is spore one of the most innovative games ever?

#1 Edited by Asky (20 posts) -

I think so. the creature creator was the best invention ever

#2 Edited by diz (918 posts) -

How do think think it has made innovations over other pre-exiting games?

i.e. what's new?
#3 Posted by Black_Rose (7785 posts) -

Taking parts of other games to make your own is not innovative. However, the idea behind Spore is .

#4 Posted by daniel_beck_90 (3159 posts) -

innovative ?  maybe 
innovative in a good way ?  Hell No

#5 Edited by diz (918 posts) -

Why did you just edit your first post and delete your response to my question?

Creature creation is not a spore invention. This activity has been included in other games.
#6 Edited by Sparky_Buzzsaw (6198 posts) -

The seamless integration of user created content definitely makes it one of the most innovative games out there.  Whether or not I like the actual gameplay doesn't really matter (I do, for the most part - kinda bored stiff with the repetition at the moment)).

Can you imagine what this technology is going to do for games in a few years?  I'm salivating over the possibilities - imagine a SimCity or a Sims game where you can walk down the street and see the houses and creations of other people without ever having downloaded anything?  Or an RPG where users can create their own monsters and heroes and have them flow into your game?  Racing games where user-created designs roam around your streets?  It's all so very cool!

Moderator
#7 Posted by Kush (8889 posts) -

I don't really think it's that innovative...innovative for this year? Yes, but not not one of the most innovative games ever.

#8 Posted by Megalon (1392 posts) -

I suppose it's innovative in terms of the creature creator and user content stuff...but I don't think it's fair to say it's the "most innovative ever".

I guess I'm one of those people who was a little disappointed in the final product after the YEARS of hype. And being a science dude, I was hoping that them using the term "evolution" would actually mean that it takes place in some reasonable fashion within the game. That would have been truely innovative.

#9 Posted by atejas (3057 posts) -

Doesn't make it good, does it?

#10 Posted by Michael4Playstation3 (10 posts) -

I feel that the animations that are being procedurally generated are beginning to look repetitive. on the other hand the amazing creativity i see in the "sporeipidia" is sometimes mind blowing

#11 Posted by pause422 (6188 posts) -

I don't really think it did a single thing innovative. All its gameplay from beginning to end is just a bunch of different genres watered down into an overall game. Having a decent creator doesn't make it innovative at all.

#12 Posted by dsplayer1010 (2227 posts) -

It wishes

#13 Posted by StaticFalconar (4849 posts) -
Asky said:
"I think so. the creature creator was the best invention ever"
The creature creator is more of a tool, the game itself is shit. But based on the creature creator by itself I would say that was innovative. If Will didn't cater to the masses with the actual 'game', then I would totally agree with the overall statement.
#14 Edited by Bellum (2944 posts) -

Spore is extremely innovative. Anyone who thinks otherwise either doesn't understand the word innovative or doesn't understand the technology behind the game. Spore has several extremely poor design choices included, but it is very innovative. We can learn a lot from it, both what it did well and from its mistakes.

#15 Posted by IncredibleBulk92 (936 posts) -

Innovation via Free Dictionary

Inovation:-
  1. The act of introducing something new
  2. Something newly introduced
I really don't think Spore has anything new or newly introduced in it.  Ever heard of Impossible Creatures?  That was the first game I played that allowed you to create creatures and see other users creations.

It's not the first game to integrate the community into the game itself either, even far cry on the Xbox you could download user maps and rate them and such.  You could even download people's rollercoasters on the original Rollercoaster Tycoon.

What Spore does do well is allow you to make creatures very easily.  It's a very friendly user interface and it's designed to be very easy for people to play if they've never played a game before.  It doesn't actually bring anything new to the table but it is very interesting that other people's content is actually in your game at all times.
#16 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -
I really don't think Spore has anything new or newly introduced in it.  Ever heard of Impossible Creatures?  That was the first game I played that allowed you to create creatures and see other users creations.

This puts you in the latter category.


It's not the first game to integrate the community into the game itself either, even far cry on the Xbox you could download user maps and rate them and such.  You could even download people's rollercoasters on the original Rollercoaster Tycoon.

Not to the extent or using the methods Spore does.

#17 Posted by IncredibleBulk92 (936 posts) -
Bellum said:
I really don't think Spore has anything new or newly introduced in it.  Ever heard of Impossible Creatures?  That was the first game I played that allowed you to create creatures and see other users creations.

This puts you in the latter category. 
Um no it doesn't.  There technology of Spore is that it arbitrarily atributes movements to your creation based on the location and sounds are assigned based solely on the mouth part you choose.  I agree it's a lot more advanced than the example I gave but it's not hugely innovative, just an improvement.

Bellum said:
It's not the first game to integrate the community into the game itself either, even far cry on the Xbox you could download user maps and rate them and such.  You could even download people's rollercoasters on the original Rollercoaster Tycoon.

