I Have Experienced Spore, and These Are My Conclusions:

Since the semester is drawing to a close and I don't know how many more of these blogs I'll be writing between now and the end of school, I wanted to be sure to dedicate a post to serve as a type of reflection of the overall topics I've discussed and my experience of playing Spore.

In the beginning.....there was a name. That name was Will Wright. This name attached to the project Spore created a recipe for one of the biggest hypes in PC game history. When I first heard about Spore from friends and watching demo videos online, I instantly understood what the hype was all about. I couldn't even fathom what the scope of the game would be from what Wright was saying about it. As for the creativity factor, I couldn't wait to try it out. As a fan of The Sims franchise, I was definitely looking forward to seeing what Wright would do with the customization aspect of the game. With the release of the Creature Creator, I was able to have a hands-on preview of what this creativity would look like. Needless to say I thought that it was a lot of fun to be able to create a series of creatures as simple or outlandish as possible. And so after this, I waited along with the rest of the world in eager anticipation for the day when Spore would finally be released. In a very exciting twist of fate, I was able to download the game early and start playing before the millions of other people started uploading content to Sporepedia. I was very excited and when I first started playing, I felt that my expectations would be easily met. Of course, it didn't quite work out that way. I started to realize how quickly I was flying through the phases and knew that I had to slow down to make the game last for an entire semester. The lack of complexity also contributed to the speedy gameplay. However, I soon started to see that it was actually a good thing that I was having to take my time. It gave me a chance to step back and observe my surroundings and the little details of the game that many other players may have missed. Despite the fact that I was playing a relatively short game at a slow pace, I never found myself losing interest in it. The balance of creativity and strategy was, I thought, a great way to keep the player engaged if there was one aspect of gameplay preferred over another. After this semester, I plan on playing Spore again at a normal pace and at a harder level and see how my experience differs from my first time playing. I'm predicting that I might get worn out after a while, but we'll see.

I would have to say that my favorite part of the game would actually have to encompass two of the phases: The creature phase and the civilization phase. The reason why I enjoyed the creature phase so much was that it catered to my creative, social side; the side that also found satisfaction with The Sims. This phase was the one that reflected the style of The Sims the closest. It is also, I'm sure, the phase that drew in the female gaming crowd with the most ease. It was great to be able to customize every single aspect of my creature in order to really make it my own. Being able to socialize and perform different actions was also a nice change from the cell phase, which was basically a fancy Pac-Man game. The civilization phase was probably my ultimate favorite because of my love for strategy games. Spore did a pretty good job on this genre, however I wouldn't have minded if it was a bit more challenging. Still, I definitely enjoyed the whole aspect of taking over other cities primarily via military force. There wasn't a moment of this phase when I wasn't active, which kept me engaged and immersed. Overall, these two phases were the ones I had the most fun with.

Looking back on my blog, I'm amazed by how many topics I was able to relate to this game. Initially, I thought this would be a basic project where I would write about my gaming experience and tie it in with some of the most popular concepts surrounding it such as science, education and its massive appeal. I had no idea that I would be pulling up topics like the Christmas Truce of 1914, Sporn, inventions, and immersion. Also, the literature I've read and different forms of online media I've viewed in creating these blog posts has been more than I would have imagined. All of these materials I've read and viewed have been extremely interesting. It's incredible to see the variety of material I was able to find online while looking for topics to write about. Spore has crossed into so many different realms of discussion and debate, both scholarly and simple, in such a short period of time. I was genuinely amazed to see the response to this game and I was happy to be able to add to the online material.

Of all the topics I discussed and blogs I wrote, I have to list these two as my favorites:
Can I really compare Spore with the Christmas truce of 1914? Let's take a look...
Sporn: Take It or Leave It
I enjoyed the first topic here because of the surprises it contained. First, for some reason I hadn't thought about the issue of religion and Spore until I came across the online blog post I wrote about. Even though it was fake, it really made me think about this deeper issue of Spore and the debate posed between evolution and creationism. It's interesting, because now I can see Spore as being both promotional for evolution and intelligent design. I experienced another surprising moment when this subject somehow reminded me of the Christmas Truce of 1914. This event is, I feel, one of the most important events in the history of games and play because it shows that even two nations at war can come together through the cultural medium of play. The Sporn blog was also a great topic to write about because it just goes to show you that people can find offense in anything. We all knew that Sporn was coming, it's amazing to see the horrified reactions that have come with it though. Ours is such a sensitive nation after all.

