Jump to content
IGNORED

Have you ever become displeased with the videogame industry?


Keatah

Recommended Posts

It's not stupid, it's historical condensation. You can only have so many bullet points in your 'history of all videogames', so over time as new iterations come up, old ones mush together. You could probably break the pre-Nintendo era into 3 chunks if you wanted, but most people won't give any of it much time anyway, so it's easier to lump it all together as 'pre-crash' and call it good. You can actually see people starting to run the 8 and 16 bit eras together nowadays too. It's all about current relevance, otherwise we could easily just do 4 generations: pre-crash, cartridge, CD & internet.

Then why don't we just lump everything between 1985 and PS1 as "Nintendo Era"? Condensation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I'm sure we'll get there eventually. ;)

It's fine if you are talking "eras" but as long as they are still using the "generation" terminology, there is no way the Atari 2600 and Atari 5200 are of the same generation because the 5200 is built from the "Colleen" platform that was designed to be the next-gen to the 2600. It is factually incorrect.

 

Face it, someone botched this. It was widely accepted that CV/5200 were 3rd gen in the 80s. Sometime later somebody arbitrarily decided that 3rd gen started with NES and everything before it was 2nd generation, and that became accepted truth.

 

It would make more sense that CV/5200/NES were all 3rd generation because they have more in common with each other than any of them has in common with the 2600 or Channel F. If they must condense it, why not condense it like that?

Edited by zzip
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's fine if you are talking "eras" but as long as they are still using the "generation" terminology, there is no way the Atari 2600 and Atari 5200 are of the same generation because the 5200 is built from the "Colleen" platform that was designed to be the next-gen to the 2600. It is factually incorrect.

 

Face it, someone botched this. It was widely accepted that CV/5200 were 3rd gen in the 80s. Sometime later somebody arbitrarily decided that 3rd gen started with NES and everything before it was 2nd generation, and that became accepted truth.

 

It would make more sense that CV/5200/NES were all 3rd generation because they have more in common with each other than any of them has in common with the 2600 or Channel F. If they must condense it, why not condense it like that?

 

How history becomes abridged has far less to do with technological similarities and a lot more to do with cultural interest. NES was huge in its cultural impact, that's why it's the breakline. Just like PlayStation will be remembered as the birth of CD gaming, despite the fact that it wasn't even close to the first CD system. It's a bit like Thespis- as my drama teacher often said "We don't know if he was a good actor, or even the first actor. But it's the first name we've got written down, so he gets the credit for it."

 

I'm also sure the generation divides will become obsolete or re-worked as more systems come out. Right now, the numbers are manageable- 7th gen, 8th gen, still easy on the tongue & mind. 15th? Not so much. Give it enough time, they'll change the breakdown again ("Everything on a cartridge is now first gen/ cart era") and a whole new group of retro fans will be complaining about it ("an Atari and a Genesis are nothing alike, why are they grouping them together? This is such a mistake!")

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Hoshi, it doesn't really matter in which "generation" a 1982 magazine would use to categorize ColecoVision or Atari 5200, because they're all "old" now. We could probably redo a cartoon like this with console "eras." Splitting hairs over small differences within a few years? Not really worth fighting about in my opinion.

 

post-2410-0-13046400-1522781716.jpg

 

As time goes on, fewer and fewer of the odd fringe things will matter, and only the highlights (SNES!) will remain. Similarly, I feel that those hung up on "losing" digital downloads because servers will go down, are forgetting that so much of everything is crap.

 

For example, for a long time, the only "de-listed" game on Xbox Live Arcade was a shitacular advergame called Yaris. Folks weren't missing much.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How history becomes abridged has far less to do with technological similarities and a lot more to do with cultural interest. NES was huge in its cultural impact, that's why it's the breakline. Just like PlayStation will be remembered as the birth of CD gaming, despite the fact that it wasn't even close to the first CD system. It's a bit like Thespis- as my drama teacher often said "We don't know if he was a good actor, or even the first actor. But it's the first name we've got written down, so he gets the credit for it."

And the 2600 had a big cultural impact as well. The 5200/CV/Vectrex not so much, so therefore they should be lumped in with the 2600 and not the NES? Nope, still makes no sense!

 

They are much closer to the NES in release date,

They are much closer to the NES in technology.

The 5200 is the LITERAL next-gen replacement for the 2600

 

Sorry- if you want to condense generations, then these systems belong in the 3rd generation with the NES, not in the 1977 generation. The Wikipedia editor or whoever decided this is in error.

 

 

I'm also sure the generation divides will become obsolete or re-worked as more systems come out. Right now, the numbers are manageable- 7th gen, 8th gen, still easy on the tongue & mind. 15th? Not so much. Give it enough time, they'll change the breakdown again ("Everything on a cartridge is now first gen/ cart era") and a whole new group of retro fans will be complaining about it ("an Atari and a Genesis are nothing alike, why are they grouping them together? This is such a mistake!")

Again era vs generation. 'Generation' has a precise, technical meaning, 'Era' has a more "things that feel like they should go together type of meaning. As long as people talk about gaming in terms of generations, you might as well get it right. If you want to talk about "Cart Era", "3-D era", "loot crate era", etc. That's different, you can slice and dice it however you like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Hoshi, it doesn't really matter in which "generation" a 1982 magazine would use to categorize ColecoVision or Atari 5200, because they're all "old" now. We could probably redo a cartoon like this with console "eras." Splitting hairs over small differences within a few years? Not really worth fighting about in my opinion.

