Talk:Spore (2008 video game)/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Possible PR Nightmare

Guys, I would be on the lookout for a concerted PR campaign and/or vandalism - Amazon has just deleted all of Spore's reviews (which, as you all know, were mostly one-starred protests), and I predict backlash to arise as a result. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Ed, a cafe facade!)} 19:33, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

AKA "Business as usual." But thanks for the heads-up. :) --Kizor 20:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Apparantly it was a "glitch": [1]. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Ed, a cafe facade!)} 21:16, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Is that what it's called nowadays? Neat!
The article is fully protected at present so there's not a lot we can do to further combat vandalism, but telling us to be on alert for whitewashing is an interesting point. Such things do happen on Wikipedia, even if EA doesn't seem to be one of the more likely companies to astroturf us. If there is such an effort and we deflect it, who's up for pissing off a De Beers PR team next? --Kizor 21:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

They've been restored. I can feel the pitchforks already been lowered. hbdragon88 (talk) 22:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Scientific debate

A lot of the section regarding the scientific merit of SPORE devolves into a totally irrelevant rant opposing darwinism and religion. That section should be deleted from the article; it's unrelated to the game itself, and has already been covered in several more relevant Wikipedia articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.213.85.254 (talk) 17:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

The whole section was very academic and hypothetical. It didn't really describe the game itself, but rather focused on whether cartain real-world theories of biology and anthropology had been successfully incorporated into Spore. Accordingly, i've moved it to the "Development of" article. It's well written and thoughtful, and may well be of interest to many people, but certainly doesn't belong in the main article, which should simply describe the game itself. Besides, this article is too long as it is. 2p0rk (talk) 21:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, since the player directs how the creatures evolve, it is intelligent design of sorts, isn't it? *Dan T.* (talk) 00:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Its a bit of both without actually satisfying either. Ultimately its a game and the game rules trump the theory rules. 198.161.173.180 (talk) 15:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

It's neither, this game has nothing that even resembles scientific or religious content. Hopefully the section won't come back. Leushenko (talk) 16:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Screenshots will need updated

I noticed in a lot of the screenshots its showing an older interface. They should either be removed or updated as they're no longer representative of the subject.--Crossmr (talk) 04:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Civ and Space pics updated. JAF1970 (talk) 15:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Higher resolution screenshots would also be nice... Ruppetus (talk) 12:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Please note that I think that even though there are 5 effectively different games, it is going to be a tough argument to justify as many screenshots as there are for this article (per WP:NFCC. The creature editor, at worst, needs to stay, but there should be consideration of what five stages are adequetely represented via text and what needs a picture (Tribe phase, for example, is fine via text, I would argue the same for Creature and Civ phases; the Space stage looks like many 4X games, so also many not be necessary). (Alternatively, if someone knows someone at Maxis and can get them to allow images per Ubisoft, that might make it easier). --MASEM 13:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Source clean-up

I'm doing some clean-up of some of the sources in the article. Most are good but over time some sources which fail WP:V have crept in there. With that many sources and that size of an article its hard to keep an eye on all of them. Remember things like wikis, blogs, forums, etc don't pass WP:V and can't be used to source information unless they're a "blog" in name only. Many reliable sources like magazines have blog sections but give the content editorial oversight just like any other article in their publication.--Crossmr (talk) 06:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Someone should also change "Chris Harris" to "Cliff Harris" in the DRM section. The article mentions a "Cliff". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.168.219 (talk) 10:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

DRM problems

I have bought the retail game. Can't validate my serial number against EA's server. Called EA customer support. "The servers are under to much stress, please try later". Wonder if this is a widespread problem. I can play the pirated version without problem. The retail does not work. Great work EA! Wish to have help updating this article about stupid DRM that EA fails to support. Realshompa (talk) 14:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Please read the relevant policy at WP:V. In short all content added to wikipedia must be verifiable via a reliable source. Things like anecdotal evidence, blogs, forums, etc don't pass the threshold because anyone can write and say anything. We rely on publications that have editorial oversight and fact checking as well as primary sources where the source is talking about itself. In this case a reliable source would have to write about the DRM problems or EA would have to make an official statement.--Crossmr (talk) 14:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

