That's the takeaway I got from the review in the New York Times (which is interesting because it's not your typical game review site... seems a bit more independent to me):
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/05/ar...pagewanted=all
The writer basically said that a ton of effort was put into the creature stage, which is fun. But past that stage it's not very well-developed. And of course we can't help but compare those later stages with the best strategy games, where it's bound to fall short. I'll play GalCivII if I want a space conquest game, unless something else is actually better at it. So far, other than the "cute" factor, and the unique aliens, I'm not hearing big enthusiasm for the later game stages. A sandbox game can't be very successful if the beginning is fun, and the end-game isn't.
Something else I've wondered about... given the HUGE scope of the game, they haven't exactly left themselves much room for an expansion pack, or a Spore II. Would people buy this again as a Spore II product, if they just improved the end-game?
Anyway, I'm waiting for more user reviews before thinking about buying it (especially with the DRM issues).
Bookmarks