Spore devs say the evolution game's previews were more ambitious than what they were actually making, and they 'built a fantasy in people's minds that was unachievable'

The mediocrity as I understand was from the rift that developed in the team about the vision of the game being a sandbox vs a campaign.

However, I witnessed a new divide among the team which was less well-known; as more core game developers (such as myself) were recruited to help finish the game, a cultural gap emerged between the newer ‘gameplay’ team and the older ‘Sim’ team. The former group (which went on to spearhead Darkspore) was primarily concerned with how Spore played as a game. Were the mechanics engaging? Did the player’s choices matter? Was the game replayable? In contrast, the ‘Sim’ team carried the traditional Maxis DNA and was more comfortable with Spore as a toy box. Could the players express themselves? Was sharing one’s creations with other players meaningful? Did the game spark the imagination?

These cultural divides ruined Spore’s chances to be a focused, cohesive experience.

http://www.designer-notes.com/2013/09/

Your original comment was pointless. Don’t expect praise and flowers for it.

That's because children adults would get stuck on a path that was untenable, and management didn't like that idea. It would lead to a bad experience and a negative review.

RIP VG Cats!

Yeah we were there when it happened

The game got released in 2008, why is this a modern day article as if the game was just released, while the information is what everyone who ever played the game already knows? The game is almost old enough (just 2 more months) to get it's drivers licence and buy alcohol in my country. When I was reading this I was like: "wait... Was there a new Spore game released?" But no, it's just about an 18 year old game 🤷

I thought the world was going to shit, but apparently there's nothing else to write about than an 18 year old game, from a sea of thousands of game being released per year.

Ok, Thanks for sharing, at least it's not bullshit from Trump or Musk or whatever I guess.

There were a couple details that mattered.


Whether you were aggressive vs friendly vs neutral at each stage had some consequences for all later stages. Creatures you befriend in the Creature stage could become pets in the Tribal stage, which could include the powerful lone wolf ones.

Modern age was the weakest. Beyond that you got to space which could've been fun if you managed to get that far.

Oh sorry, I didn't know reality checks on timelines weren't allowed.

By the way, this just got in: a plane just flew into the WTC. We don't know much yet, but there's a high possibility it might be a terrorist attack on the US. Stand by for a press conference from your president George W. Bush.

Translation: "We were just shitting you, so don't buy our game."

Friend, chill out.

SimCity is the last time I was excited for a modern remake of a game, and likely the last. It was such an incredible letdown, you couldn't even open the game at launch because of the always online stuff. Most every remake of a classic has been terrible ever since, I'm happy to be proven wrong though.

Those of us not in the industry refer to that as "lying."

Exact same thing that happened with No Man's Sky. That first trailer was so obviously curated out-the-wazoo, and I remember people insisting it was the last game they'd ever need to play based on it alone. And we all know what happened when that one came out.

If you made one now it would work a lot better, modeling evolution and proteins is vastly better Science now.