Does Spore support "evolution" or "intelligent deisgn"?

#1 Posted by Khamsai (7 posts) -

This is just something I've been pondering for awhile. But first, I would like to say that both cases can be supported fairly well. The game itself goes through the process of evolutioin of creatures and civilization. But the biggest component in the game is the player. The actual intelligent designer. After all it does fall into the god-game genre.  I've just been contempating between the two and just wanted to bring this up to hear what you everyone else thinks.

#2 Posted by atejas (3057 posts) -
Khamsai said:
"This is just something I've been pondering for awhile. But first, I would like to say that both cases can be supported fairly well. The game itself goes through the process of evolutioin of creatures and civilization. But the biggest component in the game is the player. The actual intelligent designer. After all it does fall into the god-game genre.  I've just been contempating between the two and just wanted to bring this up to hear what you everyone else thinks."

more towards the intelligent design...well, actually, it would be intelligent evolution.
#3 Posted by Termite (2398 posts) -

Does it matter? Well obviously is you think enough about it the game sort of "Supports" intelligent design. But it's a game and the developer obviously isn't putting some sort of secret message in there

#4 Posted by SonicFire (821 posts) -

Haha, well, I don't think it's supporting anything in the political sense of the word. But in terms of theory alone, definitely intelligent design, as I don't think creatures mutate or augment themselves without user interaction.

#5 Posted by NotaStalker (172 posts) -

yeah this was really useless :o

#6 Posted by Dr_Feelgood38 (1550 posts) -

I agree. The player does create their creature, and everything in the game is technically created by someone else, so I guess that in a sense it is intelligent design.

#7 Posted by atejas (3057 posts) -

I dont get the hostility towards TC...it's not a religion thread, it's a discussion

#8 Posted by Alex_V (615 posts) -

Nice topic.

I know the game has character creation, but doesn't it also have a section where you evolve at the sort of primordial ooze stage? I get the feeling the game's politics are very much evolution-based, but as you say you can't pretend that the creation of these creatures is not intelligent design.

If you wanted to get political about it, I suppose you would say that if the game is proposing that intelligent design is a viable theory for life, then why isn't the real world full of bouncing phallusses on legs? :)

#9 Posted by OakaXXV (20 posts) -

Normally you would obviously choose what creature to create, but if you want evolution then you could pick things for your creature randomly or something, then if they work, keep them, if not then that creature dies out.
Spore might look a bit limited on the surface, but with a little imagination, anything is possible.

#10 Posted by serbsta (1867 posts) -

Looks more like intelligent design to me.

#11 Posted by TheBeast (1931 posts) -

I suppose it's a matter of whether you consider the Spore userbase 'intelligent'!

In essence it's simulating various stages of evolution, but it's a game - and if we just had to watch the big bang happen and see what species happen to develop, not many people would buy it. I would. But no one else.

#12 Posted by Jrad (624 posts) -

I wouldn't say it 'supports' anything, though since you effectively play as a god (it is a god game after all...), and you directly adapt your creature, it definitely involves intelligent design.

#13 Posted by AdamBomb (63 posts) -

I don't think i would have thought of that question on my own. after all will wright explicitly says "evolve" a ton when he discusses the game.

#14 Posted by Swick (223 posts) -

You could easily make an argument for both. Clearly there is evolving in the game and clearly each creature had an intelligent designer.

#15 Posted by DualReaver (3882 posts) -

I don't think it supports either theory?
You know it's a game right?

#16 Posted by sponge3164 (407 posts) -
DualReaver said:
"I don't think it supports either theory?
You know it's a game right?
"
lol seriously, that reminds me of a post on another forum where some 12 year old thinks it's a little more then a game
http://www.xspore.com/community/sporedom/8064-questions-about-galaxy.html
#17 Posted by mariussmit (245 posts) -

If it was a game about evolution there wouldn't be much to do would there? You would just sit and watch as everything forms over millions of years. I guess a fast forward button would be nice in that game ...

#18 Posted by Jonathan (655 posts) -

I can't speak for anyone, but considering how interested Will Wright is in science and the concept of Spore I can almost guarantee you that he believes in evolution. But to have a game based off of evolution without an "intelligent designer" wouldn't be feasable for obvious reasons. It wouldn't be a game. It would just be a screensaver.

#19 Posted by igpx407 (75 posts) -

I think Spore supports having fun.

#20 Posted by Psytek (174 posts) -

I think it implements both in a way. As far as I know, you don't actually create your creature to begin with, you start with a tiny spore, then as it grows, you choose what 'evolutions' it goes through by picking new body parts in the creature creator.

The system doesn't really line up with any current models, although its a far more watertight theory than pure intelligent design, christians would do well to play spore and begin treating it as gospel.