As I begin to wrap-up my first run-through of Spore and finish the GL&S class, I've come to appreciate this assignment, despite the dedication it's taken to post regularly. I feel that I understand Spore on a much deeper level than I ever would have been able to had I not written these blogs. It's a bit ironic because in studying serious games, we're each playing a game for this class as a way to emphasize the significance of video games and their impact on learning. However, it has been in writing this blog that I have received the greatest meaning. It's a cycle where I've moved from traditional classroom learning, to non-traditional learning through games, and back to traditional learning through reading and writing. It's pretty interesting to see how that worked out. Although it was playing the game that inspired each of these blog posts, so the serious games can still take the most credit in this situation. Before taking this class, I had never really realized the true significance of play and games. After taking this class, I now have a very elevated understanding of their role in society and learning and I hope to continue incorporating what I have learned here within future learning. Who knew that there was so much you could get out of just turning on the computer and EXPERIENCING SPORE

Immersion

When it comes to Spore, immersion can be a touchy subject. I've found a lot of mixed reviews on the subject, some positive, others negative. At times, I've felt immersed within the gameplay, while at other times I haven't. I had to step back from the game in order to take a thoughtful look at this situation, and I came to a couple of conclusions.

First of all, it can be difficult for Spore to completely immerse the player within the game because of the way the gameplay is set up. In Spore, you're constantly going back and forth between the various Creator windows and the game itself, which causes you to break slightly from the illusion that you are in the virtual world. However, at times I realized that these breaks from the game actually made me realize how immersed I was in the game. For instance, the other day I was playing in the space stage and after I had been playing for about 30 minutes I read a mission brief where a SETI tool was mentioned. As soon as I read this, my mind jolted out of the game and back into the real world where something like SETI is a reality. It was a little bizarre to realize how much I was actually focusing and getting into the game. However, after playing a game like The Sims 2 a while back, I didn't think I was being immersed into Spore on nearly the same level as The Sims. Thinking about it now, I know that I'm not experiencing the same immersion because it's not as believable to play a game simulating the evolution of an alien creature as it is to play through the eyes of a very human-like Sim. I would be able to play The Sims 2 for hours without even noticing anything happening in my real-world surroundings. I was part of the virtual world. There is that element of Spore that hooks you and draws you in, but just not on the same level as other simulation games. Still, I did get a kick out of noticing the little subtleties like SETI, the Drake Equation, and the notion of parsecs, all of which showed me that I was definitely experiencing some immersion.

The AI in Spore, although basic, helps to create an environment that immerses the player. In the blog I wrote in October about AI, I mentioned some of the ways in which Wright incorporated AI within the game. It's the little details that show the game reacting to the player style which help immerse the player a little further into the gameplay. This is one of those areas where I've read some criticism about the level of AI and the game's immersion. While the AI is basic, it's come a long way from when it started in the 1950s and it has a long way to go yet.

I think a big factor that plays into how immersed you become in a game depends on whether or not the game fits your particular style. For example, someone who despises strategy games might not become immersed in the civilization or space phases because this is where the game becomes focused on strategy. However, the cell and creature phases may be better for immersion because the game is more focused on simulation and the player is playing more directly through the eyes of the creature. I found myself being immersed in the cell and creature phases in a somewhat similar way that I experienced in The Sims 2 and I was immersed in the other three phases mainly because I was immersed in concentrating on attacking, defending and exploring. I was happy to see some basic principles of AI in the game because they did help, but I think it will be even more interesting to see the games of the future where AI and immersion will be all the more complete and responsive.

