Talk:Video game

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Video game was one of the Video games good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Classification: "hardcore"?[edit]

This term gets thrown around a lot. Is it not considered a classification? SharkD  Talk  22:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

What's the context? --Marty Goldberg (talk) 20:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

History of video game consoles (eighth generation)[edit]

The article History of video game consoles (eighth generation) needs some help with references and to answer the question: Is calling the new consoles "8th generation" original research, or is it just a synonym for when the media call it "next generation or "new generation". --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

This topic has already significantly been discussed and answered at the article's nomination for deletion page. It is not a new discussion or answer for the video game project (the group of members that oversee video game articles), and in fact many of the regulars have already answered you there. This is the fifth time it will be deleted, and there's a reason for that. Additionally, this discussion page is purely for discussion in imporving this article, not others. Other than making people aware of the AFD so they can add additional commentary there (which you did not do), there is no reason to try and branch the discussion here. Please try and keep related discussions on the relevant page, the actual AFD page. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 20:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Evankarcha, 5 December 2010[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}} Duke Nukem Forever, a big name sequel that was in production for years before being cancelled, is the quintessential example of these problems.[citation needed] should be removed from this article because it has not been cancelled and has recently been confirmed still in the works. http://www.dukenukem.com Evankarcha (talk) 03:54, 5 December 2010 (UTC) Evankarcha

Yes check.svg Done --Funandtrvl (talk) 05:18, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Criticism section Australian focus[edit]

That section must be improved to discuss commercial criticism in general. Australia should be used as an example, but not the core of the section. If after some time no change is applied, the section should be just removed. I'll do some tweaking now, but I lack the knowledge to add enough information. Possible subjects to include (in short form): piracy and anti-piracy measures, region locks, health issues, over-worked developers Elideb (talk) 16:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Is computer game a subset of this article or a bad name?[edit]

Computer game redirect here. Is it a subset or only a bad name? 204.174.87.29 (talk) 00:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Video game is game that has feedback via video output. Computer game is a game playable on a computer (PC). In vast majority of cases, a computer game is also a video game. Also, computer game redirects to personal computer game, not here. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 08:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Orthography[edit]

Why video game and not videogame, if videogame is a noun and video game two, so you can't say “I'm playing a video”. What are the linguistical reasons for write it separately?

81.184.29.49 (talk) 10:57, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Reliable sources [1] —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:12, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Per Websters, it's "video game" with a space. Likewise, 1) Video refers to a raster display method and television by definition [2], or "relating to the transmission or reception of a televised image" or "the technology of electronically capturing, recording, processing, storing, transmitting, and reconstructing a sequence of still images representing scenes in motion." Or as Webster's defines it - "video (adjective): being, relating to, or used in the transmission or reception of the television image" and "being, relating to, or involving images on a television screen or computer display",[3] computer displays using the same raster or pixel process. A video signal represents an encoding and transmission process of pixels to reproduce, i.e. rasters.[4] 2) The term arose to describe the process of playing a game on the TV technology encased in all of the early video coin-ops (and the first home game system) referred to collectively by their manufacturers and the media as TV Games, TV Tennis, Space Age Game, video action game, electronic game, television skill game, and video skill game and video game. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 11:52, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

There is a video game museum in the united states it was in CA[edit]

The video game museum is called the warp zone hands on video game museum. They feature home consoles. From the frist released until now with 3d gaming you can got there and play the games look inside the systems and learn about the video game industry as well as the computer and it tech behind them. please list it in the article under museums they are small but growing. thanx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dancingirl98 (talkcontribs) 20:14, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Unreliable and biased article[edit]

The sources cited alan green - game designer, the video game journals, etc. Is that really unbiased?user:Purplepox01 18:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Well who exactly is more qualified in the field then? By that logic, every single article about video games is biased, because almost all sources specialize in video games. You don't expect biology journals to publish articles on politics; no, you couldn't trust that they know their stuff. And if they did know their stuff, then they wouldn't be called biology journal, they would be called politics journal. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 20:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Computer games museum in Paris[edit]

here the link ==>>> [5] פארוק (talk) 07:25, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

'Everything Bad Is Good for You'[edit]

I somewhat agree with him but he basically insults great games like Tetris and Chess, these is from the source article (I haven't read the book but evidently neither has the person who wrote that section):

"Twenty years ago, games like Tetris or Pac-Man were simple exercises in motor coördination and pattern recognition."