Not to the extent or using the methods Spore does.
Oh no I agree, Spore integrates these things incredibly well and subscribing to somebody's feed and getting all their creatures is great but is it innovative or just a slight step up from what already exists?  In Halo 3 I can look at any of my friends uploaded content and download their map varients and screenshots very easily.  Bungie.net allows me to do it when I'm not even playing Halo 3.  What makes Spore so different to that?

Generally to me Spore doesn't actually add anything new, encountering players content in your world is pretty cool but everything else in the game just seems to be an improvement of what's already out there.
#18 Posted by DragoonKain1687 (702 posts) -

Oh yeah, its Super innovative . . . . .

#19 Edited by Zebadee (491 posts) -

The creature animation system was really the only thing that impressed me with spore, the rest of it just felt like a bunch of mini games.
Maybe if instead of editing your creature as you progress through the game, the game itself would evolve the creature based on what you do through out the game, not just giving the creature certain actions and stats but changing the creatures appearance to an extent that you really feel the enviroment is affecting it's evolution.

#20 Edited by Bellum (2944 posts) -
Bulk, Spore is innovative because of it's advancements in procedural generatiion and because of social integration, an influence it brought to the industry from the very beginning in 2005. LBP, for instance, probably wouldn't exist at all if not for Will Wright, and indirectly, Spore. Spore innovates both by advancing what we already have, but also by developing completely new technology or using old algorithms in interesting ways. Your approximation of Spores technology is not completely accurate, simplistic, and only involves a small portion of the game.
#21 Posted by IncredibleBulk92 (936 posts) -

All I can judge is what I can see, the creatures seem to move fine but it's not like an animation system is the entire game or anything.  I'm not saying that the community integration or the way that creatures animate isn't great or anything, I'm just arguing that Spore is not the most innovative games of the year.  There are far better choices.  Also the creators ares completely superficial, the only one that has any effect on the game is the cell stage.  The rest are totally dependant on what parts you use, levels 2 parts are better than level 1 parts.  Will Wright's original announcement playthrough had the parts placement make a huge impact on the final creature, if that had still been included we'd be having a completely different discussion.

Oh and stop talking about the algorithms in the game, pretending to know anything about the game's code just makes you look like an idiot.
#22 Posted by MattyFTM (14385 posts) -

It don't think it's innovative at all. All it does is take already existing idea's and glue them together into one game. That's not innovation.

Moderator
#23 Posted by Dalai (7030 posts) -

Before its release, I would've said yes... but today, not so much.  Maybe of the most innovative this year simply for its various creators, but the gameplay is basically ripped off from other games.

#24 Posted by Alex_V (615 posts) -

The idea of following a creature through a full process of creation/evolution from a micro-organism to a universe-beating species is brilliant and innovative, and the game follows through with that idea really well. There are very few games with that sort of scope and ambition, and Spore should be applauded for trying to reach for a grander vision. I can't think of a more ambitious game.

The creature creator is better than some here are giving it credit - it is not a system where you simply choose bits of your creation like a template. You build a creature that responds to its own design, and to some extent succeeds and fails in the gameworld on the basis of that design. I think the creator is extraordinary and hugely innovative.

Also innovative is the way the game interacts with the online community, in terms of bringing others' designs seamlessly into your game. There are lots of games with a community and online aspect, but few that do it so seamlessly.

Of course all this needs to be tempered by the fact that some bits of the game just aren't all that much fun. But I think the world's a better place for Spore, and it moves games on enough to be considered innovative and fairly significant.

#25 Edited by Bellum (2944 posts) -
IncredibleBulk92 said:
"All I can judge is what I can see, the creatures seem to move fine but it's not like an animation system is the entire game or anything.  I'm not saying that the community integration or the way that creatures animate isn't great or anything, I'm just arguing that Spore is not the most innovative games of the year.  There are far better choices.  Also the creators ares completely superficial, the only one that has any effect on the game is the cell stage.  The rest are totally dependant on what parts you use, levels 2 parts are better than level 1 parts.  Will Wright's original announcement playthrough had the parts placement make a huge impact on the final creature, if that had still been included we'd be having a completely different discussion.
Oh and stop talking about the algorithms in the game, pretending to know anything about the game's code just makes you look like an idiot.
"


Your equating innovation with a quality game which is silly. And I do know about some of the algorithms involved (though I don't pretend to fully understand the math) because I watched all the siggraph presentations. ;) "Judging only by what you can see" makes you sound like an idiot, especially when you completely discount Spore as lacking innovation because of it. Your using your ignorance as an excuse for your warped views. Spore is extremely innovative in it's technology. It's important because of what it can offer the industry as a whole, a great deal. That's why innovation is important; how much value you found in the gameplay is irrelevent.
#26 Posted by IncredibleBulk92 (936 posts) -

Um ok maybe I'm not making myself to clear here so I'm going to stop trying to reason with you and keep it simple.  

The creature creator is great.  The concept of creating creatures/monsters/characters is not new however, what spore brings to the table is that it analyzes what you make and attempts to make a believeable creature and for the most part is does succed.  Saying that Spore is innovative because of it's creature creator, in my opinion, is not true.