On a side note, I came across a video on the New York Times website about kids getting immersed into video games. It's pretty amazing to see how focused some of these kids get while playing and it made me think about the crazy facial expressions I probably make when I'm playing an intense video game. Here's the link:
http://video.nytimes.com/video/2008/11/21/magazine/1194833565213/immersion.html

Commentary on a Great Article About Spore, Revisiting Old Concepts

Recently, I’ve been doing some research for the paper I’m writing about how Spore can be used as an education/teaching tool. A friend gave me a copy of the September/October edition of Seed Magazine, which featured articles about Spore. After reading the articles and interviews, I can say that I’ve never read a more complete, relevant source of information about Spore. The main article, “The Creation Simulation,” was the most impressive because it talked about everything I’ve written about in these blogs and more. I wanted to go ahead and share it in a blog because it presents a lot of very intelligent ideas about Spore’s design, its criticisms, and why it can be used in education.

This article is set up in a great way because it starts off by giving a detailed description of how Will Wright and his design team went about incorporating science into the game. I’ve always known that Wright spent the last eight years meticulously researching for this game, but until I read this article, I had no idea just how much research and thought went into designing it. Overall, the science in Spore is centered on two main ideas. The first is a documentary film made in the ‘70s called Powers of Ten. I’ve never seen it, but it shows a zoom out from a man all the way to the universe. I can see why this was a good inspiration for Spore. The second is the Drake Equation. It’s a pretty complex equation that astrobiologist Frank Drake came up with to quantify the prevalence of intelligence in the galaxy. Will Wright took a lot of inspiration from this equation and even incorporated it into the Space Phase of Spore by name in one of the mission briefs. The article says that by looking at these inspirational scientific ideas, Spore started off as the ultimate science project. After this came the research. Wright handpicked his team members and had them read science books and research galactic dynamics, the origin of life, and sciences from sociology to astrobiology. I can’t even go into all the detail of this research because it’s so expansive. However, during design, some team members started worrying about how all this science would appeal to the gaming audience. So while Wright would look at the latest scientific novelties of the game and be extremely impressed, the “cute team” would express doubts. The “science team” had to eventually make compromises in order to make this hard science approachable. This came at a cost though. Some of the impressive scientific concepts had to be either removed or significantly dumbed-down to make the game more user-friendly. For example, Wright was determined to show that travelling faster than the speed of light is impossible, but this had to be overlooked in order to make the Space Phase more enjoyable. The best way the article described the gradual loss of complex science in the game is by saying that Spore went from being the ultimate science project to the ultimate game. The editing of science in Spore caused a lot of scientists who reviewed the game to express the belief that Spore was more about intelligent design and inaccurately used terms like “evolution” and “mutation.”

The article then shifts to show how the cute aspect of Spore is actually something that may have saved the game from being labeled as inaccurate. The main point that’s made here is that “the tiny planets and multilimbed creatures give out a very strong message that this isn’t quite our world, so why should it be playing by our rules?” (p. 51). The creatures in the game are different from what we see in real life, yet they can be seen as a basis for understanding the real thing. As I’ve mentioned in previous blogs, there is a potential to teach these broad scientific concepts through Spore. It doesn’t have to be scientifically flawless in order to introduce these principles to the audience. Wright elaborates on this idea in the article as well. Another good point made in the article is that because evolution is such a complex process, it’s difficult to visualize and experience because it takes place over such a long period of time. Spore gives us the opportunity to actually see this process taking place. Write emphasizes the fact that the big scientific message is to show that life evolves. Simple as that. I thought that this was a very important point to make and I also found great significance in another idea like this in the article. This idea is that Spore “may not teach or visualize scientific fact, but teaches scientific thinking itself” (p. 51). That is, concepts of observation, experimentation and questioning that come from playing a game like this.

