While the latest video-game craze, “Spore,” touts the theory of evolution, taking gamers from a single-celled organism to complex civilizations, some say it also promotes God and intelligent design.
The traditionally contrasted themes are both represented in the game, according to game innovator Will Wright, the creator of the wildly popular "Sims" game.
"In Spore, basically, the theme of it is the complete view of life – from its early origins through evolution. But at every level, the player is creating something," Wright told ABC News.
In an interview with USA Today, meanwhile, Wright said the world created by players is "definitely not a creationist universe," but admitted the game had "aspects of intelligent design" because it puts the gamer in the "role of an intelligent designer."
Players start the game with the task of feeding a single-cellular amoeba that eventually lays an egg after it has consumed enough blob-like nutrients in its 2-D world. The egg allows gamers to edit their simple organism into a more complex creature - with seven legs, one eye and purple skin if they so desired.
At each egg stage, players can further "evolve" their creatures to have different body structures, physical capabilities and even bigger brains – all of which affect the creatures' abilities and personalities in the game. Through the creature, the players' objective is to spawn an offspring, run a city, dominate a planet and eventually, conquer other worlds and galaxies created by other players.
The intelligent design community has offered a somewhat positive view of the game, saying it supports their cause.
"Anyone can see that Spore is not really about evolution by the Darwinian mechanism; it’s about evolution by intelligent design," Casey Luskin with Discovery Institute, a leading intelligent design think tank, wrote on the group's affiliated blog Evolution News & View.
Proponents of intelligent design (I.D.) claim that life originated from an "intelligent designer" but accepts evolution as changes over time. This view contrasts with neo-Darwinian theory of evolution which purports that evolution is based on natural selection resulting from random mutations.
The game even refutes many Darwinist objections to I.D., argued Luskin, including one objection that says detecting design requires knowledge about the designer.
"Browsing on YouTube I can find hundreds if not thousands of Spore creatures that were designed by people whose real names, parents’ names, and tribes of origin I know nothing about. We don’t have to know who the designer is, or who spawned the designer, to be able to detect design," wrote Luskin.
Luskin said he knows two video-game developers affiliated with Spore that are "pro I.D.," according to a writer for Slate.com.
On the internet, many gamers – both Christian and non-Christian – have come to the defense of Spore from online critics who suggest the evolution theme is anti-Christian.
Benjamin Cormack, writing on the gaming Website GotGame.com suggested Spore may even help players understand, in a small way, the heart of God.
"As you guide and care for your creations, you may actually develop an almost parental sense of pride in watching them grow, kind of like children or sea monkeys," he wrote.
One Christian gamer by the name of "Crocodile_Key" wrote on the GameSpot.com forum that being Christian and loving Spore doesn't have to be mutually exclusive.
"I was raised a Christian, and will always be a Christian...This does not make me a hypocrite," wrote the gamer.
He acknowledged that while the game does contain evolution in its theme, he concluded its presentation is not offensive.
"It is a game designed to have fun and create with our imaginations."
After years of anticipation, Spore was released on Sept. 4 in Australia and the Nordic region and released the next day in Europe, Japan, South America and New Zealand. The game was released on Sept. 7 in North America and Asia Pacific territories.
In addition to being one of the most highly-anticipated games in recent years, Spore is also well on its way to becoming the most illegally-downloaded game ever, racking up more than 500,000 downloads on BitTorrent sites.
RSS
ozarkprof
"I'd be interested if you would post a link to Wright's statement that he believes that the universe originated in a Darwinian manner."
Um, what are you talking about ozark? Darwinins theory of biological evolution doesn't apply to cosmology or the origins of the Universe, nor does it apply to the origins of life, or gravity, despite what Ben Stein says. It deals with how life changes over time, what causes it and what we can learn from it.
