loyalty is good and Blizzard seems to have acquired it in spades for some undefinable reason. It's good when you have people in your pocket who will buy everything you put out no matter what it is.

Despite what you might think, Blizzard is one of the few developers who isn't just in it for the money. I will cite a metaphor I used earlier. Just because an artist isn't starving doesn't mean he's doing it for the money.

Loyalty is good, and there's a very definable reason. They have been one of the most influential video game developers ever since the first Warcraft, and continue to be. Personally I won't buy anything they put out - I don't care much for Diablo, despite its critical acclaim - and most won't blindly buy anything they develop either. They just happen to be a purveyor of excellent games.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2009, 09:03:46 am by Leeko »

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • Moderator
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Quote
Okay. So . . . SC took four years to develop. FS2 took one year. And FS2 is still a more "epic" game.

Okay, now look at the type of game (RTS vs. Space Sim), the amount of units on-screen at any given time (1600 [goes up to a max 4000 at some points] vs. 100 [300 with the after release player created, non-retail versions]), and finally the practicality of showing those gigantic vehicles as gigantic in-game (practicality is apporaching 0 for StarCraft vs. needed to give the game an epic feeling at all).

Quote
On it's worst parts? Okay. Tell me, is Starcraft awesome because of it's "epic" backstory in the single player? Or because of it's multiplayer??? And I'm sorry, but if the SP is the "worst" part then the game sucks. Personally I enjoyed the Starcraft SP campaign, and I don't need multiplayer to like it more. Multiplayer is fun versus your friends sure, but against random people who cares???


On a related example, I think the worst part of the Halo franchise is it's single player.  Does that make the single player suck?  No, the single player is epic.  The multiplayer is just more fun, and has replayability.  At some point, you are going to have seen everything your friends have to offer.

Quote
Oh the computer in Starcraft also cheats. It never runs out of resources. Which is another thing I find very annoying.

It does not cheat.  It just has the advantage of perfect reflexes.  Try boxing a computer in with no resources on a regular map.  The units stop coming.

 

Offline Leeko

  • Computer ketchup
  • 27
  • Lurking since 2009
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
My points exactly Scotty. There are user-created AIs out there for StarCraft that cheat however. One of my friends plays against them for practice, and they routinely whoop him. They have infinite resources, fast building units and, as he puts it, "play like two Koreans."

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • Moderator
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
User created is the key word phrase in that sentence.  Normal AI is easy, and will never change because there is no difficulty setting.

 

Offline Leeko

  • Computer ketchup
  • 27
  • Lurking since 2009
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Yeah, I just thought it was noteworthy.

 
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Despite what you might think, Blizzard is one of the few developers who isn't just in it for the money. I will cite a metaphor I used earlier. Just because an artist isn't starving doesn't mean he's doing it for the money.

Loyalty is good, and there's a very definable reason. They have been one of the most influential video game developers ever since the first Warcraft, and continue to be. Personally I won't buy anything they put out - I don't care much for Diablo, despite its critical acclaim - and most won't blindly buy anything they develop either. They just happen to be a purveyor of excellent games.

You know this HOW exactly? You know people at Blizzard? You think they're all just creating games out of the goodness of their hearts?
First of all. Let me tell you something. The people making money at Blizzard aren't artists. They're producers, directors, etcetera. The "artists" and/or programmers are of course getting money working there, but for them it's a job. The only way an artist is going to make big bucks is if he develops some game concept and gets a good share of the final product. It's the same with television. The "artists" do a bunch of work, and get decent pay, but it's the producers and the higher ups raking in the big bucks.

As for Blizzard. I can't say I care for them. All they seem to make is RTS games are RTS games aren't my cup of tea. I played through about half of Warcraft 1, and Starcraft plus most of Brood War. Beyond that I've never touched their games. If they make an FPS or something similar, then I might start caring for them as a company.

Heck, on the subject of Blizzard. From what I understand it, their warcraft and starcraft lines are basically just copies of Warhammer and Warhammer 40k respectively which they made when they failed to get the rights from Games Workshop. Zerg=Tyranids, Protoss=Eldar, Humans=Empire. etcetera . . . but then again everyone copies everyone anyway.

