Jamie Lynn Dunston

Ideally, Spore is more like a bucket of crayons than a copy of Candy Land -- it's a tool for creating, not a game to be won, lost, or even completed.

Publisher: Electronic Arts
Genres: Simulation
Price: $49.99
Multimedia: Spore
Platforms: PC
Number of players: 1
ESRB rating: Everyone 10+
Developer: Maxis
US release date: 2008-09-07
Developer website

Spore has been out for a bit more than a week now, and the reviews have been mixed. Some reviewers have nearly exhausted themselves patting Will Wright on the back for his latest (and perhaps most ambitious) undertaking, while others have criticized him for not taking his innovations further. After playing the game for a week and finding it both thoroughly enjoyable and ultimately disappointing, one question still lingers in my mind: Who is Spore's target audience?

In case you've been living under a rock for the past two years, Spore's gameplay can be summarized thus: you start as an amoeba, swimming around a freeform, two-dimensional, arcade-style world, consuming meat, plants, or both, as you prefer. When you've consumed enough other bacteria (and thus gathered enough DNA), you can evolve legs and enter the creature phase, where you play an individual member of your species, and either befriend or destroy other species. This is where your creature's physical form and abilities mainly take shape, and it plays rather like a simplified version of The Sims, with up to eight social interactions available, based on your creature's physical attributes.

After creature phase comes tribal phase, in which your creature gains sentience and establishes a community. Again, you choose between forging alliances or burning and pillaging other villages, and for all practical purposes, this stage feels like a minimalistic real-time strategy game. The next phase, civilization, has a bit more sophistication and more of a resource-management component, but it is at its core an extension of the tribal phase. Except for terminology, there is little difference between converting the populace of a neighboring city to your religion, establishing overwhelming economic supremacy, or burning it to the ground, so it is at this point that the choices you made in the previous three stages begin to feel irrelevant. By the time you get to space, which is essentially a quest-based RPG with an enormous map, there is no intrinsic difference between a friendly creature and an aggressive one.

As a woman who never met a Maxis game I didn't like (until SimCity Societies), it seemed as though I could almost have written my review before my review copy arrived. "A brilliant extension of the franchise," I should have cooed. "Typically excellent graphics, clever animations, and that classic self-referential humor for which Maxis is so well-known" would have featured prominently in my concluding paragraph. And all these things are true. Yet something felt a As I played, I felt like my fourth-grade teacher: I wanted to pat Spore on its sweet little head and say, "You're so smart, but you don't apply yourself."

So I asked my mother to give it a try. Mom, like a lot of women over 35, is an enthusiastic but decidedly casual gamer. She enjoys puzzle and arcade-style games, and completed all 172 levels of Super Granny 2: Granny in Paradise. So I figured she was the perfect guinea pig for Spore, with its complex backbone and very accessible interface. I wanted to know if someone with interest in games but no experience with real-time strategy, resource-management, or role-playing games would be able to navigate effectively.

When Mom sat down to try Spore, she insisted that she only had half an hour to play. Two hours later, my dad was tugging at her elbow, and she was fully immersed in creature phase, murmuring, "Okay, we'll go just as soon as I finish..." When we finally did pry her away from the keyboard, I asked her opinion. Was it hard to learn? Mom didn't bring her reading glasses, so I summarized the already brief tutorials at the beginning of each level, but she had no trouble customizing her creatures or controlling their movement. Did she enjoy it? "It's a lot of fun," she said, "the creatures are very cute. I can see myself sitting down to play for fifteen minutes before bed...and then staying up all night instead."

Jamie's crocodile creatures in their natural habitat

And that's really the thing about Spore. It's really, really fun. It's easy to get completely lost in the game. I've played all five stages, from amoeba to space, twice. I've played as an aggressive, warlike species and as a peaceful, spiritual one. I've spent hours in the creature creator, tweaking my bipedal crocodiles and flying giraffe-ostrich hybrids until they look just right. I've even taken a few spins around the vehicle and building tools, although I have to say that these feel sadly crippled in comparison with the creature creator. But even after spending so much time with the game and enjoying it thoroughly, something felt amiss and I couldn't quite place it.

Finally, I gave my husband a turn. As I watched him play, I was frustrated by his lack of progress in the creature phase. He had built these cute little purple spiders with six legs and two arms, but the cost of all those legs and feet had left him without enough DNA to invest in upper-level social or combat skills. As a result, he struggled to impress and ally mid-level creatures, and was too weak to fend off the more aggressive species. Perhaps if he had specialized in one of the social stances he would have done better, but he was simply too ambitious from the start and attempted to take on more than his resources would allow. Only later did I realize how apt a metaphor this creature was for the game in which it was created.

Ideally, Spore is more like a bucket of crayons than a copy of Candy Land -- it's a tool for creating, not a game to be won, lost, or even completed. Which, of course, is the Wright way -- Maxis practically invented the sandbox model with the original SimCity. But Spore also pushes the player towards a sense of completion in a way that The Sims never has. Instead of allowing the player to create the game as she goes, Spore has a prescribed method of play that is uncharacteristically linear and concrete. Certain outcomes -- most obviously, the physical appearances of the creatures -- will vary with the individual, but even many of the decisions made in the creature creator are the result of functional necessity, not aesthetics. In this sense, the urge to progress overtakes the desire to create, and both aspects suffer for it.

It's the tension between sandbox and story that ultimately left me feeling a bit off-kilter. On the one hand, the logical progression from stage to stage and the sense of accomplishment that comes with completing a mission or earning a badge is rewarding -- which is why traditional games have always made ample use of these elements. On the other hand, Spore shines as a creative tool. Why contaminate it with the baggage of a traditionally-structured, linear storyline?

The thing about Spore is that it's essentially a mashup. It draws heavily from four distinct gaming genres -- RPG, RTS, arcade, and social sim -- and brings them together in an unexpected way. But each of the five levels is essentially a knockoff of another genre, and playing in civilization mode (without hotkeys and control groups!) only serves to remind experienced strategy gamers how painfully long we've been waiting for Starcraft II. Spore is still fun, it's still innovative, and it's still incredibly compelling, but it lacks the depth and complexity that longtime fans of the Maxis family have come to expect.

If Maxis intended Spore to satisfy hardcore gamers with its unique construction and challenging gameplay, then they have failed. But if they intended it to entice casual gamers (or non-gamers), to inspire a new wave of innovative, cross-genre games, or to create a showcase for user-created content, then their success will be measured by players, not critics. Just as certain films have become classics because of their powerful impact on the movie industry, the games industry has its own classics and innovators, many of which have come from Maxis itself. Whether Spore will be to games what The Godfather was to film remains to be seen. Regardless, it appears that it will succeed by at least one common industry standard: by selling lots and lots of copies, and making EA gobs and gobs of cold, hard cash.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.