Thursday, February 18, 2016

Replaying the Tape: Boardgame Version


The late Stephen Jay Gould, a paleontologist and a lucid science communicator, popularized the idea that if the tape of biological evolution were rewound and replayed, we might end up with very different organisms compared to those that we have today. Simon Conway Morris, also a paleontologist, who made a detail study of the Burgess Shale that was made famous by Gould’s book Wonderful Life, thinks that the differences may not be so significant. Conway Morris expounds on convergent evolution in his book Life’s Solution. He thinks that rewinding the tape would lead to many convergent structures that we might observe today, although not necessarily identical.

But what if you could rewind the tape? Go back in time and start over? Might things have turned out differently if different “choices” were made? This is excellent fodder for the world of games and simulations. Wargames started to flourish in the 1950s thanks to Charles S. Roberts, his landmark game Tactics, and the formation of the Avalon Hill game company. As a teenager I saved up cash to buy Avalon Hill games. They were expensive from my point of view as a kid so they became prized possessions. I still have my first three games: Diplomacy, Civilization, and Kingmaker. Now they are all classics. Wargaming was a niche hobby for many years, but has a broader audience now with the release of Axis & Allies.

Wargames and simulations are of particular interest to those interested in history and the military. Some simulations featured near future scenarios where one might look ahead to see how nuclear war might be triggered. Many of the most famous and best-loved wargames however deal with the past. While the past in itself is interesting, the game allows players to explore “what if” scenarios. To take an example of the famous battle of Waterloo, what if the Prussians under Blucher showed up earlier or later? How important was it to take and hold Hougomont (central farmhouse)? What might have changed if Wellington and Napoleon had employed different tactics at different times?

The exploration of such scenarios through multiple plays of a game might expose the players to more optimal strategies, perhaps better than those employed by the famous generals in their one-shot at historical victory. This is where things get interesting. Once you know the rules and therefore constraints of the game, and you’ve had the opportunity to see where different choices may lead, you can “go back in time” and make different choices to achieve a different end. In the case of a boardgame, perhaps winning rather than losing, or gaining more “victory” points for a better final score.

Could there be a game or simulation that traces how life may have started and evolved? It turns out I am a consultant chemist and a playtester of such a game. Because the game has not yet been released, and is still being tweaked, I won’t reveal many details in this post. Suffice to say that the designer is quite experienced in coming up with interesting and complex games that have a niche audience, particularly those with a scientific bent. I’m a fan of his games, even though I don’t play them very often. The rules are complex, and the games have a steep learning curve. Some have even “accused” them of being more like simulations where the game plays you rather than the other way around. The games, however, are thematically rich and very immersive.

In brief, players start out trying to generate autocatalytic sets of molecules that could evolve into bacteria-like creatures. These in turn acquire mutations and evolve abilities to survive and adapt in a potentially harsh environment. If they are able to thrive, they evolve into simple eukaryotic multicellular creatures. The more complex evolved organisms you have at the end of the game yield more victory points. The game spans the Hadean, Archean and Proterozoic eras leading up to what happens before the Cambrian (of Burgess Shale fame). Life is tough. Starting life is tough. Maintaining it is no walk-in-the-park either. Random bad stuff happens and the changing environment means that if you don’t adapt, you don’t survive and you certainly won’t thrive.

I’ve only had three runs at the game so I’m still in the rules-learning stage. The first aborted early thanks to a runaway greenhouse but the other two lasted the full length. Once I no longer make rule errors, I should be able to explore the full capacity of what the game has to offer. Hopefully I will be more useful as a consultant chemist from the game-player’s perspective. Before that point I mainly answered questions about origin-of-life chemistry and the feasibility of certain scenarios or types of chemistry. I also made wording suggestions for conceptual scientific elements of the game. I did little in the way of helping to formulate the rules of the game. The designer is very experienced and has gone through this process multiple times. As someone who enjoys games, it is interesting for me to peek behind the curtain and see what the design process is like. I’ve enjoyed being a fly-on-the-wall, and making occasional (hopefully constructive) comments.

What was particularly interesting that motivated today’s post was the juxtaposing my experience playtesting the game last week and also watching the season finale of the time-travel TV series Continuum – the show is discussed in my most recent blog post. Certain individuals and factions who control time-travel devices go back in time so they can alter the future, sometimes to benefit themselves, but sometimes to benefit humanity more broadly. This seems like replaying the tape, but in addition being an active participant to try and ensure a “better” outcome, whatever that means. Life has a steep learning curve, and being at the edge of an error catastrophe, suggests that large-scale changes in the environment could well wipe out many forms of life. We humans have co-opted our environment in a way and with a speed that no other organism has done before. One might even think it amazing that we even reached this point without a guiding hand, be it the all-powerful Deity, the “blind” hand of evolution, time-travel/time-transcendence, or some combination of all the above.

As I’m playing the complex boardgame and learning the rules, I’m getting better at the game. I’m learning how to get more out of autocatalytic cycles, or at least better at hedging my bets, now that I know the rules and I’ve tried different strategies. (The random hand of chance via a dice-roll can still do you in.) I’m getting better at timing the evolution into a simple organism and how to protect it against the vagaries of a changing environment. Each game turn begins with an environmental event of significance. Organisms that are not properly adapted do poorly. If they don’t die, they merely subsist and eke out their living. While I cannot predict the order of events from the card deck, nor that all of them will show up consistently, I now have a bit more experience of the type and magnitude of things that show up. Thus I have improved my odds of creating, surviving and thriving at the game of life. But this is thanks to the experience of having some foreknowledge of what might happen, and my making different choices for my organisms!

Life is tough. Creating, Sustaining, Thriving. None of these are easy for early life. In this sense, the game does a pretty good job of simulating what we know from the science. This brings me to a question I posed in my previous post. Is the fact that we are here suggest that there is a telos or direction guiding the process – one that knows the future and the past? The game gets more fun when you’ve figured out what you can do to succeed given the rule constraints. This does, however, require multiple plays. The first time I played a game by this designer, I almost threw in the towel. The rules were complex and I made very little progress (i.e. scores were very low). But the game was immersive and tickled my imagination in a way that was similar to the wargames and simulations of old. I persevered, and started to enjoy the process, and got much better at it.

I’m looking forward to getting in more plays of this origin-of-life game. Because it intersects with my area of interest, it might even give me some alternative ways to think about the problem. Could a game spark a research pathway? Maybe. But even if it doesn’t, there’s a certain satisfaction in playing a game where you create life and make choices to help it thrive. There’s a reason why the computer games Civilization and SimCity (both probably now considered classics) gained a huge following. They are sometimes called “God-view” games. Perhaps there’s a deity-like yearning in humanity. When, where, why and how does it begin? Is there a Who? Meanwhile, replaying the tape is fun!

No comments:

Post a Comment