Does this man know anything about these games? Tetris is arguably the best video game ever designed, there's no coincidence that it became so well known and will likely be that way for decades if not centuries, it's a masterpiece. Tetris is fundamentally a game of risk management, how much are the player going to risk on getting a 'Tetris' (which you can only do if the game gives you a line piece) and thus a higher score. Pac-Man is similar, it's fruits are a limited resource and the game is ultimately about utilizing them perfectly (not to little, not to much) not "motor coördination and pattern recognition".

"Indeed, video games are not games in the sense of those pastimes—like Monopoly or gin rummy or chess—which most of us grew up with. They don’t have a set of unambiguous rules that have to be learned and then followed during the course of play. This is why many of us find modern video games baffling: we’re not used to being in a situation where we have to figure out what to do. We think we only have to learn how to press the buttons faster. But these games withhold critical information from the player. Players have to explore and sort through hypotheses in order to make sense of the game’s environment, which is why a modern video game can take forty hours to complete. Far from being engines of instant gratification, as they are often described, video games are actually, Johnson writes, “all about delayed gratification—sometimes so long delayed that you wonder if the gratification is ever going to show.”"

Chess or Gin Rummy don't put players in situations where they have to figure out what to do on their own?, Seriously. So anyone can read some simple rules of chess and become a grand-master overnight?. No that's ridiculous, not even computers can do that, Chess (and ALL games) is/are about figuring out how to apply a set of rules in a huge variety of different possible situations in order to win and/or avoid losing. Traditional games (card and board) do this far better than contemporary games which are increasing trying to become interactive films, because it's more acceptable than trying to be games or something.

And 40 hours?, is that meant to be impressive?, a good game should be uncompletable, you can play Chess or Tetris for your entire life and never 'complete' them, that's what I would call the ultimate in 'delayed gratification'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.98.112 (talk) 00:34, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Corrections needed for this sentence[edit]

"...Despite knowing well public affection for a 'Zombies' game mode, it was shipped with only one map for this game mode, and periodically releases new ones with $10 DLC"

> Not one, but two maps were shipped with the game; Kino Der Toten and Five. > The D is incorrectly capitalised. > The grammatical tense changes from past to present, which is unnecessary as all map packs have been released. > The wording suggests this is given as an example of developers holding back content completed before the game ships, when the map packs in question were in fact created after the game launched. > Wording is generally poor and the overall point seems to be based largely on conjecture. That a game mode is popular (which strikes me as something in need of sourcing) and the number of maps is perceived as low doesn't string together to make a coherent point; the sentence is simply a bunch of sometimes-questionable facts.

In fact, I'd say the sentence serves no real purpose and should be removed altogether. Perhaps something such as the Gears 3 weapon skin bundle could replace it, which is a simpler and clear-cut example of withholding content. But even if whoever has the power to edit the article thinks it should stay, please implement the grammatical changes. Thanks. 86.128.32.254 (talk) 18:00, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Video = raster dubious[edit]

