SPORE was ripped to absolute shreds by most players after it came out, and was named Most Disappointing Game of the Year from about half a dozen different outlets. It's one of the great all-time examples of a game that was utterly hollowed-out by dumbing down; the pre-release versions were aggressively scientifically accurate and many players were furious with how the game ended up.

The thing about SPORE is, the game itself isn't popular, and never really has been. No-one really bothers to play it, because it's so mind-meltingly shallow and the first four stages are interminably mini-games. The Creature Creator and the house and vehicle designing and stuff are the heart of the community; actually playing the game is pretty marginal. It'd be kind of like if SD chose to forget all that boring empire-building stuff and just focus on GC3 as a Ship Printing Simulator.

It's just not a game that I'd mention in a positive light on a 4X forum, since the odds are it'd cause a flame war. Similar things can be said for MOO3 - there's actually still a dedicated community to that game, and buried under all the crap is a very good, very deep grand strategy. But just bringing it up on most forums is inviting a world of hurt.

Now, this is VERY interesting, as it will increase race diversity as well as player's freedom.

I imagine the morale penalty to scale with the race (it should have zero effect on the Yor) and the specific choices you make (the Iridiums, for example, should be more than happy to work in the stock exchanges, but become extremely irritated if you force them in an assembly line).

Looking forward to it!

Wow. You realize though that it is actually your customers who pay for this game and your salary, right?

Haven't, but if you could provide a link I'd be happy to do so.

And of course making the game do something that you like is easier than doing something that  - according to the Forums - lots of other people would like (but not you) simply because (if the planet wheel argument is any example and boy it seems like one!) you'll never get 100% or anything like that happy. So do you piss off Group A or Group B? Hmmmm. Decisions, decisions. Of course, you go with the group who's ideas/wants match your own closest but without rubbing the other groups noses in it.

I'd like to know the process by which you decide which thing gets put into which update. I appreciate your observation that embarrassment is a bigger motivator than annoyance (the embarassment being how bad the AI handled it's planets, the annoyance being how the AI's ships would mosey into your ZOC and you couldn't yell at them for it), but what I'm asking is a situation where you have two embarrassments. What's the criteria that decides which one gets fixed first?

I wanted to add my two cents on this topic.

I got the 1.4 update a little while ago, and started playing the game and couldn't find the, Govern Planet - 'Spending Wheel'. After looking a bit, I was disappointed to see that it was gone. I use it all the time when playing - especially on my key planets, and really do not like that it has been removed.

After reading the posts on the forum, I can see that there are camps that support its removal, and those that don't. I am a relatively new player to the Gal Civ universe. I got the game earlier this year, and find it really fun and interesting. As such, I don't have the perspective of the wheel not being there, and so from my experience using the game, it has been an integral part of playing. I like the compromise proposed to have it in a future update as an option you can toggle on and off. It would seem to satisfy both groups of people. Or if it ends up coming back as a Civ Trait, then I can use it that way too.

Just wanted to provide player feedback toward supporting the provision of the spending wheel as an optional feature in a future update. I'm appreciative the Devs consider feedback and incorporate that into their decision making.

Until that update is available, I am glad I made a backup of my earlier version of the game so that I can go back to using it.

Please do.  edit:  looks like I should read all the threads before commenting in any thread.  This is all discussed in depth in another galciv3 thread. 

And that is a good justification for the shift to focuses, because it's just about the only thing that they do better than the wheel did.

Output needed nerfing to bring it into line with costs. No-one in their right mind could say otherwise. There were a lot of ways to achieve it - reducing output bonuses on buildings; increasing all costs by 100% or so, a new mechanic like coercion, or limiting our ability to interact with the economy. Unfortunately, the final option is the worst choice, since it was guaranteed to cause outcry in ways that the others probably wouldn't.

Most players would have noticed a big increase in production costs but would've just thought 'oh, stuff costs more now. OK'. The same would've been true with a general ouput bonus nerf; people knew it needed to happen and weren't likely to cause a big fuss. Introducing the coercion mechanic would probably have seen general approval, since new stuff is always nice (especially since it will allow the removal of the unpopular and ineffectual LEP system). Ripping out a major chunk of our ability to control the economy, on the other hand, does nothing to fix the underlying problem (that production bonuses are completely out of scale with the pricing model) and annoys a lot of players because removing the player's toys is just as nasty as adding new ones is nice. 

Ah best patch for a while. Been waiting for something to happen to all those boring beeline 1 decision specialization planets. More room for making the plays now instead of making the game totally dependant on the starting location.

Time to reinstall and try the game again!

SD isn't one of the components of your portfolio?

Well anyway, if the success or failure of GCIII doesn't matter to you financially (or if SD's success or failure is of no consequence to your personal wealth), or if customer opinions don't matter why bother posting or reading the forums? Just tell people "this is how it will be" and then lock the forum. Heck, just have ID do it. No sense it dealing with the whining entitlement masses. No one needs that kind of stress.

Good read .  Sometimes i wonder why you dignify some of the stuff with a response or why you put up with it.  Coming to the realization your just having so much fun in doing what you do.  Keep it up

You're kind of presenting a false binary, though - between 'the customer paid for the game and so is king of the world' and 'the customer is an idiot with a wallet and should be treated as such'. Brad's not saying customer opinions don't matter; he's just saying that just because they do matter doesn't mean they're the only thing that matters, as people saying 'I pay your wages' are basically suggesting. I get the feeling he views the game's ongoing development more as a negotiation between a collection of various stakeholders - the modders, the players, the dev team, the finance department etc. 

For what it's worth, the 'We pay your wages' argument sucks anyway. There's good, solid reasons getting rid of the wheel was a bad idea (just as there's good, solid reasons getting rid of it was a good idea, too). Full, frank discussion of the flaws of an idea is usually the best way to convince someone not to do it, rather than stamping your foot and saying 'you took my money so you should do what I want'. It's the modern day equivalent of appealing to the authority of God to win your argument.

I don't want to interrupt your discussion on Frogboys portfolio (well actually I want to, I think it is really quite pointless)...

Would it be possible to get some input on the points I asked about earlier? I'm honestly curious what you're opinion is on this subject, Frogboy.