[DennisP]

More like "one very simple model within game theory fails to explain everything in biology." There's nothing here that invalidates the whole of game theory. If the payoff matrix doesn't match reality, then the theory will make inaccurate predictions. Some models do predict cooperation (like the snowdrift game mentioned in the article). It just depends on what the incentives are.

Also worth mentioning that while the classic game theory approach is to calculate the optimum strategy, there's also evolutionary game theory, which looks at what strategies could actually be found by an evolutionary process. They tend to be the same, but not always.

"Choosing among a set of games" seems to me to be just a bigger game. "Known histories" can include any iterated game, which is a basic part of game theory. It's also studied a lot in the context of poker, where the challenge is that if you deviate from the game-theory optimal strategy to better exploit your opponent, you open yourself up to exploitation.