You also might not want to go around telling people you engage in "less-than-legal" activities. Unless of course, you live in Sweden or something. You might get lawyer-raped by certain litigious companies, hehe. But chances are that with the level of DRM in Spore, they somehow identifying that you had previously installed a pirated version of the game. That may come from experience, but I'm not admitting anything. Zell65 (talk) 01:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, and since EA's trying to sweep all this under the rug and keep it hush-hush, nothing but blogs and forums are going to cover the entire fiasco with the DRM... So what? Nobody can put it on Wikipedia, then? Ridiculous. It's sad when something that everyone knows to be true can't be put on the article simply because someone like CNN hasn't run the story. Fact remains that the blogs are more accurate than Wikipedia on this subject. Someone already took out the 3-install limit because it didn't have "relevant sources"... So let's just keep everyone in the dark. GermanShepherd (talk) 16:51, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to add that DRM didn't have anything to do with the validating problem. It was a bug on the server side that caused all of that there was nothing wrong in the install or it didn't have anything to do with the DRM. People just like to blame everything on the DRM as they think they really know how it works and what it really effects. --80.221.239.213 (talk) 19:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to say that, in a weird moment of "shoe on the other foot", I now realize why Wikipedia has such strict rules regarding what is and is not a valid source... I had someone tell me something they thought was a "common truth", and I didn't believe them and I asked for where they learned this co called common truth, and then I realized what I'd done. Just wanted to apologize for my previous statement. GermanShepherd (talk) 05:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I mentioned it above in the "Piracy" section, but any argument that states the DRM discussion can't proceed because there are no notable/reliable sources is now at an end. Forbes.com is covering this subject with this article, Spore's Piracy Problem, and I suggest you all give it a read and reevaluate whether or not Spore's failed DRM and its effect on legit consumers and pirates alike are indeed worth mentioning in the Wiki. Braidedheadman (talk) 00:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Oops, I included the Washington Post article reference to the pirate download problem at the end of the DRM section before reading the discussion. Sorry if I threaded on some toes... Andargor (talk) 05:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

The source is fine, just clean up the text a little bit. "On its way to being the most pirated game of all time" and "one of the most pirated games" is not really the same thing and the second one uses WP:WEASEL words.--Crossmr (talk) 06:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Done. Re-worded to be closer to the source meaning, and tried to be less of a weasel ^^ . Feel free to make any other adjustments if necessary. Andargor (talk) 21:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Controversial (DRM section)

From the OED : "Controversial: Subject to controversy; open to discussion; debatable, questionable; disputed." Is this not a factual and accurate description of the situation? Critics on one side, supporters on the other, debate ongoing. Why is this word presenting a problem for some editors of this article? It's not like I'm putting it in the lead paragraph. Skyraider (talk) 03:05, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". Doesn't matter if it's an accurate description of the situation, unfortunately. Also, as soon as you start adding adjectives onto something, you start risking running afoul of WP:NPOV. Just $0.02. Dp76764 (talk) 03:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hence the link immediately following the word "controversial", to an article at the BBC (a notable source) describing the situation. (i.e. VERIFYING that controversy exists) How is it POV to use the word "controversial" to describe something that is the subject of controversy according to a notable source? Skyraider (talk) 04:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

just because its controversial around spore, doesn't mean its consider controversial everywhere. The way you wrote it made it sound as though securom is simply known as a controversial drm scheme. Which may or may not be true, but its not covered in the BBC article.--Crossmr (talk) 08:58, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Go and look at the page SecuROM. Note the rather obvious history of controversy. Verify this if you must. It is clearly controversial. 217.154.153.2 (talk) 15:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• Also note that the SecuROM article is mostly unsourced and uncited. So, using that article as an excuse doesn't hold much weight. Dp76764 (talk) 16:02, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

What is up with Crossmr?, who is he?--->Cant he see there is grounds for coverage for this controversy <--I said it!*Controversy* Paying $50-$80 for a game you're essentially renting is controversial It does not have to be on CNN,BBC,ABC,DEFG to get put it, we all know there is a controversy here ChesterTheWorm (talk) 13:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC) ChesterTheWorm

