Hello all,

A fun little idea for a forum thread. Thrive occasionally strays away from realism a bit, more often than not due to decisions favoring fun and fair gameplay. Here, we can point out some of these inaccuracies in a harmless way, similar to the concept of CinemaSins. The goal of this thread isn’t really to suggest changes (perhaps some minor alterations or ideas can come from this), but just to point out where Thrive strays from its otherwise incredibly realistic atmosphere. So save your constructive critiques regarding Thrive for another thread, we just wanna have fun.

Note: the game obviously isn’t finished, so pointing out gaps in microbe stage development isn’t really the target of this thread.

Here are some I can think of right now…

The hydrothermal vents life arose from were likely not incredibly deep in the ocean as the layout of the patch map might make it seem. Also, rather than arising from the iconic black smoker vents spewing out masses of smoke like a volcano, life likely first developed within the calmer yet more stable alkaline hydrothermal vents.

The free energy represented by the bonus glucose at the start of the game likely was present mostly in the form of free-floating organics naturally formed through chemical processes rather than the sugar itself. It is true that those free organics gradually disappeared as life ate them up.

Thylakoids in game represent the prokaryotic prerequisite to the eukaryotic chloroplast and share the more complex organelle’s function in producing sugars, but thylakoids actually don’t produce glucose. They produce ATP from light needed for other parts of the chloroplast to facilitate processes, including the creation of glucose.

Eukaryotes typically vastly outsize bacteria. If realistically portrayed. Most prokaryotes would look like specks floating around.

The nucleus probably actually evolved after the mitochondria as a result of the genetic exchanges between the mitochondria and a host cell in endosymbiosis where the mitochondria transferred over its membrane genetic information, resulting in the accidental creation of a lipid within the cell matrix. For some host cells, this membrane would surround genetic information, providing a useful buffer-zone between genetic parasites and their genome, and thus allowing a more stable genetic code.


Mass conservation isn’t fully respected due to gameplay balancing (cells don’t drop all of their absorbed compounds when they reach apoptosis). Otherwise, predation would be useful.

1 Like

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

This is not the first time you used rude language on these forums. Now, I’m not a mod or anything. However, it is my wish that these forums mantain a more mature/collected/civil enviroinment. As such, I would like to ask you to be more considerate.

As for your question, OxyToxy is likely supposed to be an oxygen-based toxin. Some say it might simply be a fancy name for ozone (O3).


Yes, please keep cursing to a minimum. Thanks for pointing this out, when I read that message initially I was too tired to take action myself.

1 Like

What’s “NT” tho? The full name is Oxytoxy NT

1 Like

It most likely stands for NeuroToxin.


cells don’t have neurons though lol

True, but this is what has been told me. Can you think of another acronym?

I will comment that the use of oxygen as a toxin has been hypothesized to be partially responsible for Rubisco showing up. The idea goes that microbe used oxygen when it was still potent against anaerobic life. Not sure how widely expected the theory is, or what NT stands for however.


No one seems to really know. We’d need to track down some 2013 or maybe even earlier team members to ask them…

1 Like