There’s no way I can go in detail into all the other great points that are brought up in this magazine because there are so many. In the article I was just writing about above, the author goes into Sporn, AI, female gamers, intelligent design versus evolution, a comparison of the Sims, and the future of gaming. So, pretty much everything I’ve covered in my blog posts until now. If you are able to, I would highly recommend getting a copy of this magazine and reading it. There’s also an interview with Will Wright, a documentary of five video game projects that are expanding science, and other general articles about evolution and ecology. It’s a great reference for anyone who’s interested in the larger issues surrounding Spore.

After writing this blog, I was able to find the article I was talking about online, but I still suggest looking through the whole magazine if you’re able to. Here’s the link:

http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2008/09/the_creation_simulation.php

Creepy and Cute Parts Pack

Two days ago, EA released Spore's first add-on called the Spore Creepy and Cute Parts Pack. This pack includes 60 new creature parts, 48 new paint options and 24 new animations. Basically, you are now able to create a new, cute, cuddly creature, or one with angry, harsh features. This is another way that Spore has gone on to increase its already nearly limitless creativity. This is an exciting release, right?

well...

From my point-of-view, I can't say I'm too delighted. As you can tell from other blogs I've written, I believe that there are definitely some areas where Spore could improve. The main ones having to do with length and complexity. It is apparent that many other members of the gaming community have criticized Spore for these reasons as well. In fact, in most reviews I've read about Spore, even the negative ones tend to acknowledge the game for its creative scope and user freedom. Why then, is Spore's first add-on simply an addition to the creative aspect of the game? Why did Wright and EA choose not to address the problems that are receiving the highest criticism by gamers? When I first saw the trailer for the Creepy and Cute Parts Pack, I thought two things: This is unnecessary and this is cheesy. There is no way that anyone has reached their creative limit in Spore. There are SO many options for how to create a unique creature that I could keep busy for a long time. It doesn't make sense that Spore players would need an extra parts pack so soon after its release. As for the cheesy aspect, the trailer felt like watching some corny Disney cartoon. The new "cute" parts it showed had big, googly eyes and large rabbit teeth. However, this is what seems to sell. As I mentioned in an earlier blog about female gamers, big eyes can make the little girls squeal. A very depressing thought that came to mind after I watched this trailer had to do with the fact that Spore has now been officially distorted. During the development of this game, Will Wright spent eight years doing research and interviewing dozens of scientists in order to make Spore a strategy/simulation game that could break the norm and be used as a teaching tool. With this parts pack, it's easy to see where the emphasis of the game lies: The creatures. The strategy/simulation aspect of the game that is rooted in science and is the actual gameplay is not receiving the attention it needs. Does EA know that a large number of Spore's fans are carried over from The Sims crowd? Is this why they're emphasizing the creative, customization side of the game to a greater extent? This is what it seems like.

Overall, I'm sure that this parts pack will be entertaining for many people, but I feel that it was not well-timed and should have come after the technical aspects of the game were fixed. One final thing that absolutely blows my mind is the cost of this parts pack, which is $20. Seeing this pushed me over the edge a bit. It just seemed like a superficial way for EA to rake in a good deal more money. $20 seems ridiculous for some limbs, paint and the ability for your creature to do the moonwalk. I'll probably have to wait until someone hacks it and puts it online before I try it. Maybe by then the gameplay issues in Spore will be worked out too (probably not). Then we'll have a pretty perfect game universally (maybe).

Sporn: Take It or Leave It

Everyone had to know this was going to happen. How could it not? Within the first day of the Creature Creator release, it was already starting to spread across the web. I am of course talking about Sporn. In case you haven't heard, this is one of the first controversies that came up in regards to Spore. Sporn is a popular internet term combining Spore and porn. When the Creature Creator was released, Will Wright and his team were hyping the fact that you could make any kind of creature you had the creative ability to make. And they meant ANY creature. If you visit YouTube, any other video site, or type "Sporn" into a Google search, your monitor will be filled with walking testicles, breats, and "phallic fornication machines." Naturally, it was not Wright's intention to have Spore turn into a creative porn expo, but there's no way that the design team didn't see this coming. In fact, Wright designed the game knowing that he had to expect the unexpected. In an AP statement made in late August, Wright even acknowledged the fact that a lot of the Sporn creations online are actually pretty creative (view article). I have to admit, after looking at a couple of videos, I raised an eyebrow, but was pretty impressed by how detailed and creative some of these creations were.