Our article claims in its lead that "The word video in video game traditionally referred to a raster display device,[1] but following popularization of the term "video game", it now implies any type of display device." The reference given is an early video game patent. This claim is dubious at best. Many early games such as Asteroids (video game) used vector displays. Games for the home, the subject of the patent ("Television Gaming Apparatus") used raster displays because they used a TV receiver the consumer already owned. That does not support the claim that video traditionally meant raster. --agr (talk) 22:17, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you're mistaken and this has more than been discussed already on here and at the first video game article. The patent is not just an early patent, it is famously the first such patent and defended as such successfully in court for three decads. Where your confusion lies is again the pop-culture definition of the term vs. it's original use. Asteroids is not an "early" game in comparison, it was released well after the pop-culture version started taking hold (though I'll point out the original flyer for it did not include the term "video game". A point by point explanation: 1) There is nothing dubious in the definition portion of the article. Current common usage is addressed per the "with the popular catch phrase use of the term "video game", the term now implies all display types, formats, and platforms" statement. 2) Video refers to a raster display method and television by definition [6], or "relating to the transmission or reception of a televised image" or "the technology of electronically capturing, recording, processing, storing, transmitting, and reconstructing a sequence of still images representing scenes in motion." Or as Webster's defines it - "video (adjective): being, relating to, or used in the transmission or reception of the television image" and "being, relating to, or involving images on a television screen or computer display",[7] computer displays using the same raster or pixel process. A video signal represents an encoding and transmission process of pixels to reproduce, i.e. rasters.[8] 3) The confusion in this case arises that both raster and vector use a CRT, however a CRT does not imply display method or a transmission signal. A vector driven CRT is not a video display - there is no video signal present, nor signal decoding to generate an image. Rather instead it uses a direct control of the CRT's beam by the computer or electronic device (in the case of an oscilliscope) to generate images like an etch-a-sketch, or what is traditionally called an XY Monitor or "Random Scan" display [9]. Unlike dubiousness because of Asteroids that you claim, the process of how a vector display works and it's difference to raster/video is more than well documented outside of Wikipedia. [10] There is no argument that vector/XY/Random Scan displays were used in the coin-op industry, that does not however make them video displays. Nor does it rewrite history to how the term video games arose - arising in the very early 70's to describe the TV technology encased in all of the early video coin-ops referred to collectively by their manufacturers and the media as TV Games, TV Tennis, Space Age Game, video action game, electronic game, television skill game, and video skill game and video game. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:25, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 28 October 2012[edit]

(Add my request under the line : The Smithsonian American Art Museum is running an exhibition on "The Art of Video Games".[88])

The Maison d'Ailleurs (House of Elsewhere) in Switzerland presented an video game's and new media art's exhibition, entitled Playtime - Video game mythologies, from the 11th of March 2012 to the 9th of December 2012. This exhibition, curated by José Luis de Vicente, has been created under the direction of Marc Atallah, Director of the Maison d'Ailleurs. Marc atallah (talk) 16:58, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Not done: WP:NOTSOAP. Mdann52 (talk) 13:17, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 22 May 2013[edit]

Under the video game museum section, you should consider adding The Strong musuem, in Rochester, NY, which opened the first permanent video game exhibit, eGameRevolution (produced by the International Center for the History of Electronic Games) and continues to garner a lot of press about its work in displaying, collecting, and studying electronic games.

References:

"Video Game Destinations: International Center for the History of Electronic Games," Official X-Box Magazine, September 2012

Encyclopedia of Video Games: http://books.google.com/books?id=deBFx7QAwsQC&pg=PA329&lpg=PA329&dq=%22encyclopedia+of+video+games%22+international+center+for+the+history+of+electronic+games&source=bl&ots=IPux3hWZQk&sig=ezrkwo7R3Dnl8lt4EBJ_UaEsPFs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mH10UJTfCImw0QGAjoFo&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22encyclopedia%20of%20video%20games%22%20international%20center%20for%20the%20history%20of%20electronic%20games&f=false

Gamasutra: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/31666/Strongs_eGameRevolution_Exhibit_Gives_Game_History_Its_First_Permanent_Home.php

Wired: http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2011/02/the-arcade-experience-at-egame-revolution/

Game Spot: http://www.gamespot.com/news/will-wright-collection-donated-to-game-institute-6280078

74.43.95.134 (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Done - Thanks! --ElHef (Meep?) 16:37, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

too generic[edit]

A video game is an electronic that involves human interaction with a user interface to generate visual feedback on a video device.

