Spore Meets Diablo: EA Announces Darkspore Action RPG

[GodKlown]

I will certainly withhold judgment until February gets here, but this project does sound relatively good. There was a lot of potential in the Spore creature creator, and I'm glad to see they didn't just let it die. Combining the DNA from Spore with the action of Diablo does sound like a great game, given that it is executed properly. I'm not familiar with titles such as these with the EA stamp on them, so perhaps they might bring something new to the genre. Unless there is a lot of customizable options, I wouldn't be surprised to see this project also ported to consoles shortly after the release. After all, EA does like to make a lot of money.

 

[Enigmers]

I'm always up for more stuff that can be describe with the words "Like Diablo, but ________"

 

[dashiz94]

That sounds absolutely terrible

 

[Terrified Android]

awesome

 

[Kollega]

As i've already said...

IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE THERE IS ONLY SPORE!!!

Sorry for that, but word "Dark" in the name or title rarely means anything good.

I mean seriously... the idea of constructing "living weapons" to play as in Diabloesque game is a good one, but the name is ridiculous. Calling something "dark" is primarily a method of appealing to 13-year old boys, and we all know the usual result of trying that. I don't mind "dark edginess", as long as it's done for:

A) introducing some actually mature themes (see: Jak 2), or
B) for shits and giggles, as opposed to pseudo-maturity (see: Madworld).

Unfortunately, things built with EXTREEEEEEME 13-year old audience in mind usually fit neither of these criteria.

 

[JWW]

Maybe...maybe. I'll wait for the reviews before buying a Spore game, though.

 

[Luke Cartner]

Hmm,
My first response to this was glee but now I'm not so sure. Will the combination really work?
I liked the idea of spore and the creature creator and I loved Diablo but can the games really intersect well?

I mean I like pickled onions and I like icecream but pickled onion icecream doesn't really work...

 

[Killerbunny001]

From the pitch to the product there is a long way to go.

Take Spore for example : Great pitch, extraordinary crappy game.

 

[ArchBlade]

This looks worth keeping an eye on. I just need not to get too hyped. I overdid my excitement with Spore, and the fall was somewhat hard.

I still quite liked the creator though, and I'm a sucker for RPGs.

 

[The Hairminator]

This will be Maxis' first real non-children action title, then? I'm interested in how it's going to play.

 

[Torque669]

Diablo = Awesome

Spore Creature Creator = Awesome.

This could be brilliant, especially if you can create the skills of your character aswell.

if its the download system again then we might find this:

"vagina creature hits big dick boss for 9 damage. big dick boss fucks vagina creature for 9999999 damage."

Id get a giggle out of that as Im sure alot of people would

 

[Optimus Hagrid]

Diablo = Awesome

Spore Creature Creator = Awesome.

This could be brilliant, especially if you can create the skills of your character aswell.

if its the download system again then we might find this:

"vagina creature hits big dick boss for 9 damage. big dick boss fucks vagina creature for 9999999 damage."

To be honest, that sounds absolutely awesome.

 

[airwolfe591]

Spore may be my most hated game of all time, but I will always defend one thing about it; the creators. I thought these were very well designed. They were simple and easy to use but still allowed for the creation of complex and interesting creatures and objects. Had the actual gameplay been decent, Spore would have been great. So the idea that they are taking one of these creators and infusing it into a game with solid gameplay elements sounds very appealing.

Still going to remain skeptical though. I'll not raise my hopes again only to have them smashed to pieces.

Whilst I admired what the creators tried to do, the game mechanics where designed to reduce creativity for people playing through it - for example, having multiple copies of the same limb/piece cost DNA points, but had no impact on the stats; this meant having more than 1 pair of hands and feet of the same type was discouraged.

Creativity seems like it will be impaired at least a little, here's some information I pulled from another site.

Genesis Type (Races):
Bio:
-Uses Plant and Organic based skills
Cyber:
-Uses Technology based skills.
Plasma:
-Uses Fire and Lightning based skills.
Necro:
-Uses Death and Poision based skills.
Quantum:
-Uses Time and Space based skills.

Archetypes:
Sentinel (Tank class)
Tempest (Mage class)
Ravager (Rogue Class)

Thought I should share.

Edit: Instead of controlling one hero, you will maintain a 3 hero squad. What's your Dream Team?

Mine is a Quantum Ravager, Cyber Sentinel and Necro Tempest. (Yeah, I'll admit, I'm pretty excited for this)

The devs say they want you to build a 'Collection' of heroes as well.

 

[Rack]

After about half an hour of Spore I hoped that exactly this would happen. Fingers crossed they can get in a good system designer.

 

[Booze Zombie]

I am so making Godzilla, gonna stomp me some fools!

