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

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

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

innovative ?  maybe 
innovative in a good way ?  Hell No

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

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!

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

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.

Doesn't make it good, does it?

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

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.

It wishes

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

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.

Innovation via Free Dictionary

Oh yeah, its Super innovative . . . . .

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

"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.

"

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 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.

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.

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.

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'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.