Way too generic. You could be calling anything a video game, such as reading this.

And, if you stop calling PC Game articles video game, much too generic, have more specification please!

For example:

"Mojang AB is a Swedish Indie Game company."

Much more specific.

"Roblox Corporation makes Computer and iDevice Games." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.74.20.134 (talk) 23:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

No, you're wrong. The term Video game is generic and the definition is in line with that generic nature. Video games can be anything from Windows Solitaire (arguably the single largest shipped number of a game ever), to Skyrim and everything in between. It is a catch all title for the form of entertainment.BcRIPster (talk) 22:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
As BcRIPster alludes to, it's a generic pop culture term now. At one time it had a very specific meaning/descriptive, but not any longer. We account for both in the definition in the intro, I'm not sure how much different it could be rewritten without going too far in one direction or the other. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 22:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2014[edit]

[1]

110.164.40.103 (talk) 01:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Empty request Technical 13 (talk) 03:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Device Input change request.[edit]

"The input device primarily used to manipulate video games is called a game controller, and varies across platforms. For example, a controller might consist of only a button and a joystick, while another may feature a dozen buttons and one or more joysticks."

But you should also add through motion sensors without a gamepad at all. Kinect is an example of this. VideoGameMuseum (talk) 02:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I wouldn't consider a Kinect to be a primary input. It would be secondary to a traditional controller at this point.--Asher196 (talk) 12:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
However, as of this moment Kinect is bundled as a primary controller. There is also still the Wii. Oh and this Game System Here. Although it's not traditional it is still a game console. VideoGameMuseum (talk) 15:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
What about driving wheels and pedals, or oculus rift, or light guns or whatever. There are too many sensory devices to mention that are all strictly speaking "controllers", but few referred to as such in common use. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
This is different because Oculist rift is VR but still uses a controller input. Now light guns you are correct. VideoGameMuseum (talk) 15:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

To chime in here. The statement is written to be comprehended by the least common denominator to illustrate a point. Anyone reading this page is likely to have some reference to a "button" and a "joystick" as they have been the core controller elements for games for what, almost 40 years now and they are also still the core of controller technology for video gaming? The intro to this page is NOT meant to be a showcase or advertisement for what someone thinks is trendy right now. As for the Kinect argument, it is irrelevant if it's a primary controller or secondary, it is not a common point of reference and useless as an illustrative example. BcRIPster (talk) 17:16, 21 February 2014 (UTC))

Agree with BcRIPster. Smartphones also have different methods of input, since most are equipped with accelerometers. How about we just lump them all together and mention them in passing, such as "in recent years, numerous different methods of input have emerged for consoles and with the emergence of smartphones"? — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 17:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm ok with that. Let me add something... keep in mind that short of motion control. Smartphones are basically still using button tap control schemes, just on a touch sensitive surface. How's this revision of this paragraph (see last sentence):
  • The input device primarily used to manipulate video games is called a game controller, and varies across platforms. For example, a controller might consist of only a button and a joystick, while another may feature a dozen buttons and one or more joysticks. Early personal computer games often needed a keyboard for gameplay, or more commonly, required the user to buy a separate joystick with at least one button.[2] Many modern computer games allow or require the player to use a keyboard and a mouse simultaneously. A few of the most common game controllers are gamepads, mouses, keyboards, and joysticks. In recent years additional methods of input have emerged such as camera based player observation for video game consoles and touch screens on smartphones.

