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.

Spore: A Great Invention

I wanted to go ahead and write a blog about this because it really shows how big Spore truly is in the world. During a Google search for Spore topics, I came across Time's Best Inventions of 2008. It turns out that Spore made the list at number twenty. Some of the other inventions Spore preceded on this list included the following: the synthetic organism, bionic contact lenses, thin-film solar panels, the invisibility cloak, the 46th Mersenne Prime, Einstein's refrigerator, and a biomechanical energy harvester, among many others.

When I first saw this list, I was actually surprised. Spore is a greater invention than bionic contact lenses and a biomechanical energy harvester? I guess someone thinks the game is better than what a lot of the negative reviews out there have said. However, this leads to an interesting point. Even though Spore has received a fair amount of negative reviews within the gaming community, this in no way means that it is a failed game. It illustrates the contextual significance of video games. This idea has come up in class as part of our discussions about James Paul Gee's views on semiotic domains, video game literacy and contextual/social meaning. An important point he made that stuck out to me while reading his book had to do with the fact that you can receive far more meaning from something by looking at it in different contexts instead of reading/viewing/interacting with it in one set way (this was talked about throughout the first chapter of What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy). In the case of Spore, the average gamer will only receive one set of experiences involving playing the game as a set of goals to be met with a creative twist. However, when you place Spore in an instructional setting, it takes on a whole new meaning for teachers and students. It takes on another meaning still within the context of Time's Best Inventions of 2008 as a game displaying societal, scientific importance. This is why I think I was surprised when I first saw this Time article. It's very interesting to see how the meanings and significance of Spore change so dramatically from context to context. One group thinks it's a disaster, another appreciates it for its massive scope and revolutionary concept, yet another thinks it's an award-winning invention. Needless to say, there are most likely countless other meanings and experiences that have been gained from Spore by other individuals. I read Gee's book and understood the concepts he addressed, but it's always great to be able to find examples of these concepts in the real world.

Now, do I believe that Spore warrants spot number twenty on this list? I'm not completely sure. It's definitely an amazing piece of video game ingenuity, but it seems like some of the other inventions I mentioned above could have been ranked higher than Spore. Still, as I've mentioned in previous blogs, I believe Spore marks the beginning of the future of gaming. If you're interested in seeing the actual issue of Time with the best inventions, here's the link:

Time's Best Inventions of 2008

Can I really compare Spore with the Christmas truce of 1914? Let's take a look...

As I was browsing the web for topics for my upcoming blogs, I happened to cross a blog post with the title, "Anti Spore: Resisting EA's War on Creationism." As soon as I pulled up the page, I had two immediate experiences. The first was one of bizarre amazement and the other was an epiphany (more like a smack-myself-on-the-head realization). I'll get to explaining both of them in a minute, but first let me tell you a little about the blog.

A couple of months ago an unnamed blogger, who I shall refer to as Jim for continuity's sake, posted a blog about Spore because his son saw it in the store and wanted to get it. Thinking it was a simple E-rated game, Jim didn't see any harm in Spore until, that is, he realized what the game was teaching. As a christian (fundamentalist maybe?), Jim turned out to have quite a few problems with the fact that his son had such a close brush with evolution (Good save there, Jim. You may have just saved his young mind from all kinds of bad experiences). In his blog, Jim talks about a variety of subjects including "Sporno," Will Wright's evil character, "Evolutioniaryists," and christian values/creationism. Please feel free to read the details on the actual blog.

Now I'll come back to the main experiences I had with this blog. When I first started looking at this site, I was definitely surprised. I find it extremely interesting to listen to what the christian fundamentalist sect has to say on issues involving creationism versus evolution or other topics surrounding science and technology. It was especially significant in my case because we had just watched the documentary "Jesus Camp" in one of my other Honors classes. This film spent a great deal of time talking about the christian fundamentalist view on science and evolution. Since this subject was fresh on my mind, I couldn't pass by the opportunity to relate it to Spore. In any case, I reacted to this site as I had reacted to the film: I thought it was rather bizarre. But after a couple of minutes, I came to my second notable experience. I sat back for a moment and then realized that I actually had no reason to be surprised at all. In fact, I began to wonder why I hadn't seen a creationist reaction to Spore before this. Naturally, because Spore is based on the overall idea of evolution, any person with creationist ideals would be furious that children would have access to these scientific teachings. After thinking about this, I took a brief look around the web and saw quite a few anti-Spore websites, many of which talked about the particular blog post I'm mentioning here. We don't tend to hear about these arguments as much in the mainstream media, though, which is what makes a blog post like this cause a double-take once you come across it.

Sure, after reading the anti-Spore blog it's easy to laugh, raise an eyebrow, or mouth a few confused explitives at the monitor, but it's important to realize what a serious issue this is. I've read some of the comments Jim's been getting on his blog and some of them range from insults to death threats. You would think that Jim had killed somebody's child if you read the comments first before knowing what the blog was about. This really makes me want to reconsider what a serious game is. I mean, if people are willing to come to blows over the content conflicts, doesn't that make this game a little more serious than we originally thought? It's pretty disturbing to think about. It's funny, when I first played Spore the thought of creationism versus evolution never even crossed my mind. In fact, I was just excited to be playing a highly-anticipated new game. It seems a pity that we can't even set aside politics and religion for an hour to just play a game for the sake of play. One example I thought of (and this is a stretch from video games, but a good "play" example), is the Christmas truce of 1914. On that day, No-Man's Land practically turned into a playground where Brits and Germans got together, told jokes, juggled and had snowball fights. So, I mean come on, if two countries can take a break in the middle of WWI and have some fun together, why can't we play Spore and leave religion out of it? After we turn off the controller, then we can get back to hating everyone.

It just goes to show you that a game is never just a game; there's always politics and crisis spinning away every time you put the disc in the drive. It's a little sad that we've gotten to that point.



PS: There's been a whole other game in play with this post and the anti-Spore post. Click here to find out what. Also, click here and read the last "Bible" verse on the post. Classic baby.