It does not cheat.  It just has the advantage of perfect reflexes.  Try boxing a computer in with no resources on a regular map.  The units stop coming.

Um, yes, it does cheat. It NEVER runs out of resources. I've been in a situation, where, I ran out of resources. So I then decided to snipe away at his units to lower his defences. All the resources on the map were gone. I was taking out units on a continual basis, he kept building more. I destroyed a building or two, he rebuilt them. I did this for a while until I realised that I was completely wasting my time because the computer is a cheater and never ever runs out of resources. So then, I restarted the map, and won it easily (because I knew the map already), which was a lot less satisfying.

It cheats. Plain and simple.

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • Moderator
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
I just love how you dislike a company completely independently of it's quality, but rather on the fact that RTSs are not your favorite kind of game.

Point 2:  Okay.  You ran out of resources.  That means that obviously the computer must be cheating if it has a penny to its name.  I personally never let my funds below 10000 or so after the first 20 minutes as a safety measure.

There is a very easy way to prove that a computer does not cheat.  Go to the campaign editor and select any map.  Or just make a new one.  Do not put minerals on it.  As part of the Map Settings, set starting player resources to 0.  Then, place the command center and start area.  Watch as the computer is unable to do anything because it doesn't have money.

 

Offline Bob-san

  • Wishes he was cool
  • 210
  • It's 5 minutes to midnight.
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
I just love how you dislike a company completely independently of it's quality, but rather on the fact that RTSs are not your favorite kind of game.

Point 2:  Okay.  You ran out of resources.  That means that obviously the computer must be cheating if it has a penny to its name.  I personally never let my funds below 10000 or so after the first 20 minutes as a safety measure.

There is a very easy way to prove that a computer does not cheat.  Go to the campaign editor and select any map.  Or just make a new one.  Do not put minerals on it.  As part of the Map Settings, set starting player resources to 0.  Then, place the command center and start area.  Watch as the computer is unable to do anything because it doesn't have money.
Here's a better method to see that the computer AI DOES cheat; put down resources but build it out of the way. The AI will almost always go directly for those resource dumps while the player is stuck exploring to find them in the first place. Player-AI (like automated workers) doesn't do a darned thing to help but computer-AI knows all.
NGTM-1R: Currently considering spending the rest of the day in bed cuddling.
GTSVA: With who...?
Nuke: chewbacca?
Bob-san: The Rancor.

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • Moderator
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
That's because its not possible to put fog of war on a computer.  That's not cheating, it's just an advantage.  Kind of like tactics on the player's side.

 
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
I just love how you dislike a company completely independently of it's quality, but rather on the fact that RTSs are not your favorite kind of game.

I don't dislike them, they simply don't interest me because they haven't produced anything of interest.

Quote
Point 2:  Okay.  You ran out of resources.  That means that obviously the computer must be cheating if it has a penny to its name.  I personally never let my funds below 10000 or so after the first 20 minutes as a safety measure.

There is a very easy way to prove that a computer does not cheat.  Go to the campaign editor and select any map.  Or just make a new one.  Do not put minerals on it.  As part of the Map Settings, set starting player resources to 0.  Then, place the command center and start area.  Watch as the computer is unable to do anything because it doesn't have money.

Excuse me. But the computer cheats. The fact that I ran out of resources is irrelevant, the fact that he did, and yet continued to build things IS relevant. I was continually killing units with a fleet of Zerg Queens. I came in and destroyed buildings as the opportunity allowed. Basically I was costing him a lot of resources yet he still built a default number of units. Clearly there is a minimum that the computer can build regardless of what it has in store. If the computer had more resources why didn't he build an attack force? The computer never built up, he simply replaced the units and buildings that he had lost.

I'm not talking about some "quick action" mode. I'm talking about the campaign itself. What the computer does in some pre-defined lack of resources is irrelevant.

 

Offline Commander Zane

  • 212
  • Spoot Knight of Anvils
Re: Is Spore turning into the new Sims 2?
Replay video then, because Scotty's still right, put no resources in a map, give all players zero resources, and the AI's dead in the water.