Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Spore website launched

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
Sol Invictus said:
I don't know how you're able to say all that, Norfleet. On what facts do you base your accusations of the game's supposed fakeness?
The fact that it doesn't actually exist, for one thing. Do you have it? Do you know anyone who has it? Didn't think so. All we've seen is an easily-falsified demo. That is not proof of existence. Therefore, due to failure to convincingly prove the existence of the actual game, I must conclude that it does not exist. He may actually MAKE such a game, in an attempt to make the lie catch up to reality, but the things like this have a disturbing way of falling very, very, short. Especially when you're dealing with EA.

BetterNights said:
And wasn't Wright actually PLAYING a Spore demo at the GDC?
Proves nothing. Demos are rigged. Everyone knows that. The fact that they haven't even bothered to make the demo available is proof: It's not actually functional beyond the minimum level needed to look shiny. You will notice how in the video, he finishes just about every simple stage in minutes, and skips over the rest. Clearly, this is either all there is in the game, and he wishes to exaggerate its actual content, or there simply IS no game, and the "demo" is fake. Maxians have been known to lie practically compulsively. Are we to believe that the Chief does not have the longest nose of them all?
 

NeutralMilkHotel

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
389
Ignore Norfleet. Non-existance until proven is his gimmick. I'm guessing he's a second account of someone to get a rise out of people.

OMG, NORFLEET DIDN'T COME OUT OF MY WOMB, I DIDNT TOUCH OR HEAR YOU, YOU DONT EXIST LOL! HIS ACCOUNT IS RIGGED, HES A BOT!!!!
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
Sol Invictus said:
I think you're confusing Will Wright with George Broussard and Peter Molyneux.
Nah. If those two told me the sky was blue, I wouldn't even believe it was supposed to be so until I double checked that. With Will Wright, I'd just double-check it at convenience, then report it as a bug if it wasn't. I do not, however, subscribe to pie-in-the-sky speculation. Besides, a critical look at my position reveals it to be unassailable: No matter what happens, I still win. Certainly no position is more superior than one which can only result in a win/win scenario. Besides, I run a rather busy shop cleaning up Will Wright's failures to deliver: I think I know what I'm talking about here.

NeutralMilkHotel said:
Ignore Norfleet. Non-existance until proven is his gimmick.
That is generally the logical view of things. I don't happen to be religious.

I'm guessing he's a second account of someone to get a rise out of people.
Naw. I have a long and verified existence as my own identity. You can search me and check my cred.
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
Dudes, you are like all random electrons firing around in my brain. None of you exist, Matrix-shcmatrix puddin-n-pie. You're delusions from whiskey, corn not rye.

Oh yeah, I forgot I have an opinion about this game.

It will be freaking awesome if the promise is realized. However, I agree with Norfleet in spirit at least that it a hyped pile of shit until I've played it and am convinced it's not a house of cards.
 

Seven

Erudite
Joined
Aug 20, 2003
Messages
1,728
Location
North of the Glow
Besides, a critical look at my position reveals it to be unassailable: No matter what happens, I still win. Certainly no position is more superior than one which can only result in a win/win scenario. Besides, I run a rather busy shop cleaning up Will Wright's failures to deliver: I think I know what I'm talking about here.

Oh yeah right, an assailable position? Wow, you really got us now because clearly saying that something does not exist (even though my own eyes have observed it) puts you in a win-win situation so long as we take your word for it. But if it's all the same to you I'll let myself be the judge of what's real and what's not as your sensory perceptions (as well as your mental faculties) are undoubtedly busted.

Sincerely,
Seven
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
obediah said:
It will be freaking awesome if the promise is realized. However, I agree with Norfleet in spirit at least that it a hyped pile of shit until I've played it and am convinced it's not a house of cards.
Very true, but there's no proof that it will be. As such, adopting my view of the matter puts you in a clearly win/win position no matter what happens. This makes it clearly the correct position.

Seven said:
Oh yeah right, an assailable position? Wow, you really got us now because clearly saying that something does not exist (even though my own eyes have observed it) puts you in a win-win situation so long as we take your word for it.
Really, now? You've actually observed the REAL GAME? I highly doubt this. You have almost certainly observed the movie clip of the alleged demo. Note, however, that none of the viewers were permitted to handle it in the clip. Note furthermore that there is no actual game, merely a rigged demo. In light of this, it must be pointed out that you have not, in fact, observed the actual game. The existence of a quite-likely-rigged demo is not conclusive proof of existence for the actual game in question. Many games which ultimately failed to materialize still managed to produce rigged demos and screenshots (*cough* DNF *cough*). Furthermore, it should be emphasized that both EA and Maxis have a longstanding history of producing rigged demos and scenes, and that Will Wright has not demonstrated himself to be a man of integrity by his actions: He sold out to EA and habitually perpetuates falsehood and deception. He is a slimy weasel who only could be more devoid of any semblance of integrity only if he took up the occupation of a lawyer, or went into politics. Nothing he says can be trusted without proof.