The Sporepedia and integrating other people's content into the game works really well and is almost completely seemless.  Again this seems like a refinement of what's already out there tho.  With the Sims you can download other people's tables and lights and shit but it's slightly more complicated and intimidating than Spore.  Again an improvement not an innovation, that said if this technology appears in more games in the future I'd love it.  Maybe run into user generated quests in the next Eldar Scrolls game, that would be awesome.

I don't think Spore is a great game, it is sold solely on the creation tools, the only part of Spore that really interested me was the Cell Stage in which the actual placement of parts on your creature greatly affected it's performance.  It really got on my nerves that all of the other creators were either completely superficial or incredibly simplistic, Spore lives and dies by it's creature creator.

Arguing about my/your ignorance and the algorithms behind Spore is rediculous.  Neither of us know bugger all about the code behind Spore and that's what I ment by my badly worded "Judging by what I can see".  I don't know what is in the code, I'm not botherede about algorithms or anything like that.  When I bought Spore all I had to judge it on was what I recieved.  I may have recieved an advanced piece of technology but I don't know that, it's a game.  I play the game, I don't play algorithms.

The only decent counter argument I've seen in this thread is Alex V's point about following a creature from it's "birth" in the primodial soup to becoming an intergalactic civilisation.  That I would actually agree is quite interesting, I'm not sure I'd label it innovative, seems too strong a word really but I did enjoy that element of the game.  

Also I do agree the game is pretty ambitious and don't read what I'm saying here as me hating on Spore but labeling it the most innovative game ever is incredibly generous (no offence OP)
#27 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -
The Sporepedia and integrating other people's content into the game works really well and is almost completely seemless.  Again this seems like a refinement of what's already out there tho.


It does so in a new way.

I don't think Spore is a great game, it is sold solely on the creation tools, the only part of Spore that really interested me was the Cell Stage in which the actual placement of parts on your creature greatly affected it's performance.  It really got on my nerves that all of the other creators were either completely superficial or incredibly simplistic, Spore lives and dies by it's creature creator.


Again, this has nothing to do with innovation. I don't care if your "hating on spore" or not. Personally I liked the game, but was fairly disappointed because of several poor design decisions. Not a game I spent as much time on as a result. I've probably only spent about 70 hours in the game, all told. Not much considering how much I love the game. I also love The Sims, but I can't stand playing the damn thing. Both of these games are important and I can recognize that without the bias.

The creature creator is great.  The concept of creating creatures/monsters/characters is not new however, what spore brings to the table is that it analyzes what you make and attempts to make a believeable creature and for the most part is does succed.  Saying that Spore is innovative because of it's creature creator, in my opinion, is not true.

The creature creator is innovative, but that's only part of the story. Another part of the story is how it can go from viewing the entire galaxy to watching the creatures walk around on a planet in a few seconds is an innovative technology. Again, I am not talking about gameplay. The editors are innovative. The animation and texture systems are innovative. This has nothing to do with how much you like the game. It's not a popularity contest.


I don't know what is in the code, I'm not botherede about algorithms or anything like that.  When I bought Spore all I had to judge it on was what I recieved.  I may have recieved an advanced piece of technology but I don't know that, it's a game.  I play the game, I don't play algorithms.


And that is the main problem with your argument. Your ignoring a big part of what the game is. You may not play algorithms, but the computer must use them for the game to run. Spore is innovative. It's gameplay isn't anything new, but it does a lot in a very small amount of time, both development time and run time. This is important whether you can see it or not.
#28 Edited by Ravey (330 posts) -
Kush said:
"I don't really think it's that innovative...innovative for this year? Yes, but not not one of the most innovative games ever."

Agreed. Spore just ties a lot of old ideas together is a new package...

#29 Posted by IncredibleBulk92 (936 posts) -

Oh dear Bellum you really dont seem to have read my post and if you did you seem to pick and choose which parts you reference.

I don't hate Spore which you seem to think I just don't think it deserves the title of  "most innovative game ever".  I personally, me, not you, not anybody else, do not think that Spore is incredible innovative but instead mixes a lot of things that have been done before (and 95% of Spore has been done before in some form)  into a nice easy to use package.  Raver and Kush see it here, it's nothing really new but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad game or even not an innovative game.

Also your algorithm argument is getting on my tits, I don't give a shit what's inside my dodge viper, it's a fucking dodge viper.  I don't care what went to making google chrome, I use it, it works, it's fine. DONE.  The poster asked if Spore was the most innovative GAME ever, not the most innovative algorithm.  If you don't see that I really do feel sorry for you.  If you want to say that Spore is a good game because they say it uses complex algorithms (im not saying it doesn't)  then wow, just wow.

I'm not going to waste any of my time debating this.  You seem to have taken this as some sort of personal attack and not just me saying that "most innovative game ever" is a tad strong.
#30 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -
I'm not going to waste any of my time debating this.  You seem to have taken this as some sort of personal attack and not just me saying that "most innovative game ever" is a tad strong.

Not at all, I take it as you being an ignorant fool. ;)

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.