Please familiarize yourself with WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:NPOV editors cannot insert judgments and other opinions in the text of articles on wikipedia. In addition to this you may wish to read WP:NPA and keep your comments about the content and not other editors.--Crossmr (talk) 13:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

You guys have an odd definition of controversy. Controversy means people are arguing about it in the press, not that people don't like it. So 1) the term is in no way POV, although it might be inaccurate, and 2) if it's actually controversial there should be no shortage of references. The idea of a controversy that can't be adequately referenced is self-contradictory. Leushenko (talk) 16:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Space Phase - Genesis

The reference to Project Genesis under the Space phase is a reference to Star Trek II Wrath of Khan, not Hitchhiker's Guide, as is reflected by the link.

Can someone update the text to match the link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.254.192.74 (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The number 42 is a reference to Hitchhiker's Guide, as is the majority of the dialogue in the cutscene at the centre of the galaxy. Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 05:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

To which a reliable source has to make that connection. Interview, developer comments on the extra DVDs, etc. While very likely, for us to draw that conclusion without a reliable source doing it, its WP:OR.--Crossmr (talk) 05:10, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Spore is gold

Posted the item in the article - however, it should be removed once the game is released. JAF1970 (talk) 19:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Release date

EA posted the press release: will be available for the Mac and PC at retailers September 5 in Europe and September 7 in North America and Asia Pacific. Spore(TM) Creatures for Nintendo DS(TM) and Spore(TM) Origins for mobile phones will also be available globally September 7. That's final. JAF1970 (talk) 21:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Odd. Here in Scandinavia, i've checked every store in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. All of them says 4th of September, and has said so since January. Not sure it's of any importance to the article though. Same with Australia. Serio (talk) 02:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's September 4 for Australia at least (sources in an above section are more than enough proof). However if anyone adds it to the article: JAF will remove it and complain that they aren't right sources or whatever. I guess we will have to prove him wrong if the game does come out on that date, it's only weeks away now. RobJ1981 (talk) 05:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing the shops say 23:59 4th in order to appear early compared to the other shops, while EA says 00:01 5th to avoid people going in vain.--Per Abrahamsen (talk) 08:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Stores usually get the actual product several days in advance, but if they sell it before the official release date then its at their own risk. The latest Harry Potter book had that kind of retailer vs. publisher spat. Depending on the clout of the publisher, the retailer may find himself not selling that product anymore. Also there is truth to what Per Abrahamsen says, a retailer may stay open past midnight on the 4th to sell the product. So while its technically the 5th, the retailer will concider the sales as part of their reciepts on the 4th. Thus making it a release date shell game not unlike movies that officially come out on Fridays, but have "sneak peeks" showing one or even two days before. 198.161.173.180 (talk) 16:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm talking about online stores. Specifically the one i mentioned sends the game a day or two before release, in order for the customer to have the game on the release date mentioned on the site, which in this case is 4th of September. Serio (talk) 13:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Just noting that AU's EA states 7th Sept for Spore release. People need to stop changing it. ClosedEyesSeeing (talk) 14:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Also noting that Asia Pacific includes Australia. No need for the redundant mentioning of it. (not like the anons go in here and look at this) ClosedEyesSeeing (talk) 14:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

As a moderator on the EA AsiaPac site, I can tell you that those dates are rarely updated, and are usually incorrect. Spik3balloon (talk) 13:25, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

The page currently says "Spore will also be available for direct download from Electronic Arts on September 7." In the UK the date for direct download is September 5. I'm pretty certain the dates for direct downloads from the EA Store are no different to the dates listed previously, so this line should be removed. AdamBristol (talk) 22:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Easy enough - just remove the release date for a download - already says "download" in the infobox. JAF1970 (talk) 23:10, 2 September 2008

Spore was freely available to buy on Monday 1st September in Australia. On the proceeding Friday, the retailers said it had been released here early. They also said some retailers were even selling it on Friday 29th August - but that this was unofficial. They said the official date was Monday 1st. Regardless of what EA's website says, people need to stop changing the date. I bought it on that day, so hell if I wouldn't know.(UTC)