It is a game people. Nothing in that game is a threat to the belief systems of Christian children or atheist children, regardless of what the creator(s) believe. Honestly, I believe it would generate a child's natural curiosity and questioning such as, "If I am the one making the 'design' of these creatures, who was behind the design of the real universe?" I lean more toward the group that says this game really promotes creationism, despite what the author intended. In the end, the intention of the game designer is moot; what is important is the actual influence the game has on our youth. In this respect, we should focus on banning games like 'Grand Theft Auto' which is one of the most horrible, real-life games I have ever seen. Players steal cars, kill people for money and have sex with hookers to gain life points and those examples barely scratch the surface of the disgusting depravity in those games.
"so I find it comical people try to twist his game into somehow supporting the antithesis of what he actually believes. "
Secualarists cannot take the chance that anything that might even question evolution be allowed to exist. If evolution isn't air tight then we might actually be accountable to God and Jesus may have actually died for our sins.
It's called the spirit of anti-Christ in the Bible. Ironic would be the word I would have used although comical does fit!
"I'd probably be best described as an atheist. I'm open to the idea that there is some creator somewhere." -Will Wright
His statement best describes an agnostic. An agnostic who doesn't understand the difference between agnosticism and atheism. The rest of his reply leads me to believe that he is not overly interested in the topic anyway.
Here's the link: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=211273 . He says that he's an atheist, and the furthest he'd go in imagining a creator is the same extent that he believes man would have the same ability to one day create "microverses". So it's an ID game as much as a wager that man will be your god's creating equal. No more, no less.
Additionally, don't talk down to people when mentioning something about the extinction of 99% of all species that ever lived - you show your ignorance. That is the scientific concensus of all the the most minute number of qualified scientists throughout the world. It's based on the fossil record, biology, geology, etc, all coming together with EVIDENCE to support it. You ridicule and remain skeptic of science for what it doesn't know, yet cling to blind faith with absolutely zero proof in THAT. Hold both to the same scrutiny or stay out of the discussion.
Matucon312:
I'd be interested if you would post a link to Wright's statement that he believes that the universe originated in a Darwinian manner. Even scientific ID people accept the demonstrated notion of evolution. The key is the difference in the assumption of the nature of origins between Neo-Darwinists and ID adherents.
I think that you would have a really hard time supporting your contention that "99% of all life that's (sic) ever existed on this planet is now extinct." Are you talking about mass or number of species? Wouldn't you have to know the total number that have existed to determine the percentage that have become extinct? Such estimates read nice, but make no sense from a scientific basis. It is like saying that x number of unknown species go extinct each year due to environmental damage (a statement that is commonly heard these days by biodiversity protection proponents). If they are unknown, then how do you know that they are gone?
A weakness in both of your arguments (matucon312 and argyle86) is that you see probabilities as deterministic, a notion that is not uncommon but still a misconception and poor understanding of probability and statistics.
In response to it being "the product of rolling a 1 on an almost infininte sided die and making it on the first try", we are not here on the "first try"; 99% of all life that's ever existed on this planet is now extinct. Additionally, even by conservative estimates of the potential number of planets in the universe, 1-billion to 1 odds would still give life on 1 billion planets.
It may be rare as far as we know now, but we're learning more and more about the universe and it's origins year by year. Let's not forget, some people also thought the idea of a round earth and helio-centric solar system was ridiculous.
Oh, and also, Will Wright distinctly and unambiguously believes in evolution, so I find it comical people try to twist his game into somehow supporting the antithesis of what he actually believes.
It's a game; therefore, not real; fiction; make believe.
Yup, just like intelligent design.
and all of existance in itself is just one great coincidence, life is the product of rolling a 1 on an almost infininte sided die and making it on the first try? THis is science!? The only logic behind such a scientific answer is that when it comes down to it scientists just DONT REALLY KNOW, so they will give us a cheap answer like this one. Theres just as much probability to (if not more likely) there being a creator and things working out in the universe the way it does, and more logical to go with that answer than to say gamble and roll an almost infinant sided die and hope to get a one on the first try.