The question is, is Sporn a serious issue or just harmless fun? From my perspective, it seems like it's just something fun that a group of immature people decided to do. I've read some reviews on this subject and there are a good number of people who believe that Sporn is a very serious issue that is just as bad as child pornography. This issue frequently comes up for debate when brought into the realm of video games. Second Life is a good example because in this MMO game, users are able to read cyberporn magazines or have sex online with other avatars. Again, you give the users control over the gameplay, you're going to see things like this. I don't believe Spore can be placed on the same level with Second Life though. In Spore, if you design your creature to look like a naked man/woman, this in no way changes how the creature behaves or interacts with other creatures. In Second Life, if you present yourself as an avatar with sex in mind, other players can respond to that in different ways (On a quick side note, I've never played Second Life so if I'm getting this wrong or if you can add more detail, please let me know). This is why Sporn doesn't seem so harmless. It's more about players getting a laugh out of the fact that they are able to create something that they haven't been able to do normally in other games. PS: There are a lot of immature folks out there. We all know what it was like to be a hormone-driven teenager, and for some, that mentality sticks for a long time. There was a CNN article I read about Sporn where a 37-year old "Spornmaster" was interviewed about why he created these obscene creatures. Response: "It came up simply as something silly and juvenile to do." The majority of comments I've read on blogs concerning Sporn have the same idea in mind.

Regardless of whether or not it is offensive or simply childish, EA has taken steps to make sure that people don't have to be exposed to this content. Players have the option of playing with no outside content, all outside content, or content from specifically-chosen users. Just as you have options for adjusting settings on your computer to filter out porn sites or other questionable material, you have this same ability in Spore. In other words, it's extremely easy to avoid seeing Sporn in the game or online, so if you are offended by it, you need to take steps to avoid seeing it. EA also makes sure to regulate incoming content and follow-up on complaints in order to remove some of the Sporn that comes in. Wright wants to make it clear that even though players can be creative and make whatever they want, but it shouldn't ruin the experience for others. Well said Mr. Wright.

How Spore Fits In with the Female Gaming Community

The Sims is now the largest PC game franchise in history and has attained this notoriety through one crucial element: the female gamer. I did a Google search for “female gamers and The Sims” and most of the sites I came across emphasized that women are one of the biggest reasons why The Sims became such a high-selling game. An article in the New Zealand Herald said it best: “Wright has done what many have tried and almost all have failed to do. He's crossed the boundaries of video game appeal and given female gamers something to get excited about, while still keeping the average 15- to 24-year-old male player happy” (view article). This is a trend that Wright is continuing with Spore.

When Wright compares Spore with The Sims, he usually refers to the creative aspects and possibility for artistic expression in referring to why his games draw a female audience. In a game like The Sims, there’s no shooting, strategy, or general skill involved in playing the game. It’s a virtual sandbox where you can create characters and have them interact with other characters. This makes the game very approachable to pretty much anyone. When you play Spore, you can clearly see that Wright has definitely made it a point to continue the theme of customization and creativity. It seems like women who wouldn't normally be interested in video games might find this a bit more entertaining. Spore is quite a bit different from The Sims though, because a big part of the game is having strategy and skills to get through each level. Because Spore has the ability to lure in that female crowd with the simulation element that was present in The Sims, perhaps this will give women the chance to get some new experience with the strategy game genre. It's interesting to think about how Spore has been accepted by women since its release. Looking at the sales figures of Spore since its debut in early September, it's been in the top two spots for top-selling PC games until just the other week when it dropped to number four. This shows that the response by the gaming community is definitely high and I would venture a guess that a good percentage of that crowd is made up of women who had a good experience with The Sims.