This is just to tell you guys that the release date for Spore was not the 4th of Sep for Australasia (as it currently says), it may have been for Australia, but for New Zealand it was/is the 5th. Last time I checked, NZ was part of Australasia. Not sure how you'd like to rearrange this. (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mechwarrior Puppies (talk • contribs) 11:36, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

North America was not the last territory released. Spore was released in India on 10th Sept 08. Source: http://businessofcinema.com/news.php?newsid=9847 and other news sources. ---

Just to add to the mess: I got my German copy of the Galactic Edition at a local mall (not even a minor one) on the 3rd (noon!) local time. My English copy was dispatched by Amazon UK later that day. The forum was already full of players by the time I had started playing (Sept 3rd to 4th) -- 88.153.25.45 (talk) 14:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect Information in the Gameplay Section

There are some incorrect bits in the gameplay section, and as the article appears to be under a lock-down (i.e. I cannot edit it), I'll mention them here.

Firstly, in the Civilization section,

When the player becomes technologically advanced enough, the UFO editor appears.

The editor actually appears when the player has taken over every city in the world. The technology aspect of the Civilization phase had been removed completely before Spore went Gold.

Secondly, in the Space section,

Players can make contact with other civilizations, called 'empires', most of which are created by other players. Intelligent species can be found, and when the UFO visits that world, they may impress the beings with fireworks, attack them with weapons, or try to establish a language with the civilization via a Close Encounters of the Third Kind-styled musical mini-game. The player may beam down a holographic image of his/her creature to interact more directly with an alien species.[27] A user-created civilization's AI reacts depending on its behavior and personality, both of which are based on the play-style of its user. The player can unite or conquer the galaxy by creating a federation or sparking an interstellar war. As a show of great force, the player may even completely destroy a planet (similar to the capabilities of the Death Star from Star Wars), which may bring retribution from that species and its allies. The player is sometimes called upon to fight off an invasion of their home planet, colony, or an ally's planet, from space pirates, environmental collapse, or attack from enemies.[48]

I don't know about the validity of the second sentence with regards to pre-space-faring creatures, as I have not advanced far enough in the game to tell, but when dealing with space-faring creatures, one generally interacts with them directly using a Civilization-like diplomacy panel.

I don't know if those are all the errors, but those are at least some of them.--Scyldscefing (talk) 21:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I made most of the edits in regards to this paragraph, but I left in the part about the minigame until I progressed far enough. Now I know that this doesn't actually happen ingame and the only way to 'raise up' a primitive species is via the monolith. The fireworks are available in the Socialization panel, like you said, and there is no need to establish a common language as you have a universal translator. I will fix this. Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 05:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Spore Galactic Edition Contents

The detail in the wiki page listing the Galactic Edition contents is not accurate for all countries - some countries are missing some contents. Australian users found out after purchase that their copies of the Galactic Edition did not (and were never going to) contain the "How to Build a Better Being" DVD due to "licensing restrictions" for the documentary. When queried about the missing DVD, EA Games Australia have stated that this DVD is for the USA/Europe releases only, and that users should have contacted EA Games Australia directly by email to ask whether the contents of the Galactic Edition in Australia would be the same as elsewhere rather than relying on the official game website (despite the "Australia" link on the front page). The Australian EA Games site has never listed the Galactic Edition in their localised website, so there was no localised information about the missing content available prior to purchase - a questionable omission with the false advertising/misleading advertising laws in Australia.

The EA Games New Zealand site does list the Galactic Edition, and the "How to Build a Better Being" dvd is not listed as part of the contents for New Zealand either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.1.195.174 (talk) 13:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

General Article Updates

Now that the game is out, there seem to be many discrepancies between what we were told we were getting, and what we have. This is my first-hand experience from playing this game.

Gameplay:

“If all of a player's creations are completely destroyed at some point, then that player's species goes back to the beginning of that level, or the last viable point in species development.” – Now that the game is released, this does not seem to be the case. Every death seems to place you back at your safe spawn point (nest, main hut, capital city, etc) with no time shift. To clarify, if an enemy ship destroys you over your capitol city, you will respawn in the same location to continue fighting.

Interplay:

“My Sporepage” – This is actually called the MySpore Page, and can be seen on the left side of the screenshot within the article.

