Talk:First video game

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article is on a subject of mid priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:

Contents

[edit] Initial Discussion

I made this article to initially curb all the "claims" to such-and-such a person being the FIRST creator of a video game. This article intends to discuss the history dispassionately and allow the reader to form their own opinions as to who indeed created the first video game. Drumpler 14:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I also relied on two initial sources, neither of which are primary (except for the patent), so any additional sources would be appreciated. Bear in mind, this is a stub and so it needs to have time to grow. Drumpler 14:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
The problem is, it was not dispassionate and glossed over the court's definition and statements on the very same site you used as a main reference. Ralph has not "claimed" anything, he was legally backed up and in fact still gets called on to testify in video game related suits to this day. I fleshed it out a little more given these facts and the resources you cited. --Marty Goldberg 15:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
What wasn't dispassionate? Thanks for the help, nonetheless. Drumpler 15:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I see where the misunderstanding arises. Thank you for the clarification. Drumpler 16:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I made some grammatical changes. Nothing more. :) Drumpler 16:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
No problem. :) I think all parties involved are equally important in the history of things, so don't get me wrong. And it was a good idea for you to set up this stub (though somewhere down the line its probably going to be merged in with another current entry when someone gets the inkling to do it). But as a writer in the industry, it seems I see this confusion pops up all the time and the plethora of web pages that present personal opinions over the years haven't helped the matter. Dave (my friend that runs Pong Story) has tried to clear it up with his amazing resource site, and Ralph just released a book last year that goes in to it all in great detail as well. But it seems its not always enough to avoid the confusion because Video Games in the popular sense have gone on to become a generic term for any computer/electronic game in any display environment. I've even seen the old LED handhelds from the 70's and 80's (Mattel Football, etc.) refered to as a "video game". --Marty Goldberg 16:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I can understand that. It is nice to have someone in the industry helping with this article. I, myself, am just an avid game addict who is aspiring to one day sit on my arse, learn some code and write my own games, a challenge that becomes daunting when I see that the industry is now in the millions. :-P So what I know is merely what I can glean from books and sites on the subject. But yes, I did believe the topic deserved its own stub/article and I think one can flesh out all the different sides of the issues neutrally. Thank you for clarifying my own terms. Drumpler 16:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I'd also like to add another "source of confusion" is within the game industry itself. Steve Rabin, who wrote the book I cited, is a senior software engineer at Nintendo of America and likewise attributes Higginbotham with the creation of the first video game. Question is, which definition are we to rely on? The court's definition? Drumpler 16:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that's because Nintendo tried to use that position as well in court and lost. They wound up having to pay Sanders as well. --Marty Goldberg 16:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

(Back to the left - indentation was getting exessive) A very fine start, but I think this sentence is unnecessary, redundant: "Depending upon how a video game is defined in a general vernacular, the above candidates are also credited with being "the first", with William Higginbotham, Steve Russell and Ralph Baer being the most popular in debates." - DavidWBrooks 17:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Might actually work better reworked as an intro paragraph? That way its followed up in the text by the cited examples you have. --Marty Goldberg 17:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
That's what I just did, shortening it considerably. That intro could probably be expanded, though. - DavidWBrooks 21:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed this phrase in the section on NIM: "The display in this case was a panel of lights, so again it can't be classed as a 'Video' game." I did so because I felt it was redundant (the paragraph on Baer and the court battle already state that none of the other other games were playable on a video monitor). If there's any reason it should be included, please clarify. Otherwise, I think everyone is doing a fine job with this article! :) Drumpler 01:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Agree with removing the "so again it can't be classed as a 'Video' game" part, it was redundant. But the first half of the sentence should still be worked in since now there's no actual mention of what it used to display the game. --Marty Goldberg 02:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with this. I actually was going to work it in after I removed it, but didn't know where to place it. I think you did well. Drumpler 04:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NIMROD

Okay, now I'm confused... (:-/) My original wording seems to have crept back in! I was going to agree with that revision Drumpler made, but object to some of the other wording that got put back. I don't like the statement that NIMROD was "Released" on a particular date, as if it was a PS3 or something. There was only a single unit that was rather 'exhibited' to the public for around 6 months. Unless someone has good reason for that wording I'll go and revise it again. Pete G. 23:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I had reformated to be similar in structure to the other paragraphs (which all start with the year introduction), which is probably how that happened. I just changed "released" to "presented" then and added a few more things to coordinate with the information in the Wikipedia article on NIMROD. --Marty Goldberg 23:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Odyssey or Other Filler Image Needed

Apparently the original wasn't properly sourced. I do not know how to do that, so if anyone feels up to task, that's something that can be done. Drumpler 10:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I put it back, provided a source for the original. --Marty Goldberg 16:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CHASE AND PONG YEAR

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(first_generation)

UR NOT ADDN CHASE FROM 1966 MADE BY RALPH BAER B4 PONG NOR DUZ THIS ARTIKL SPECIFY WEN PONG WUZ IN ITS 1ST ERLY PROTOTYPE STAGE WHERE IT WUZ AZ EXCLUSIV N UNCOMERSHAL AZ MISSILE SIMULATOR FROM 1947

I think I speak for everyone when I say, "Uhhh.....what?". Please turn the caps key off and use full english when writing comments. This isn't a cell phone, and you're not a hax0r. --Marty Goldberg 18:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
I figured it out. It's an acronym for "Help, I'm trapped in a CapsLock key factory! Send help and a Strunk & White manual!" - DavidWBrooks 19:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of early video games

I think this article should be renamed to History of early video games since that is what it really covers. I'll do that unless there is consensus to not rename. The article is not really about the first video game, so the tile is slightly misleading as to the content. Vegaswikian 21:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

No, that is not what it covers. The entry was created to specifically address the contested topic of what is a video game and what is not, what was considered the first (the Odyssey), and why. The very first paragraph specifically addresses what the purpose of this entry is, so there's not much confusion there. Video game history is already covered elsewhere on Wikipedia. --Marty Goldberg 22:02, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
The title is still somewhat misleading. How about First video games or Early video games or List of first video games? The current title implies that it is about the first video game, content not withstanding. Vegaswikian 22:41, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Because none of those would be accurate, and would be misleading themselves. Once again, this entry was designed (by a group of us) to discuss what the first video game was and was not and why. Naming it what you want is misleading to the intent of the entry, because those early games are not considered "video games" by the definition. Hence what this entry is about. Likewise the title and content was reached by consensus. --Marty Goldberg 23:22, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] non-video computer games

The definition section seems to me to say that computer games are video games. To me (and I suspect other retro enthusiasts) computer games is a better term; having "Adventure" in a list of "video games of 1972" is just wrong when so many people played it on printing terminals. Now, I realize that there is no perfect term; as pointed out, digital games doesn't cut it (no Tennis for Two), and electronic game could include anything with an audio amplifier in it, but I know of no video games that are not computer games, but can name computer games that are not video games; I think this article, all the "video games of 19xx", and probably a bunch of other articles and categories could use a rename of video game -> computer game with redirects for the video version of the name. And computer game has to be separated from personal computer game; right now it's a redirect. Thoughts? -- Akb4 (talk) 00:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

You're probably not aware of it, but everything under "computer games" was merged to video games this last year by consensus at the video games project. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 01:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
why? Did no one point out that not all computer games are video games? -- Akb4 (talk) 07:11, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but because the term is used so generically now they didn't care. I had a hard enough time getting the actual definition in to the leading paragraph of the Video game article. That's also what lead to this article, which tries to show the strict definition of the term. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 07:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)