#21 Posted by Homer (1372 posts) -
I would say more intelligent design then evolution.
#22 Posted by themaster408 (70 posts) -

Although I totally see the arguments for intelligent design, I'll be a devil's advocate.
Evolution is gradual changes and survival of the fittest.  If you're creature is not "the fittest" it will die.  It will not be fast enough or powerful enough to evade or kill predators or prey.  If your creature evolves stupidly, then you'll be rewarded justly (be killed).

Obviously simply because you are a gamer, it's intelligent design, but I think the game is actually focused on evolution rather and you are just choosing those "fittest" parts for your creature.

#23 Posted by dwarfzilla (170 posts) -

That's one of the things that most disappoint me about Spore. It would be neat if your creatures were always being born with messed up new mutations, and you had to change the environment in order to try and steer their evolutionary future in a certain direction. That would be way cool. Spore 2, maybe?

#24 Posted by themaster408 (70 posts) -

wow dwarfzilla, that's actually a really cool (and ambitious) idea.  It would be cool to have a "random generator" or "random improvement" but I suppose they figured no one would go for it (or it'd be really difficult to do).

Not sure how you could change the environment to fit the needs of your creature, but that really would be cool.  Make it colder since your creature has fur, who knows.  I doubt it'll happen any time soon though.

#25 Posted by krazedkaoz (71 posts) -
atejas said:
"Khamsai said:
"This is just something I've been pondering for awhile. But first, I would like to say that both cases can be supported fairly well. The game itself goes through the process of evolutioin of creatures and civilization. But the biggest component in the game is the player. The actual intelligent designer. After all it does fall into the god-game genre.  I've just been contempating between the two and just wanted to bring this up to hear what you everyone else thinks."

more towards the intelligent design...well, actually, it would be intelligent evolution."
I agree. Definitely intelligent evolution.
#26 Posted by Hewkii (190 posts) -

let's see...making your own creature. I don't know, it's such a hard answer.

#27 Posted by Otacon (2209 posts) -

Spore uses the idea of panspermia, that  evolution takes place because there is a mind to think what needs adaption. With Darwinism there would be no game.

#28 Posted by Vaxadrin (2297 posts) -

I don't think Spore "supports" either in the sense of saying "this is how things are".  I think, though, that if you were to break down the gameplay mechanics it's quite obviously intelligent design in nature, but the same could be said of any strategy game.

#29 Posted by atejas (3057 posts) -
Vaxadrin said:
"I don't think Spore "supports" either in the sense of saying "this is how things are".  I think, though, that if you were to break down the gameplay mechanics it's quite obviously intelligent design in nature, but the same could be said of any strategy game."
I see you are skilled in the necromantic arts.
#30 Posted by Demilich (2598 posts) -

derp

#31 Posted by Kyle (2323 posts) -

*reads thread title*

. . . . . . . . . . . . HOLY FUCKING SHIT. You just blew my fucking mind hahahaha!

*reads first post*

Wait, you were asking that as a serious question? Uh . . . . . . wha? Dude, Spore only supports awesome, stop thinking about things so hard.

#32 Posted by vhold (422 posts) -

It supports the theory that smashing bones will give your children new kinds of body parts, with better stat bonuses.

#33 Posted by KamasamaK (2409 posts) -

It does not support either in the sense that it is not evidence for one nor is the game trying to push that one is true over the other. It's just a game. That said, for it to be an enjoyable game there would need to be some kind of design made by the player, which I suppose could be likened to Intelligent Design.

As a side note, Will Wright, the lead designer of this game, is an atheist, so if one were to be pushed it would certainly be Evolution.

#34 Posted by nakke (64 posts) -

I think it supports survival of the fittest pretty clearly. Obviously the first way to think is "hehe you design your creatures, ergo intelligent design", but it's more deep than that. You have to constantly update your creature's design in order to adapt; get rid of crappy features and 'buy' good new ones. ID doesn't say god or some other guy constantly updated the design of creatures, right?

#35 Posted by Pibo47 (3166 posts) -
atejas said:
"Khamsai said:
"This is just something I've been pondering for awhile. But first, I would like to say that both cases can be supported fairly well. The game itself goes through the process of evolutioin of creatures and civilization. But the biggest component in the game is the player. The actual intelligent designer. After all it does fall into the god-game genre.  I've just been contempating between the two and just wanted to bring this up to hear what you everyone else thinks."

more towards the intelligent design...well, actually, it would be intelligent evolution."
Yeah, actually this is what i believe. intelligent evolution.
#36 Posted by StaticFalconar (4849 posts) -

Why can't it be both, where you the original intelligent designer, but, the original designs where flawed so evolution had to take place.

#37 Posted by Gamer_152 (14091 posts) -

Yeah, it takes a little from column A and a little from column B. It is beneficial to the player for them to evolve their creations using certain parts at certain points in the game, or they may be pushed into having their evolution take a certain path due to lack of certain parts. However, outside of this the player is free to create in whatever manner he/she wants.

Moderator

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.