“Via the in-game "My Sporepage", players receive statistics of how their creatures are faring in other players' games, which has been referred to as the "alternate realities of the Spore metaverse." The game reports to the player on how other players interacted with them (for example, how many times other players destroyed a copy of their planet).” – This may have been left out in the initial release. The only thing that resembles this is that the game will report the actions of people on your Buddy list. This list is very limited, however, and only shows approximately 10, with no way to view older messages.

Phases:

“There is a difficulty selector to each stage, allowing players to choose the difficulty for each part of the game.[23]” – This selection is only available when starting a new game. It is not selectable at any other time for that creature.

Cell:

“The player may also encounter Epic Creatures.” – Has this been verified, other than in the talk page? I have yet to run into any Epic cell creatures, that I know of.

“The creature's behavior directly influences its role in the creature stage, and only parts that are fitting for that creature's evolution will become available.[13]” – This doesn’t belong under Cell, since there are no parts restrictions in the cell phase. The creature phase, however, will limit only your mouth choice (Carnivore, Omnivore, or Herbivore) based on how you played through the Cell phase.

“The ocean floor becomes more prominent, and the creature editor interrupts, requesting the user add legs.” – None of the game phases are ever interrupted by progression. Once you finish the goals set forth by the phase, you have the option to click on the Advance button or continue to play the phase until you’re ready to move on.

Creature:

“Once the creature becomes intelligent, the game progresses to the tribal phase.” – As with the Cell phase, the game allows progress to the next phase, but the player is free to stay in the Creature phase as long as they wish.

Also, not sure where to add this (maybe under player created content), but at some point during your Creature game, you will likely run into, or rather run away from, someone else’s space craft.

Tribal:

“Creatures also gain the option to wear clothes that demarcate their professions.[37]” – This has apparently been removed from the game, since you can only design one Tribal/Civilization outfit for the entire race to wear.

“Domesticated creatures seem to undergo neoteny in contrasting photos of the same species.[41]” – The only differences in the domesticated creatures is that the Rogue creatures form the creature phase are shrunk. Other than that, they appear identical, depending on whether you tamed an adult or a baby creature.

“For every tribe befriended or destroyed, a piece of a totem pole is built, which increases the population limit of the player's tribe.” – The tribe only grow three times, after the first three tribes are taken over. Tribe sizes are 6, 9, and 12.

“When the totem pole has five pieces, the player moves forward to the Civilization phase.[27][38]” – The player CAN move on to the Civilization phase. They can also continue to fish, hunt wild animals, and gather food until they are ready to move on. At that time, as with the Cell and Creature phases, they can click the Advance button to move forward.

Civilization:

“When the player has conquered or allied with all the civilisations on the planet, the UFO editor appears.” – As with previous phases, the editor does not come up until the player clicks the Advance button. Also note the misspelling of civilization.

“For example, the cities of the planet change from a properly-scaled view with all individual buildings visible to a more cartoon-like depiction.[43][46]” – Not sure if this was removed, or if my computer can’t handle it, but none of my cities do this. Once beyond a certain height, the buildings vanish, but nothing replaces them. WHTJunior (talk) 15:36, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

“The player may also encounter Epic Creatures.” – Has this been verified, other than in the talk page? I have yet to run into any Epic cell creatures, that I know of.“

I have encountered them in my gameplay (in the Creature and Tribal phases), so yes, they do exist. --  ClosedEyesSeeing  (Speak) 20:21, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Creature, tribal, civ, and space, but no cell. Unless you count the bigger cells, but I don't think you can... 130.179.223.7 (talk) 20:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: "“Via the in-game "My Sporepage"..." - you do get information on when another player befriends/epicizes/exterminates your race. There are indeed no stats. 130.179.223.7 (talk) 20:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Enormous cells are counted as 'Epic'. It is possible to see who exterminated your creature on MySpore Page, but as you mentioned it is difficult as you can't see previous messages. I'll see what I can do about the others, though. Nice catch. Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 01:41, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

All edits completed, thankyou once again! I apologise for the 'misspelling of civilization' - I speak British English and do it out of habit...that particular error was created when I modified that sentence :P Must have overlooked that one. Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 01:55, 18 September 2008 (UTC)