The phrase "Jack of all trades, King of none" springs to mind. Also "biting off more than you can chew".

It was more gutting because the cell stage was great, position of cilia and spikes directly affected gameplay and it really felt like I was evolving a creature. The rest of the game was so shallow in comparison. The cookie-cutter creature add-ons were the worst, doesn't matter how you configured your body plan, buy the expensive feet and suddenly you could run fast. You build Jabba the Hutt but slap some tiny wings on and suddenly you can fly. I can barely even bare thinking about the abysmal city stage.

The technology they created really is completely amazing, even after the disappointment. The advances in procedural technology, everything from randomised planets to animation generation, was incredible. They just couldn't pull it together into a fun game.

The author's comment that they should have restricted the scope to cellular and creature stages, and applied focus to that smaller subset, I can't help but think that would have been amazing, even if you never got the interstellar stuff (which quickly became a chore to play anyway, defending planets etc). Even if it were just cellular creatures, with the end-game being a small fish or something, it could have had much more depth.

More than anything, it taught me that hype can easily get out of control, and it's important to manage player expectations as it is to pump them up for something amazing or revolutionary. It was such a profound lesson (I spent AU$110 on the galactic edition - shudder) that I'm very wary of the recent talk of HL3. I won't buy into any kind of hype for anything until I've read a dozen reviews to back it up after release.

Anyway, this article brought up many bad memories, hence the ranting.