Ultimately, in the absence of proof, I choose to disbelieve the wild and grandiose claims. You are free to believe as you wish, but remember this: No matter what happens, I still win. If the game never materializes, I win. If the game materializes and falls way short of the target, I still win. If the game is absolutely freaking awesome, I STILL WIN. My position is no-lose.
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
Norfleet said:
Ultimately, in the absence of proof, I choose to disbelieve the wild and grandiose claims. You are free to believe as you wish, but remember this: No matter what happens, I still win. If the game never materializes, I win. If the game materializes and falls way short of the target, I still win. If the game is absolutely freaking awesome, I STILL WIN. My position is no-lose.

You don't have a position. You can't lose or win because your haven't shown anything other than you'd be the most annoying person at any party. It's obvious you want to say the demo was a sham and the game will suck, so dropping some fucking stones and put it out there without trying to cover your ass with stupid word games.

How did you find the codex while being so bad at the internet?
 

Shagnak

Shagadelic
Joined
Sep 6, 2003
Messages
4,638
Location
Arse of the world, New Zealand
Norfleet said:
...disbelieve the wild and grandiose claims... *snip*...If the game is absolutely freaking awesome, I STILL WIN. My position is no-lose.
Nope.
Under that logic, if the game matches it's wild and grandious claims you lose - at this spurious argument at any rate. If you also get a game you enjoy you win at something else.

Actually, even if it doesn't match its claims, but is still halfway decent you lose. We already think you are an annoying fucktard.
 

Fez

Erudite
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
7,954
Will Wright came by my house the other day, kicked down the door and said " wha da dilly yo? would ya like ta try muh ma fuckin new tight game? It's fine ass pimp-tight. you know das right! ya'll is mad stupid. I know yo a playa" I replied "Sure, whatever. Please don't shoot." and installed the beta and tried it out. It was awesome and the best and most definitely existant. We later made love and lay naked in the moonlight, then he killed me and put my body in a wood chipper.

So to sum up, Norfleet is a tool and Spore is real.
 

LlamaGod

Cipher
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
3,095
Location
Yes
Spore looks real enough for me, i'll start bitching when news of it not being so appear.
 

merry andrew

Erudite
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
1,332
Location
Ellensburg
I just watched the video. I usually don't even play these types of games, but dear lord.

Although I am kinda curious how the gameplay is going to boil down. There are so many options that I wonder how much they matter.
 

Seven

Erudite
Joined
Aug 20, 2003
Messages
1,728
Location
North of the Glow
Norfleet said:
obediah said:
It will be freaking awesome if the promise is realized. However, I agree with Norfleet in spirit at least that it a hyped pile of shit until I've played it and am convinced it's not a house of cards.
Very true, but there's no proof that it will be. As such, adopting my view of the matter puts you in a clearly win/win position no matter what happens. This makes it clearly the correct position.

Seven said:
Oh yeah right, an assailable position? Wow, you really got us now because clearly saying that something does not exist (even though my own eyes have observed it) puts you in a win-win situation so long as we take your word for it.
Really, now? You've actually observed the REAL GAME? I highly doubt this. You have almost certainly observed the movie clip of the alleged demo. Note, however, that none of the viewers were permitted to handle it in the clip. Note furthermore that there is no actual game, merely a rigged demo. In light of this, it must be pointed out that you have not, in fact, observed the actual game. The existence of a quite-likely-rigged demo is not conclusive proof of existence for the actual game in question. Many games which ultimately failed to materialize still managed to produce rigged demos and screenshots (*cough* DNF *cough*). Furthermore, it should be emphasized that both EA and Maxis have a longstanding history of producing rigged demos and scenes, and that Will Wright has not demonstrated himself to be a man of integrity by his actions: He sold out to EA and habitually perpetuates falsehood and deception. He is a slimy weasel who only could be more devoid of any semblance of integrity only if he took up the occupation of a lawyer, or went into politics. Nothing he says can be trusted without proof.

Ultimately, in the absence of proof, I choose to disbelieve the wild and grandiose claims. You are free to believe as you wish, but remember this: No matter what happens, I still win. If the game never materializes, I win. If the game materializes and falls way short of the target, I still win. If the game is absolutely freaking awesome, I STILL WIN. My position is no-lose.

If I called you a miserable cunt, could that be construed as an insult even though I genuinely believe it to be true?
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom