Will Wright talks Spore, Leipzig, next-gen

Spore designer discusses his game's many possibilites, those handheld and console rumors, and letting computers do all the work for you; exclusive new screens inside!

By now, most gamers know about Spore, the next game from Will Wright, designer on SimCity and The Sims. The game will let players create a custom-built microscopic germ that can evolve into a macroscopic critter that can walk on land, build its own cities, and eventually discover the secret of space travel. One of the most intriguing features of this open-ended game is how it will focus on "procedurally generated content"--that is, content that's created on the fly by the game in response to a few key decisions that players make, such as how they make their creatures look, walk, eat, and fight.

Beam me up, Scotty! There's no intelligent life down here!

Spore is currently confirmed for release only on the PC, though as Wright explains, the computer game could be just the beginning. For more information on the game, consult our previous coverage.

GameSpot: Give us a brief update on the development of Spore. What aspects of the game is the team working on at the moment?

Will Wright: We've basically got all the levels playable at this point, so we have a lot of tuning ahead of us, because we've finally integrated all the different styles of [gameplay]. At this point, it's basically iterating on the gameplay, doing a lot of tuning, finishing up some of the [art] assets, interface, design...stuff like that. So, in some sense, we're in the home stretch. Although the home stretch is pretty long nowadays (laughs).

GS: How big is the team at present? How much of the team is working on art, programming, artificial intelligence, design, and other areas?

WW: Our team is probably around 80 people right now. We have a disproportionately large number of programmers on this team and a small number of artists, because of all the procedural content. So, probably 40 percent of the team is programmers, which is pretty high. The art staff is probably about a third of the size of [the art staff assigned to] a typical EA game. And all our artists are very technical as well, so they're doing a lot of the programming and scripting.

GS: We understand that the game will be going on tour in Germany for the Games Convention later this month. What's being shown there?

WW: We're going to be at Leipzig. We'll have [Spore] on the floor so that people can actually come up and experiment with it. We'll be doing demos. [Editor's note: According to EA, Wright himself will be present on the floor, giving demonstrations in person.]

GS: And the creature creator editing tools will be playable by the public, too?

WW: I think that's the plan, yeah. There are other parts that we haven't decided on. The tricky thing whenever you do a show like this is: How much time do you spend getting ready? E3 was always a one-month distraction as we were trying to get together our presentation, and that takes away from your development timeline. So, we're going to have to be careful to manage that and make sure that we don't do too much throwaway work for a particular show or presentation.

E3 is turning into some kind of "industry insider" thing. So, Leipzig might become the big show that we attend every year. Who knows.

GS: Much of the game is based on procedural content. Tell us about how the game takes user input and turns it into, for instance, animation for creatures based on their bodies.

WW: It's pretty technical--it happens at different levels. First, you're sculpting the outer form, using the torso, which is like clay, then the parts that you stick on[to the torso]. But even the parts have a lot of "morphability"; you can stretch and bend them in all sorts of interesting directions. And from that, we generate a mesh and a skeleton. Next up is painting; we use procedural textures and layers to make a lot of different combinations, but most of these things get compressed to a very high degree so we can send them over the Net cheaply. And then, the last level is the animation, which is the hardest.

We found that the state of research in digital animation was fairly limited and almost exclusively based around human animation. The first people I hired on the team were actually specialists in that field to crack that problem, and because we didn't know what players would make--whether [created creatures] would have seven legs, or tentacles, or whatnot, so we had to approach the problem on a more fundamental level than people were approaching it with human character animation, where you know you have a biped that's roughly five or six feet tall.

GS: How did the editor end up being something that average players could understand and use?

WW: The other problem we faced was: How could we make the easiest system for players to edit and create their creatures? The real hard part there, for the most part, turned out to be figuring out what Z-depth the player was inferring. At the highest level, what we're trying to do is build a 3D editing system that an average Sims player can use, right? Something that has roughly the power of Maya, but that a casual gamer can approach.

[After testing,] we were able to go back and say, "I think we should infer from this, or from this part, or from the way they turned the camera in this direction," so we added a lot of subtle cues to help the computer roughly guess what players were thinking while they were moving things around.

GS: How does the game use procedural content to create entire ecosystems?

WW: Because it's procedural, we can reduce what players do to a fairly small number of parameters, so your creature is, maybe 3 megabytes in size, and you can compress that down to 3 kilobytes. Which means that we can send it over the Net very cheaply. We also store a huge database on [players'] local hard drives, or cache them very cheaply as well. So, when players make these creatures, we're actually sucking [the creatures] up onto our server and using them to repopulate everyone else's world.

You've also got stats associated with them, so I can look at a creature and say, "oh, it's this fast, and this strong, and it eats meat." Not just creatures, but other things as well: "This tank is this fast, and has this much offense, and this much defense." So, these things are sorted based on their properties, and that's how we use them to fill out other players' worlds--finding a balance of creatures, where some of them are above your capabilities and some are below, so you might have things that are coming after you and some things you can eat. And in some sense, it's a form of dynamic difficulty adjustment. The game tries to make a challenging environment unique to where you are.

And we do that with different things, too. Sometimes [objects] are sent to you to match your abilities and skill level; other times, they're sent to you to match your aesthetics. [The game] is trying to fill out your world with things of a similar aesthetic to the things you choose or design. When you're designing a city, for instance, and you want to build a factory, [the game] opens a screen full of factories which other players have designed that you can shop for. And again, [the game is] trying to populate your shopping catalog with styles that are similar to the ones [the game] has seen you choose in the past. So, if I start choosing [objects] that look, you know, European-style, or Dr. Seuss-style, or Pixar-style, the game will start populating my shopping catalog with things of that style. So in some sense, [the game is] learning your aesthetic very much like the way Amazon.com's recommendations system does.

GS: Tell us about how the game will let players sort and rate different kinds of content that they and other people have created.

WW: We're going to have a couple different systems for that. One system is going to look at how popular content is. For instance, when we open a shopping catalog for buildings, we can see how often people choose various buildings. So, in that sense, we're getting a popularity rating automatically. And if you design a piece of content like a creature or a building, you'll be able to get a report back about how popular it is amongst all the other players, and how it's being used by other players, as well. That's what we're calling our "metaverse report." So there's going to be kind of a meta-competition amongst the players to make the coolest creatures and the most popular buildings or vehicles.

There's that, and then, of course, like we do on the Sims Web site where players have the ability to flag content as being inappropriate, we'll have those types of controls as well.

GS: We saw at E3 that Spore's creatures may not live just in the game or in editors, since the game catalogs them using an interface that looks a lot like a collectible card game...

WW: We're looking at how we can leverage all the stuff in the game and bring it outside. So we're exploring all those things right now; we're not really announcing any of it yet. But I think the amount of ownership that people feel over this content they create is amazing--just in testing, watching people create a creature, how proud they are of it, and how much they want to bring other people to the screen and show it off to them.

GS: What are your general thoughts on next-generation game consoles and handhelds?

WW: We were kind of assuming that the next-gen consoles would all be superpowerful, but now we're looking at how expensive the Sony [PlayStation 3] is, trying to leverage the value of Blu-ray; we look at how cheap the Nintendo Wii is going to be and its innovative controller; we're looking at Microsoft's early mover advantage and its focus on network games. We're actually seeing the manufacturers going off in their own directions, which is interesting. And at the same time, we're seeing that handhelds are very different from each other; they appeal to very different groups with very different styles of gameplay. So, I think we're seeing a kind of explosion of gaming, where games are going out to all these different platforms, with all these different styles, and we're starting to see lighter, more-innovative, more-casual games on some of these lower-end platforms.

GS: Do you see a home for Spore on any of the new consoles or handhelds in the near future, or is it too early to say? What can you confirm for us at this time?

WW: We're certainly looking at [Spore] as a franchise. The PC [version of the game], for me, is the tip of the iceberg. You can imagine Spore in a lot of different variants, because we have all these different types of gameplay. We can pull out individual levels; we can use the editors in totally different ways; and so on. I can easily imagine Spore on any conceivable platform, and that's something that we've definitely been looking into. We're not announcing anything yet, but it's pretty obvious that I want Spore to take over the world (laughs).

GS: Then what we can confirm is that Spore is a game with the potential to expand somewhere else, but right now, it's only for the PC.

WW: Yeah, but my ambition is for it to become a major franchise. You can take that for what it's worth.

GS: So the idea is that this is intended to be a franchise that goes beyond being a computer game? Where else will it go?

WW: I think [Spore] definitely wants to go beyond being a computer game. I think the essence of Spore as a franchise is creativity. So, we have these editors with which players will be making huge amounts of content, and the question is: How can we leverage that content into other game styles, maybe other platforms, and other experiences? I think that's what will distinguish Spore as a franchise from a lot of the other games out there--it's not totally dependent on peer-to-peer, head-to-head gaming. That's why I don't feel Spore is as constrained to its original platform.

GS: We understand that you've been focused primarily on Spore and you no longer work on The Sims on a day-to-day basis. But while we've got you here, could you share your thoughts with us on the Sims franchise?

WW: I think The Sims struck a chord with a lot of people, a lot of nongamers. It was interesting watching how a lot of players didn't really convert into "gamers," even though for a lot of them, The Sims was the first game they'd ever played. So, I think it's very important that we don't lose the accessibility that brought the core group into The Sims...but also to push things into more of this creativity direction, because I think that where The Sims really struck a chord was how players felt like they were authors, or directors.

My answers on The Sims are almost of a speculative nature--this is really what I'd like to see in the game, but it doesn't necessarily mean that [the Sims development team] is actually working on it.

GS: Finally, we've heard a few different dates get tossed around for the release of Spore. When is the game scheduled to launch?

WW: We're saying the second half of next year [2007] for now.

GS: Thanks, Will.

GS: How did the editor end up being something that average players could actually understand and use?

WW: The other problem we faced was: How could we make the easiest system for players to edit and create their creatures? The real hard part there, for the most part, turned out to be figuring out what Z-depth the player was inferring. At the highest level, what we're trying to do is build a 3D editing system that an average Sims player can use, right? Something that has roughly the power of Maya, but that a casual gamer can approach.

[After testing,] we were able to go back and say, "I think we should infer from this, or from this part, or from the way they turned the camera in this direction," so we added a lot of subtle cues to help the computer roughly guess what players were thinking while they were moving things around.

GS: How does the game use procedural content to create entire ecosystems?

WW: Because it's procedural, we can reduce what players do to a fairly small number of parameters, so your creature is, maybe 3 megabytes in size, and you can compress that down to 3 kilobytes. Which means that we can send it over the 'Net very cheaply. We also store a huge database on [players'] local hard drives, or cache them very cheaply as well. So, when players make these creatures, we're actually sucking [the creatures] up onto our server and using them to repopulate everyone else's world.

You've also got stats associated with them, so I can look at a creature and say, "oh, it's this fast, and this strong, and it eats meat." Not just creatures, but other things as well: "This tank is this fast, and has this much offense, and this much defense." So, these things are sorted based on their properties, and that's how we use them to fill out other players' worlds...finding a balance of creatures, where some of them are above your capabilities and some are below, so you might have things that are coming after you, and some things you can eat. And in some sense, it's a form of dynamic difficulty adjustment...the game tries to make a challenging environment unique to where you are.

And we do that with different things, too. Sometimes [objects] are sent to you to match your abilities and skill level; other times, they're sent to you to match your aesthetics. [The game] is trying to fill out your world with things of a similar aesthetic to the things you choose or design. When you're designing a city, for instance, and you want to build a factory, [the game] opens a screen full of factories which other players have designed that you can shop for. And again, [the game is] trying to populate your shopping catalog with styles that are similar to the ones [the game] has seen you choose in the past. So, if I start choosing [objects] that look, you know, European-style, or Dr. Seuss-style, or Pixar-style, the game will start populating my shopping catalog with things of that style. So in some sense, [the game is] learning your aesthetic very much like the way Amazon.com's recommendations system does.

GS: Tell us about how the game will let players sort and rate different kinds of content that they and other people have created.

WW: We're going to have a couple different systems for that. One system is going to look at how popular content is. For instance, when we open a shopping catalog for buildings, we can see how often people choose various buildings. So, in that sense, we're getting a popularity rating automatically. And if you design a piece of content like a creature or a building, you'll be able to get a report back about how popular it is amongst all the other players, and how it's being used by other players, as well. That's what we're calling our "metaverse report." So there's going to be kind of a meta-competition amongst the players to make the coolest creatures and the most popular buildings or vehicles.

There's that, and then, of course, like we do on the Sims Web site where players have the ability to flag content as being inappropriate--we'll have those types of controls as well.

GS: We saw at E3 that Spore's creatures may not just live in the game or in editors, since the game catalogs them using an interface that looks a lot like a collectible card game...

WW: We're looking at how we can leverage all the stuff in the game and bring it outside. So we're exploring all those things right now; we're not really announcing any of it yet. But I think the amount of ownership that people feel over this content they create is amazing--just in testing, watching people create a creature, how proud they are of it, and how much they want to bring other people to the screen and show it off to them.

GS: What are your general thoughts on next-generation game consoles and handhelds?

WW: We were kind of assuming that the next-gen consoles would all be super-powerful, but now we're looking at how expensive the Sony [PlayStation 3] is, trying to leverage the value of Blu-Ray; we look at how cheap the Nintendo Wii is going to be and its innovative controller; we're looking at Microsoft's early mover advantage and its focus on network games. We're actually seeing the manufacturers going off in their own directions, which is interesting. And at the same time, we're seeing that handhelds are very different from each other; they appeal to very different groups with very different styles of gameplay. So, I think we're seeing a kind of explosion of gaming, where games are going out to all these different platforms, with all these different styles, and we're starting to see lighter, more-innovative, more-casual games on some of these lower-end platforms.

GS: Do you see a home for Spore on any of the new consoles or handhelds in the near future, or is it too early to say? What can you confirm for us at this time?

WW: We're certainly looking at [Spore] as a franchise. The PC [version of the game], for me, is the tip of the iceberg. You can imagine Spore in a lot of different variants, because we have all these different types of gameplay. We can pull out individual levels; we can use the editors in totally different ways; and so on. I can easily imagine Spore on any conceivable platform, and that's something that we've definitely been looking into. We're not announcing anything yet, but it's pretty obvious that I want Spore to take over the world (laughs).

GS: Then what we can confirm is that Spore is a game with the potential to expand somewhere else...but right now, it's only for the PC.

WW: Yeah...but my ambition is for it to become a major franchise. You can take that for what it's worth.

GS: So is the idea that this is intended to be a franchise that goes beyond being a computer game? Where else will it go?

WW: I think [Spore] definitely wants to go beyond being a computer game. I think the essence of Spore as a franchise is creativity. So, we have these editors with which players will be making huge amounts of content, and the question is: How can we leverage that content into other game styles, maybe other platforms, and other experiences? I think that's what will distinguish Spore as a franchise from a lot of the other games out there--it's not totally dependent on peer-to-peer, head-to-head gaming. That's why I don't feel Spore is as constrained to its original platform.

GS: We understand that you've been focused primarily on Spore and you no longer work on The Sims on a day-to-day basis. But while we've got you here, could you share your thoughts with us on The Sims franchise?

WW: I think The Sims struck a chord with a lot of people; a lot of non-gamers. It was interesting watching how a lot of players didn't really convert into "gamers," even though for a lot of them, The Sims was the first game they'd ever played. So, I think it's very important that we don't lose the accessibility that brought the core group into The Sims...but also to push things into more of this creativity direction, because I think that where The Sims really struck a chord was how players felt like they were authors, or directors.

My answers on The Sims are almost of a speculative nature--this is really what I'd like to see in the game, but it doesn't necessarily mean that [the Sims development team] is actually working on it.

GS: Finally, we've heard a few different dates get tossed around for the release of Spore. When is the game scheduled to launch?

WW: We're saying the second half of next year [2007] for now.

GS: Thanks, Will.

Written By

Want the latest news about Spore?

Spore

Spore

Follow

Discussion

298 comments
monkeyb412
monkeyb412

Cheese is right but god is real and big bang or darwinisim is Bull SH** HEHEHEaha Arent I cute Say yes or i kill you and do your dead bodys

ss_cheese_it
ss_cheese_it

ALL OF YOU! Shut up! You people are everywhere, it's like all you do is go from site to site talking about what you believe in is right because you say it is, just shut up and eat your damn soup.

lord-of-gamers
lord-of-gamers

wow i never thought i would see this in the comments rofl - the classic debate - the one true debate lmao SIENCE Vs. RELIGION i mean wow on gamespot? makes me laugh i mean come on should it really be here? dont get me wrong i believe somewhat but there is a limit.... i like the theory behind i day for god is 2 billion universe years thats good and makes sense... like we wait another 0.3 billion years and there will be peace on earth and all that cause it will be complete :P looks like a really fun game this though - not what i would normaly go for but hey i think i might.... have fun rofl just like to say too - did you know that apparently, if one person were to know the exact position and trajectory, speed and all that of every single sub atomic particle of matter in the entire universe. that person would be able to predict into the future about 10 minutes? how cool would that be?

UberZano
UberZano

THERE IS NO GOD , to you people that have posted alot of false stuff here about god teory , the nerest god we can come to is Alien,s noting else.. this game will be fun :) will be the game of the year .

UberZano
UberZano

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

UberZano
UberZano

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

darkton
darkton

science nerd God created us, you can beleive in what ever you want. but when you die i hope you've done good things or no heaven for you. (FYI i don't beileve in hell . your spirt will wonder earth forever)

erdrickgr
erdrickgr

Aren't there unions for these kinds of debates? ;)

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

You dont believe me? Fine, not my problem, but im just saying on my life so far.

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

hey, the Indians believe in a great flood, so do the catholics, so do the Native Americans, so do the chines, and so on. many of these cultures believed in it long before they ever met each other, all i know is its odd, but as i said, in Iraq i saw both enemies and friends die and every time you could see something leave through their eyes, it actually gave me the creeps, but its true.

MatchLegacy
MatchLegacy

Don't go assuming everything you read is true. What science cannot explain is simply what people have not been able to apply science to. "Science" means "the study of", in a sense. Anything, really, can be a "science". The problem with science is that you need hard evidence to prove things with it (something that religion commonly lacks). Thus, the issue with existence and God and whatnot cannot (yet) be determined by science due to the un-obtained evidence required. Perhaps, upon studying physics patterns and possibly an overlaying key to the reason behind all matter existing as such, we might be able to tie together that of science and religion. All in all, there's always going to be a "what if... " with religion and science. There's always that one guy that, instead of accepting the fact that your optic sensory system "blanks out" before you die and you drop into a subconscious (dreamlike) state before dying, will still come back from a near-death experience and say he "saw the light at the end of the tunnel". People just believe and listen to what they WANT to believe and listen to. They take in info that vaguely supports their ideology, and never sees both ends of the spectrum. Arguing in a medium which is accessible to nearly every person on the planet with a computer, is futile. There are an unsurmountable number of minds to shift to see reason for anything to be gained from a forum or chat.

gmangw
gmangw

"science explains alot yes, but theres plenty of things science can't. like why every religion in the world believes a great flood happened some 3 thosand years ago, or why we are the only planet in our known universe to be able to support life, while other planets much like our own don't." there are a fair number of things science can't explain... so why did you pick A: something untrue and misleading, and B: something it CAN explain, to use as examples? P.S. there's this nifty button under the submit button called 'check spelling.' If only there was one called 'check fuzzy religious math.'

MatchLegacy
MatchLegacy

I can name a certain human brain that doesn't understand much of anything. I'll give you a hint: it's not the one writing this comment.

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

yep indeed. man may not have been a unified species but the various cave wall drawings say they believed somthing happens after death. and if you've ever seen some one die, which i have in iraq, u can see somthing leaving their eyes as they come to rest, its a mystery indeed, but i believe after seeing such that it is indeed the spirit, and i do believe in evolution as well as billions of years the univers existing. funy though, how top scientist believe the universe is in the area of 13.7 billion years old, even funnier is the fact that it nearly equals 14- a factor of seven, the amount of days the universe was made in. so just how long is a day in heaven, well, God only knows, i day in heaven could be 2 billion years. The human brain dosn't understand this, and perhapse it wasn't ment to.

MatchLegacy
MatchLegacy

"how could 1 million years of man believing in something beond be wrong?" Yea... about that. Man hasn't been around for any longer than 300,000 years. The earliest recorded religion dates back only a few thousand years BC. I do believe in a God, for future reference. Yet my opinion rests on that of mathematical inevitability. A numerical balance whereas all things exist only due to the fact that any other result simply fails. A completion of a certain secret of perfection which causes everything to harmonize mathematically. By the very structure of such a system, life is inevitable as is every fine detail until you reach the point where we are in the universe. In Pi, the 42nd value after the decimal is 9. Why is it 9? Because it cannot be anything else other than 9 ... or the ability for Pi to continue endlessly is destroyed. There's no other reason for its placement other than to complete a perfect notion, yet created from imperfection itself. 9 is not perfect. It's the system it generates that is flawless. As the overall flow of reality is, in a sense, perfection made from so many imperfections. Everyone's perspective revolves around the imperfections they see, but no one really grasps the true meaning behind why we're here. Perhaps we're just here because it's the only way it CAN be for the system not to fail. Exactly HOW God plays a role in all of this, is the mystery. But I can tell you right now he didn't craft every piece of matter in the universe on precisely the 168th hour (be it coincidentally a week's time, which has been changed numerous times throughout history) and man was most definitely not (in human physical form, at least) the first creature on the planet. I guess I could really keep yammering on about this and elaborate on that, but then I remember I'm arguing a point to someone who's name is all in caps.

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

well, if u can explain y millions of molecules came together and how all of the sudden a cell read them as a blue print fine by me(and i know molecules that have attraction to another come together automaticly, but the way dna comes together is interestingly sentient ). if you dont believe in a God, its not my fault you dont see the obvious, how could 1 million years of man believing in something beond be wrong? science explains alot yes, but theres plenty of things science can't. like why every religion in the world believes a great flood happened some 3 thosand years ago, or why we are the only planet in our known universe to be able to support life, while other planets much like our own don't. but dna is so mind bogeling and complecated, but at the same time its so easy that i believe dna is much like computer code, it was made by some one or something with a brain. are you going to say millions of 1's and 0's came together and all of the sudden the computer read it?

MatchLegacy
MatchLegacy

What a great way of thinking! (scarcasm) "Oh, it's really complicated, so it MUST be made by a higher being! I dont really have time to come up with an educated reason, so lets make it easy and have the notion of a Deity be the reason to everything that gives me a headache." Speaking of dope: I'm pretty sure someone in the post below me was doing it while they were typing. There are enough spelling errors to safely consider it a new language since it certainly isn't English.

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

well in all look at it this way, dna is so complex and interesting, it obviosly was made by God, any dope who believe a gazilion molecules came together by chance and possibility is a dope indeed. and for the dopes who think dna changes, ur stupid, the dna your born with is the dna you die with, unless you survive a nucleur holocaust. its when egg and sperm meet is when the 2 different dna strands meet and cause differences, and once in a while a mutation that causes a select few to be better then others. if you looked at evolution down to the molecule, you could say that every race is a different species cause of our skills and fails( white people can swim and hunt small animals cause their geneticly built for were the race was created-europe. but black people are geneticly built for deserts, so they can't swim but sure can tackle bigger animals in the desert. white people weren't built to run very far cause in cave man days they hunted near the area so they can't run that great, but black people originated in the plaines of africa so they run exelent and catch better too.) the only thing that makes us all a species is the ability to mate with each other.

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

people are idiots, ur dna dont change instanly when u cut urself a bunch of times, mabey a gazilion years in the future an egg and sperm combine and their dna reads "heal this fast" so that you heal instantly, but dna dont change in your life time...unless your hit with a nuke.

MatchLegacy
MatchLegacy

I just managed to stumble across this blurb of incoherant vomit someone (Reader81) wrote earlier: "If my hand got lot of cut , then why my hand isn't evolve to immune cut? Why did snake or Sharks dont changed in million year? I guess our DNA want us to die. " Holy... sh... [bleep]. I almost dont want to rip on these kinds of people because it's too easy. I...don't even know how to respond to this. Our DNA want us to die? All your base are belong to us? What? I used to think elementary school was a waste of time for people. Man, how you've proven me wrong Reader81. Rip of the Day: "so now look at evelution, doesnt it seem just as completely insane!? Whales going from sea, land, than, back to sea? why? i find it hard to picture a whale with feet....." - Sgwee "i love animals but face reality we have something they dont, a consiounce we have more choices in life that they dont have," - Sgwee Dont count your stones before you get beat with them, Sgwee. I doubt the animal kingdom is that far off from your bright level of understanding.

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

MatchLegacy
MatchLegacy

Wow. All I have to say is wow. Not because of the game... I mean, yes it's amazing. But what I'm "wowing" over is some of your stupidity really starting to shine, people. "Holes in evolutionary theory?" Hah.. more like gaps in your knowledge base. So far, the only people who even attempted to criticize evolution are those whom have absolutely NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. I'd go as far to agree with them that swimming for a long time wont turn you into a fish. T_T I pray someday that society invents an all-encompassing stupidity test so certain people are required to wear attire identifying them as sub-human. Many people argue "but how would you be able to distinguish the fine line between intelligence and dumb people with a standardized test? I mean, look at Einstein!!oneone!111 LOLZ!".... trust me. You'll know. Here are a few points you might want to consider before posting publicly: 1.) Get the facts before talking about "God's viewpoint" on evolution. 2.) Stop making more out of this than any other game produced with skewed morals and religious issues. 3.) NO one cares what you think. We're still going to buy the game anyway. 4.) Will Wright probably doesnt want people as dumb as you purchasing their software and populating the Spore world with stupid-looking creatures :) With that said... Sgwee, if you could liquify your intelligence into physical matter, you wouldnt be able to fill a thimble. Can you not be any more wrong? How did you survive childhood with a mindset like that? Try taking a science class before you open your mouth again. On a large scale of intelligence: there are some stupid people in this world, then come rocks, and then you fall into place somewhere below that. Perhaps some of the idiots here that boast about the "improbability" of evolution will have the first-hand pleasure of experiencing how evolution works when they're all killed off (e.g. murdered) by predators (e.g. us) because of their unadaptable abilities (e.g. thinking). Ice burn! I hope it hurts. Good luck getting a job or, for that matter, remembering to breathe. For a bit of my own 2 cents: try remembering when the bible was created. It was made to make simple people understand unimaginable concepts. Apply it using symbolism and merge it with science and evolution, and you'll easily be able to weed out the nonsense. If given some thought (and if you know how to think for yourself) you might be able to see things outside of your 1-dimensional ideology.

filodelallata
filodelallata

Yeah! I was there yesterday seen the spore video and Will wright just in front of me, i even get signed the Sims 2 booklet, i love the Leipzig convention and Spore looks awesome!

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

How come when ever i make a post it is always so good that it shuts everyone up and and no one knows how to respond to equal its strength, hmm interesting... But im getting this game and making my raptor soldiers. But for now, yey! last post!

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

as an old relative of mine would say, " i guess i just ejamakated(educated) you today!"

ROBERTBOBBY91
ROBERTBOBBY91

i cant believe u nerds still argue over evolution, well im a mix, i believe in evolution, however i believe God influences it when need be. as to my proof of it? a bunch of flies get sprayed with ddt, some survive, most dont. the ones that survive had dna to create a protection from the bug killer, hence it replaces the dead population and evolves as a species that has adapted to ddt, simple explanation of evolution. another is if 2 people with six fingers hypotheticly had children with all six fingers, and they all had children with six fingers, thats a new human species. if u think evolution is just a change out of no were to adapt, ur retarded, its dna random mutations that once in a while help things to survive. look at your skin closly and if you look , you'll see that it looks alot like reptile skin only smooth and with hair, perhapse a random mutation long ago made a reptile get born with soft skin and became a mamal. however i maintain my belief that God influences it, and thats the words of the pope himself !

pabster212
pabster212

please my friends stop this useless fighting we can all beleave what we belive in and still live in harmony please do not fight the only thing that matters is that you belive in what it is you think started us thats it

Reader81
Reader81

If my hand got lot of cut , then why my hand isn't evolve to immune cut? Why did snake or Sharks dont changed in million year? I guess our DNA want us to die.

boku14
boku14

3 cheers for the grammatically incongruent!! Hiq hip HoRay hip Hig hOOrey hiy hup whoRaaY lol.

Yamikage
Yamikage

"I personally welcome a little intelligent debate on the Gamespot forum. Link this page and send it to your parents and Joe Lieberman as proof that videogames aren't destroying your mind and turning you into a violent, bloodthirsty zombie." - illkillyou I like intelligent debate as well. The problem is that the debate here isn't very intelligent. All I see is a bunch of grammatically incongruent posts filled with numerous spelling errors by people who think that they actually have an idea of what they're talking about when it comes to the incredibly complex theory of evolution, when in reality they don't know jack. Face it, folks; you guys have no idea what you are talking about. Acknowledge your own ignorance, forget about evolution and focus more on this incredibly awesome game. Seriously, starting out as a single celled organism and evolving up to the point where you can travel around the galaxy, terraforming, populating and/or destroying entire planets/solar systems with your own personal UFO = ownage. Enjoying a wide variety of gameplay types and creating massive amounts of your own content, which can be shared with other people for them to use or to populate their world = ownage. Everything about this game = ownage. I can't wait.

vlad299
vlad299

Looks like awesome game, definately getting it. About evolution thing: I think that got created the universe, and all the stars became stars from the gas clouds, that compressed to such high density they ignited. Planets were made from random rocks coming together. The first microbes were there because ideal conditions were met. About why are monkey still here: Monkeys and Apes are just a different type of human. When Human ancestors went north, be it because of food, or curiosity, or whatnot, the climate became harshes. No longer could we rely on our sheer strength to defend ourselfs, and find food. So one day some smartass decided that it would be much easier to throw rocks at the prey then just run up to it and beat it to death with fists. Eventually they came up with tools and such. When they went north there was much less UV radiation, and there became no need for pigments in the body. While all that happened The apes and primitive humans that remained in africa, and were content to just live the same day to day cicle of gethering food and surving. More on Evolution: If there was a village in the on a small island oin the middle of nowhere, and everyday they went out to catch fish, they might eventually come to use nets. Alternatively If everyday they had to dive deep to catch some fish, Eventually their lung capacity would increase. some they might be able to spend hours underwater (ala Whales). After a while there would be less need to hawe legs, so they might come up with something more eficent, after some time there would be no need to have houses on the island, so they would move into the ocean. That's sort of a whale thing. Also Whales have a remenescent leg bone in their body. It serves no purpose and isn't attached to anything. So god made the universe which made the Stars which made the planets which made the life which made the humans. So god made humans.

sgwee
sgwee

man you evelution theorists never give up trying to defend your peice of crap ideas that have more holes in them than swiss cheese at least god has more compassion than your "mother earth" god knows what he's doing, you just fear acknowleding at the idea of there actually being someone better than you, grow up.... alright, look at it this way, most of us here will laugh at scientologists and their wacky beliefs, so now look at evelution, doesnt it seem just as completely insane!? Whales going from sea, land, than, back to sea? why? i find it hard to picture a whale with feet.....also, why is it humans who are the "smartest" i mean sharks have lived for millions of years to, yet they still choose to live their lives just to eat, i believe that god favors us more than animals, its in the bible in genesis where he puts us at the lead before animals doesnt it seem sick to compare us to these animals? i love animals but face reality we have something they dont, a consiounce we have more choices in life that they dont have, why out of all the creatures are we special, able to overcome and enjoy life unlike things such as ants who just live their life as drones as i said earlier, if your going to veiw another human as just another animal, doesnt that just make you more prone to hurt them and have no remorse?

boku14
boku14

ok, im going to go fishing more. so I could turn into a fish. *goes fishing*

Don_Quigleone
Don_Quigleone

Ah the theory of evolution, it is an elegant theory to be sure but to answer boku14, who clearly doesn't know the ins and outs of it... With regard to people turning into fish it would happen... but over a really long time(i mean really) and if a creature is sufficiently advanced it might never happened, but then again whales used to be fish. then adapted to land, then to the sea again, the thing is is that if people did go to sea we'd likely all die off due to the new living conditions being too different from our original one, however if you say had a community that could only subsist on fish, you might have one person who was better at catching fish, be it having greater agility, intelligence, or maybe webbed feet (and there are many people who are born with webbed but it's usually removed) this would allow him to fish better hence the women would be more likely to have shildren with him, he has more children, who all have webbed feet, they in turn have more children, and gradually the entire population has webbed feet, with regard to primates being around,humans did not evolve directly from chimpanzees, what happened was thatchimps and humans had a common ancestor, at some point the population split, and one group lived in one environment and the other in a different environment, gradually the two poulations adapted with minor changes being made over time until they were completely different and couldn't breed anymore with each other, it might seem complicated but read a good book and it will explain it. heck why would god give peacocks something so ridiculous as their feathers...

boku14
boku14

The problem with "modern day science" is that it is more then unlikely if we hold the Truth aka the Holy Bible aka God aka the Truth against it. the "chain that we evolved from" does not exist. in the end evolution does not work. if everyone started to swim alot. to the point where people spend nearly all of there time in water. the evolution theory says that we would slowly start turning into fish. that we would grow gills. and fins. now, I ask you. do you really think that turning into fish is more realistic then God being real? if you do think the evolution theory is correct. then may I ask, why are there still prime-apes on the earth? if they all turned into us. why are they still here? and its not like they are a new gen of us evolving. since it took so long for us to evolve, they should still be in a MUCH lower state of evolving. it is things like this, that punch SO many holes into the evolution theory, that it is hard to even think of it as a funny plot for a movie. oh, and I hope you guys know that the guy who thought up the evolution theory was a drug crazed mad man. who would have been put in a home for the insane, if he was not so rich. but, he must have been right. since he had money! and he made a flashy book about it too!! and since their is no way that there can be ANYTHING smarter, stronger, and in more control then us. I mean geesh, we landed on the moon! how can we be wrong.

Crovax20
Crovax20

The problem with the God Theory is that it is rather unlikely if we hold modern day science against it The problem with the evolutionary theory is the gap. The gap is basically where is the chain that we evolved from?

Joemo
Joemo

haha... seriously, who cares? what difference does it make? is it really the process that matters, or the end product? in this case, it REALLY doesn't matter. we'll never know the absolute truth. you're pretty naive if you'll believe half the stuff that's thrown out there. let's just have fun and look forward, not look back and be confused.

sgwee
sgwee

what are you talking about fabiolean its impossible to beileve in both evelution and god, they totally contradict evelution tries to disprove the book of Genesis, their is no gap theory, the bible is a span of about 6000 years check out a scientist named dr. Hoven who looks at the bible scientifically and how evelution can not exsist in the bible because evelution is the idea of us just being a part of an animal earthly non special speck of a race with no conection to a supreme being evelution is an idea that is corrupting schools making seem more like animals than actually having some sense of morality doesnt that seem wrong? murderers look at humans the same way, thats why they have no remorse after killing another human at least church gives humans some value..... anyway back to this game, a video game thats i am okay with because it is JUST A GAME and it will be fun to mess with this idea to my liking and take the role as a godlike figure games rock and are a good thing to get away from pointless arguing, the only reason evelution even exists is because people dont want to aknowledge that their is someone stronger has it ever occured to you that nothing has occured to god god knows whats going to happen before after and during he can do whatever he wants but our choices is his choice to give us freewill therefore you cannot question god because he knows what will happen down the road of the "butterfly effect" god is not bound by time therefore he can spend as much time as he wants on one second of time as he wants therefore he is not bound by needing to rest, the reason he rested on the 7th day is because he wanted to sit back and let man and our free will to go forth in his plan some people (deadkingdg) might think that god breaks his own rules, that isnt true everything he does happens for a purpose, anything with god is possible, everything he does is for a purpose even if we dont see it at the time aka the flood, god killed them because he saw no matter what he did they will not bow down to him (for he is a zealous god its in the ten commandments) and will eventually go to hell god knowing this since he knows everything that will happen in the future killed them off earlier before they did something that really would have hurt the world he did the flood as another step in the plan for the future he invisioned for mankind DONT QUESTION GOD have fun with video games as long as you keep it without sex and so much violence it hurts your eyes but hey its your free will....

boku14
boku14

this looks like its going to be a great game. and to who ever does not want to get it since they are not into the whole evolution idea. its just a game. look at the star wars games. does getting one mean you think that star war is real? look at all of the shooter games. does getting one mean you are going to go around shooting people? I think evolution is a bad idea, that people still have not been able to prove. but I am still going to get this game. since its only a game. it does not mean evolution is real. look at age of mythology. I play it, and I think its a great RTS game. but it does not mean all of the monsters in it are real. it is just a game. games for you to relax, have fun, a kind of get away. with out having to leave your house. if you don't want to play this game, its fine. if you do want to play this game, its also fine. its no big deal. its just a game.

IrenicApollyon
IrenicApollyon

why are we forcing our opinions on other people? who cares if he doesn't want to play this game? not me. this game looks jawsome to the max... said like a true street shark.

master_gamer000
master_gamer000

danm that looks so awsome! i cant wait to play that game!

fabiolean
fabiolean

You're all a bunch of **** retards, you know that? Guess what? The Church's official stance on evolution is that it doesn't conflict with the idea of a supreme creator. Bam. Debate over. Put the dicks away, and end this circlejerk.

deathmonkey13
deathmonkey13

To ooddiittyy, neither you or Pizza guy are completely correct because in some ways genetic modification though mutations can be harmful, but in the long-run potentially helpful. Did you know that wild peas actually burst their pods to spray the peas, their seeds, all over the ground? If one of these mutated (which obviously it did) into a pea plant that was missing the gene that performed that function or it behaved improperly then the peas would not spray to the ground, which would be potentially lethal for that plant because it would not be able to reproduce therefore, that pea and it's mutation would die out. However, it just so happens that the pea pods that do not burst are the ones which humans are able to eat, seeing as the ones that did burst would no longer be whole pods. When people would eat these pods, their seeds would be distributed through their excrement, thus, making these peas, now the dominant peas in the world because we favor them over the popping wild peas. So anyways, why don't we all just stop arguing and enjoy reading about the game? Not that this discussion isn't intriguing but I just hate to see people get so emotional over games.

BabySealClubber
BabySealClubber

This thread is demented. I'm not saying debating, or in this case, arguing about something such as evolution is unhealthy. I just think that how this started is really stupid. The person isn't going to play the game because of his beliefs? 1. Spore in only a mild way supports evolution, so don't get your panties jumbled. 2. What other games don't you play? Are you playing GTA3 and having a blast running over pedestrians? Do you believe in killing innocents? Are Star Wars games off limits cause the phrase "A long, long time ago, in a galaxy far away..." offends you? Please, spare us the drama and your vanity. I play plenty of games where I do things that conflict deeply into my personal beliefs. I don' t care though: cause it's a GAME. So many games would be off limits if you actually did care about the sanctity of your beliefs. I geuss the only games left for you are The Sims and Sims City...

Ooddiittyy
Ooddiittyy

To ThePizzaGuy: I like to think I have a decent head on my shoulders, but I'm calling you out on something from your post, specifically where you mention this while speaking of genetic mutation: "...thereby leading to, in one way or another, harm to said organism, as the miscopied gene is now not performing its intended [sic] function." That's just not true. The gene is not performing its intended function, but that doesn't mean it doesn't result in an advantage. You say that mutation leads "one way or another" to harm to the organism, and I take issue with that. Otherwise, over millions of years our genetic makeup would have to have become extremely effecient and streamlined, where in reality we use only a tiny fraction of our genome for actual phenotype-expression, the rest of it being mainly "junk" code, but still coming along for the ride, which doesn't make any sense given your assertions. And gene expression is not always due to a "loss" of genetic information; it can just be selective expression of genes based on activator code not present in other, "less-fit" organisms. Do a little reading yourself next time. ;)

hells_zargon
hells_zargon

Bloody hell, you guys are taking this WAY to seriously!

ThePizzaGuy
ThePizzaGuy

Ok, I'll just add to my last post. First, If I sounded "enraged", then I'm sorry, it certainly wasnt meant as such. I was more writting in a matter of fact way, adding my two cents to this expanded discussion. Second, I'm eagerly awaiting this games release. From what we know it looks like it'll rock, and I cant wait to play it. I maybe be a genetisist by day, but that doesnt mean I cant love games. ;) Roll on late 07!

robert_roig
robert_roig

the process of Mutation (wich is usually pretty bad thing) and then natural selection of those who have mutated in a positive way... ... it's ok, it happens, but, at what pace?, and is supposed not to have an orientation, no will... then there is thing with dominant genes, why some show up and some don't?, what makes a gene into a dominant gene? our genetic code has loads of information not expressed when our body builds up there MUST me something... but i don't "believe", thus creation is out of the question, and i don't mean because what the church says now that creation happened 6 million years ago or something like that... wich makes absolutely no sense at all, since there is scientific proof that life forms existed prior to that...