Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Michael White | May 11th 2009 04:48 PM | 4 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More Adaptive Complexity articles

All

About Michael White

Welcome to Adaptive Complexity, where I write about genomics, systems biology, evolution, and the connection between science and literature, government, and society.

I'm a biochemist


... Full Bio

The evolution game Spore was somewhat of a critical flop - especially among scientists. The game has glitzy graphics, but, for a game billed as being somehow connected to science, the science sucked.  What's more important, many of us thought the game play could have been improved with better science.
Well, if the Spore guys had gotten together with the creator of Swimbots, (or GenePool - not sure which is the real name) the result might have been amazing graphics, gameplay, and science:

It's a computer simulation where hundreds of virtual organisms evolve swimming skills. These organisms are called "swimbots". You can set mate preference criteria and thus influence what the swimbots consider as attractive qualities in potential mates. The most attractive swimbots get chosen most often to have little babies, and so their genetic building blocks propogate to future generations. Eventually, swimbots get better at pursuing each other, competing for food, and becoming babes to other swimbots. Local gene pools emerge which compete for sex and food (for energy to have more sex). Eventually a dominant sub-population takes over.

Sometimes, everyone just dies. That's not a bug. That's nature! If you want, you can move swimbots and food around to help your favorite critters survive.



Comments

Hank's picture
There's a game I'd rather forget.   It was hyped up to be biology's 'War and Peace' before it missed its release date by 3 years and most of its feature set.  I was going to call my article on it "Why is Wil Wright trying to bitch slap the life sciences?' but it was too boring to merit such a great title.

adaptivecomplexity's picture
What's sad is that they made a conscious decision to dump science for glitz. Graphics and special effects have murdered intelligent gameplay, not just in Spore, but just about everywhere.

...and then there was Dwarf Fortress.  
If you want a game that kicks graphics to the curb and has more depth&detail than any other, give Dwarf Fortress a try.

But dwarf fortress, while in-depth, takes way too much CPU and isn't really about science...
In my opinion, an MMO where you try to make the best organism and let it compete for survival would be awesome.

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.