Academia and the arcade

Could a new hit video game be the next step in teaching evolution?

Will Wright, the game designer behind The Sims, spent years creating "Spore," a new video game that is supposed to simulate the process of evolution.

The National Geographic Channel produced a documentary on Spore called “How to Build a Better Being” and conducted interviews with scientists in the field of evolutionary developmental biology, or “Evo-Devo.”

The documentary even shows how Spore might serve as a useful tool for researchers.
However, local specialists in both biology and learning sciences say that Spore is a fun game and nothing more.

“Spore is not simulated evolution,” said Sam Miller, a biology graduate student in IU’s Evolution, Ecology and Behavior program, who played the game after its Sept. 7 release. “Evolution is not linear. Humans did not come directly from fish, they just share a common ancestor.”

Spore begins with a meteor crashing into a previously lifeless planet, populating it with microbes.

One of these microbes is the player’s avatar, who eats and tries to survive, all the while gaining “DNA points.”

The points are used to buy and sell various body parts – from horns to flagella – with the idea of upgrading the creature at each generational step.

The creature eventually develops legs and crawls out of the sea, where it advances along different levels of civilization.

Nathan Taylor, a biology graduate student in the Evolution, Ecology and Behavior Program, said he’s also familiar with the game.

Taylor said that, although enjoyable, Spore’s educational value for biology is on par with that of the “Oregon Trail” for history.

Taylor said the game could capture kids’ interest in the field of biology.

Sasha Barab, an IU professor and director of the Center for Research on Learning and Technology, does not foresee Spore becoming a method for teaching evolution.

“It’s not consistent with Darwin’s work and would cause more confusion than insight,” he said.

However, Spore is not without its merits, Barab said.

It encourages deliberate thinking and reasoning, he said.

While Barab’s 5- and 7-year-old children played the game, they discussed which physical traits were better for their creatures.

“Kids having scientific arguments about cause and effect is very valuable,” he said.

If game designers came closer to actual simulated evolution, Barab said, Spore would not only be more educational, but more fun.

Dan Kearns, an IU assistant professor of molecular biology and genetics, described in simple terms how evolution works.

“Evolution is driven by things that didn’t die, not the best or the fittest,” he said.

If someone wanted to create a game that simulated evolution, they should generate 1,000 random virtual organisms, put them together in an environment and see which ones don’t die, Kearns said.

Larry Yaeger, a professor in the School of Informatics, said that although his exposure to Spore is still limited, he feels that it is more of a game than a means for scientific research.

“Spore has been winnowed down for predictability,” he said.

A game called “Creatures,” created by British software designer Steve Grand, is a more accurate representation of evolution, Yaeger said. The avatars in that game had biologically appropriate neural structures, which allowed them to evolve on their own.

“Spore is like Legos with animal parts,” Taylor said, “but it’s fun.”