FWIW, this revision now reflected on the page at the moment. If it's a problem feel free to revert it, I need to go AFK for a few. BcRIPster (talk) 17:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm happy with the change. I nudged it just a little to make it more general (smartphone → mobile device) which includes things like tablet computers. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 18:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Cool. Nice clean-up. Internet high-five. BcRIPster (talk) 18:57, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Video games as references[edit]

I think the time has come for academia to accept that video games are materials which themselves can be referenced; not just their instruction manuals or reviews of them. There are no page numbers or issues like a comic book; no episodes like a television show, nor are there are not frames like a film which can be referenced by time code. CensoredScribe (talk) 20:33, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

This issue was discussed here. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:41, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Questioning the value of this statement in the opening[edit]

Do we really need this statement "In the early days of cartridge consoles, they were sometimes called TV games. This is still common in some languages, such as Swedish (where TV-spel is now more common than videosepel, which earlier was a popular term)." in the opening segment? It really seems out of place as the whole opening is this a rather functional breakdown on the topic and then we throw in a cultural/ligustic tidbit at the end? Shouldn't this be in some kind of an "other popular names" segment? Frankly this has been bugging me since it first was added to the page but I was hoping someone else would bring it up first. BcRIPster (talk) 17:45, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

It's been bugging me too. When it was first added, it wasn't so glaring (after I touched it up), but now it really sticks out as you mention. Either trim it down to something like:
"In the early days of cartridge consoles, they were sometimes called TV games. This is still common in some languages, such as Swedish (TV-spel)."
Or, since it's entirely unreferenced, it can be done away with altogether. We don't need a section that lists what video games are called in other languages. Readers can already do that with the Languages drop-down. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 17:54, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to go for removal for the moment and we can discuss further here. I'm not even sure the re-wording really fits, but I'm totally open to hear other thoughts. BcRIPster (talk) 18:03, 7 May 2014 (UTC) -- Wgungfu beat me to it. BcRIPster (talk) 18:04, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 August 2014[edit]

In the Controversy section, "propaganda" should have two brackets on each side to make the word become propaganda. I didn't know what it was, nor do I hear it in everyday life. 98.194.29.36 (talk) 19:11, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I went ahead and added the edit along with one on tobacco, nothing about it seemed controversial, I'm surprised it wasn't already linked. I'm not sure what your comment about hearing it in everyday life means though. There's a long history of using games for propaganda just like any other marketing tool. But I can see the usefulness of providing a way for people to learn the word if they somehow haven't been exposed to it. BcRIPster (talk) 03:05, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Reorganisation needed[edit]

There is a lot of overlap between video game culture, video game controversies, gender representation in video games, and sexual harassment in video gaming.

We really need to sort them out. Please cull side sections linking to main articles to the bare minimum and move the relevant information to the main articles. For example, Video game controversies contains a huge section on gender representation, when that information would be better placed in Gender representation in video games. A simple one-paragraph summary of the issue will suffice, with a link to the main article, where the topic is covered in more detail.

Asian Game Markets[edit]

Not sure where this should go, but there's a lot of great information here that probably deserves including somewhere: http://www.lai.com/en/asian-game-markets-japan-china-korea

Willhesucceed (talk) 02:39, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 November 2014[edit]

Mymymymy70 (talk) 12:28, 4 November 2014 (UTC) 102436

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 13:05, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

"The four largest producers of and markets for computer and video games (in order) are North America (US and Canada), Japan, the United Kingdom and Germany."[edit]

This statement has no citation what so ever, despite specifying an order which would seem to imply that the information came from somewhere. In the following sentence, there is a citation, number 74 for the article, that seems it could relate to the above statement, however I have searched the entire document and did not see this specific order of producers and markets for video games. Even if this is the source, it would be nearly seven years old, and needs updating to reflect current facts.

Ad in the article[edit]

In the "Commercial aspects" section there is a sentence which looks totally advertisement and also gives the link:-

" Among the popular Video Gaming Communities in India, Gaming Central stands out as a rich source for the latest in video game news, game previews & gaming reviews."

I'm not sure what do with it. So somebody should look on it. Thank you.--Hindust@niक्या करें? बातें! 11:04, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, revert the edit. It was added on 28 October. (the last edit)--Hindust@niक्या करें? बातें! 10:34, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2014[edit]

مساعدة و لو زحمة عليك

2620:117:c080:520:5e26:aff:fefe:86ec 09:28, November 30, 2014‎

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 15:00, 30 November 2014 (UTC)