My only problem with this whole discussion is that there's now a sort of stereotype that goes with the female gamer. Because there's been such a dramatic response by women with the release of The Sims and Spore, it seems to portray this demographic as one that is only interested in more "feminine" games that don't require much action or skill. It seems like the design team for Spore had similar ideas. In one of my many readings about Spore, I came across an article on GameSpy.com where one of the game designers was talking about the design process of Spore and mentioned that as long as you put big eyes on anything, "the little girls squeal" (view article). It's sad, but across the board it's pretty true. I wanted to dispel this stereotype by pulling up a website about women and video games. I was sure that there would be discussions about how women are just as willing to play FPSs and MMORPGs as men. So, I went to the first site that came up, which was WomenGamers.com. When I looked under the Games tab to see what kind of games they were promoting, I felt a little sad inside. The stereotype was raging on this site with featured games such as Cooking Dash, Sally's Spa, Chuzzle Deluxe, and Magic Encyclopedia. I checked out the About Us page and saw that the point of the website was to cater to the interests and needs of women gamers. I can see that they're trying to get women interested in games, but I just couldn't get past the stereotypes. As a woman who enjoys playing FPSs with friends and many other games on my computer, it just made me a little disappointed to see that the women of this website thought that these would be the only games interesting to women. I suppose I can't argue with the sales figures for these games though. It's true that some women will never develop a liking for traditional "masculine" games. It's good that The Sims and Spore are at least paving the way for women to get into games that are also widely accepted by men. As I said earlier, hopefully Spore will serve to get even more women interested in the strategy genre as well as simulation.

Why Do Games Like Spore Satisfy Us?

I recently finished the fourth phase of Spore (Civilization Phase) and decided that it is thus far my favorite phase of the game. There are several reasons for this. One of the most important reasons has to do with the fact that I have always loved playing PC strategy games. I have added many games to my list of favorite strategy games over the years, but I have to say that my top two games would have to be Zeus: Master of Olympus and Black & White II. Now, I’m sure that most people are at least somewhat familiar with Black & White II because it was a pretty recent release. However, you may be a little less familiar with Zeus. It was released in 2000 and received pretty good reviews across the board. In the game, there are a series of quests (or levels) that increase in difficulty as you complete them. It’s a city building game where you create Greek city-states, manage an economy, invade neighboring nations, expand your empire, slay mythical creatures and fulfill the tasks of heroes and gods. I’ve been playing Zeus off and on for years and I still haven’t completed all of the quests, it’s that good. Even today, I still enjoy playing this little game and I’ll probably never be bored of it because I love the challenge that comes with it and thinking that has to be put into strategy games.

I believe that my enjoyment of other strategy games can be important when discussing why games like Spore are so easily accepted within the gaming community. The whole idea of control is a very important concept here. As individuals who have ideas about how a country should be run or the ideal way individuals should interact within society, strategy games give us the ability to put some of these ideas into action. There’s something extremely satisfying in being able to take a god-like role over a society of people (albeit a society of computer-generated 0s and 1s) and know that their destruction or survival relies on your click of the mouse button. The Civilization Phase of Spore is where I really started feeling this dominating sense of control. I found myself really concentrating as I was getting into this phase because there was a lot more going on that I needed to pay attention to. This was especially true whenever my city was being attacked or I was invading another city. Once I captured my first city, I couldn’t stop; I felt a strong sense of accomplishment in having accomplished my first goal and I wanted to dominate the rest of the map as soon as possible. I didn’t stop playing until the phase was over. Even though Spore isn’t nearly as challenging as the other strategy games I’ve played, it was still just as fun.

Will Wright’s reputation with the SimCity series also guaranteed a following of players who found satisfaction in these world-famous strategy games. Game designers obviously note that players enjoy this sense of power and control gained from manipulating other people’s lives and capitalize on that. This concept worked even better once Wright decided to remove the strategy element and focus solely on governing people’s lives with the simulation games of The Sims and The Sims 2. The world confirmed this by making The Sims the biggest-selling PC game franchise in history. Spore definitely works to continue this following by incorporating a complex level of simulation and customization into the game play as well. Combining simulation and strategy is hitting the best of both worlds in my case. It makes for a very enjoyable game.