Okay, maybe that's aiming a bit high. I'll just crush people with my robotic super-soldier.

 

[boholikeu]

Spore may be my most hated game of all time, but I will always defend one thing about it; the creators. I thought these were very well designed. They were simple and easy to use but still allowed for the creation of complex and interesting creatures and objects. Had the actual gameplay been decent, Spore would have been great. So the idea that they are taking one of these creators and infusing it into a game with solid gameplay elements sounds very appealing.

Still going to remain skeptical though. I'll not raise my hopes again only to have them smashed to pieces.

Whilst I admired what the creators tried to do, the game mechanics where designed to reduce creativity for people playing through it - for example, having multiple copies of the same limb/piece cost DNA points, but had no impact on the stats; this meant having more than 1 pair of hands and feet of the same type was discouraged.

You're right about the above example, but almost all of the other mechanics of the game were built around supporting creativity. Earlier versions of Spore had every design decision tied to gameplay (IE more legs=faster, imbalanced body=can't walk). When they play-tested these earlier builds they found that people became frustrated because they couldn't make the creatures they wanted to. Mechanically, the earlier creature creator acted more like a puzzle than a catalyst for creativity, which was in direct conflict with their vision of the game. That's why they "nerfed" the stats system into what it is today, and while it might not be a lot of fun for someone looking for a lot of strategy, it actually does encourage creativity a lot better than other games of its ilk.

 

[Serioli]

Looks good but so did the original concept videos and interviews about Spore. Guess I'll wait for the user reviews as usual....

*Acts twice shy*

 

[Doug]

Spore may be my most hated game of all time, but I will always defend one thing about it; the creators. I thought these were very well designed. They were simple and easy to use but still allowed for the creation of complex and interesting creatures and objects. Had the actual gameplay been decent, Spore would have been great. So the idea that they are taking one of these creators and infusing it into a game with solid gameplay elements sounds very appealing.

Still going to remain skeptical though. I'll not raise my hopes again only to have them smashed to pieces.

Whilst I admired what the creators tried to do, the game mechanics where designed to reduce creativity for people playing through it - for example, having multiple copies of the same limb/piece cost DNA points, but had no impact on the stats; this meant having more than 1 pair of hands and feet of the same type was discouraged.

You're right about the above example, but almost all of the other mechanics of the game were built around supporting creativity. Earlier versions of Spore had every design decision tied to gameplay (IE more legs=faster, imbalanced body=can't walk). When they play-tested these earlier builds they found that people became frustrated because they couldn't make the creatures they wanted to. Mechanically, the earlier creature creator acted more like a puzzle than a catalyst for creativity, which was in direct conflict with their vision of the game. That's why they "nerfed" the stats system into what it is today, and while it might not be a lot of fun for someone looking for a lot of strategy, it actually does encourage creativity a lot better than other games of its ilk.

Hmm... I don't see how - for example, if you think mouth part A looks awesome, but mouth part B has better stats, you pretty much have to upgrade to mouth part B regardless of if you like it's look or think you can use it creatively. Of course, if you're just using the creators without having to play the creature you're making, its not an issue, but if you're combining this creator with a game (i.e. the whole point of Spore) it doesn't work well for creativity - hell, it encourages you to just create a snake and apply body parts to it anywhere you feel bothered too - at least when it was 'body position affects performance', i.e. the version we where presented back in 2004 or whenever it was, it encouraged the player to experiment....

*sighs and grumbles* Sorry, just was gutted by the quality stuff they removed from Spore in order to satisfy the mass market that killed it as a creative thing for me. Every alien, vehicle, and building felt like a generic block with little to no point in variation to me.

 

[Miral]

Hmm... I don't see how - for example, if you think mouth part A looks awesome, but mouth part B has better stats, you pretty much have to upgrade to mouth part B regardless of if you like it's look or think you can use it creatively. Of course, if you're just using the creators without having to play the creature you're making, its not an issue, but if you're combining this creator with a game (i.e. the whole point of Spore) it doesn't work well for creativity - hell, it encourages you to just create a snake and apply body parts to it anywhere you feel bothered too - at least when it was 'body position affects performance', i.e. the version we where presented back in 2004 or whenever it was, it encouraged the player to experiment....

This is the biggest gripe I had about the Spore creators. Sure, you can work around some of the issues (the usual workaround being to save up extra DNA points and then put part B on for the stats, but rotated to be hidden inside the body, then put part A on purely for the cosmetic effect; sometimes this leads to weird behaviour, of course, so it's not very satisfactory).

The games that followed on from them were ok at first, but they definitely pall when replaying with different creature types.

I can see the argument about "make it too realistic and it stops being fun", but I think they took it too far in the other direction.