Well the NES is old too, but yet to hear the younger generation tell the history of videogames it goes something like this:

 

1. In the beginning Atari released Pong, next they released ET and destroyed the industry

2. Then came the NES and it was glorious!

3. Then came Super Mario Brothers and it was glorious!

4. Then came Zelda and it was glorious! and so on and so on

 

I just don't think the classic era gets enough respect for what it did, and mislabeling the generations is part of that disrespect.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't like it, take it up with Wikipedia, the encyclopedia everyone can edit.

yeah.. I know how Wikipedia edit wars work. If I corrected it and added my source (Electronic Games magazine), some editor would change it back within 5 minutes citing other sources that are somehow more legit. Even if those sources used the Wikipedia as their source for generational numbering in the first place! :)

 

There have been authors who can't correct biographical information about themselves on Wikipedia because some newspaper article misreported it, and those articles are considered more valid than actual firsthand information because reasons.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what little it's worth, I clearly remember seeing Atari 2600 games, ColecoVision games, and Intellivision games being sold in the video game section at Toys'R'Us and other stores back in the early 80s. To me, that's the main indicator of what a "generation" is. If they were actively competing with one another for consumer $$$ during the same time period, then they are part of the same generation. Of course, there's some unavoidable overlapping (NES was still being sold while Sega was transitioning from SMS to Genesis, for example) because each console has its own release date and life cycle. That's why a technology-based sub-categorization is required, to help clarify some of the fuzziness. This sub-categorization leads to clear statements such as the Super-NES being of the same generation as the Genesis, and the PlayStation being of the same generation as the Saturn.

 

Attempting to categorize consoles strictly by technology is pointless because the electronic components inside each console were not created simultaneously in one swoop. Should the ColecoVision and Game Boy be lumped into the same "generation" because they both used a Z80 CPU? There's actually quite a few years that separate the two, and they were never sold in stores together at the same time (except maybe in a few specialized boutiques).

 

 

There have been authors who can't correct biographical information about themselves on Wikipedia because some newspaper article misreported it, and those articles are considered more valid than actual firsthand information because reasons.

Well yeah, obviously. Since anyone can go on the internet and pretend he/she is someone else, there needs to be some kind of system in place to validate things. So if an author wants to correct his own biographical info on Wikipedia, he needs to go through proper channels.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well yeah, obviously. Since anyone can go on the internet and pretend he/she is someone else, there needs to be some kind of system in place to validate things. So if an author wants to correct his own biographical info on Wikipedia, he needs to go through proper channels.

But in Wikipedia's case the "proper channels" are too often news articles that frequently contain incorrect information. It's hardly ideal.

And there's a number of "Wikipedia hoaxes" that have lived on the site for years before being discovered, so it's not like their system is working well as it is.

 

You should be able to provide a sworn affidavit or something to correct personal information, and that affidavit would serve as the source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the NES is old too, but yet to hear the younger generation tell the history of videogames it goes something like this:

 

1. In the beginning Atari released Pong, next they released ET and destroyed the industry

2. Then came the NES and it was glorious!

3. Then came Super Mario Brothers and it was glorious!

4. Then came Zelda and it was glorious! and so on and so on

 

 

 

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :rolling:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the 2600 had a big cultural impact as well. The 5200/CV/Vectrex not so much, so therefore they should be lumped in with the 2600 and not the NES? Nope, still makes no sense!

 

They are much closer to the NES in release date,

They are much closer to the NES in technology.

The 5200 is the LITERAL next-gen replacement for the 2600

 

Sorry- if you want to condense generations, then these systems belong in the 3rd generation with the NES, not in the 1977 generation. The Wikipedia editor or whoever decided this is in error.

 

 

 

Colecovision released August 1982

Atari 5200 released November 1982

Vectrex released November 1982

Atari 7800 released May 1986 (with a test run 2 years earlier)

NES released September 1986 (with a test run in October 1985)

 

If NES marks the beginning of its generation/era, then anything that released prior is part of the previous era. Timelines only move one way. You can certainly make a case to move the 7800 up to the NES era, given the leapfrogging test & full release dates- but I'm sure many a folk will argue it was intended to release in 1984, same as its test run, so it sound count as pre-NES.

 

We appear to have stumbled into something else the industry has done to displease us- chop up the early history into unflattering chunks! :-D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was displeased when they stopped printing written instructions that came packed with each new title. I remember Christmas of 1982 I got a Colecovision and the kids next door got a 5200. We spent the rest of the Christmas holidays making a trail back and forth playing both systems. It got to the point that I would be at there house alone playing the 5200 and they would be playing Donkey Kong at my house. Fun times indeed:) I eventually came across a game they had called Star Raiders and asked them about it. They said it was complicated and they had no idea how to play it. I started messing around with it and the first time I accidentally hit a red alert I knew I had to figure this thing out. The game manual compared to anything I had previously read was huge! I took it home that night and read it cover to cover and the next day the three of us had a blast playing Star Raiders on the 5200. A very well written instruction booklet and overlays for that game. I would also like to add that even though Swordquest sucked total ass the comics and posters that came with the games were very cool.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Colecovision released August 1982

Atari 5200 released November 1982

Vectrex released November 1982

Atari 7800 released May 1986 (with a test run 2 years earlier)

NES released September 1986 (with a test run in October 1985)

 

If NES marks the beginning of its generation/era, then anything that released prior is part of the previous era. Timelines only move one way. You can certainly make a case to move the 7800 up to the NES era, given the leapfrogging test & full release dates- but I'm sure many a folk will argue it was intended to release in 1984, same as its test run, so it sound count as pre-NES.

 

We appear to have stumbled into something else the industry has done to displease us- chop up the early history into unflattering chunks! :-D

 

Hello, the NES was released in July 1983 (Japan, it just had a different name (Famicom)). Always the original release date counts.

Otherwise you could say the Atari 2600 was released in 1983 (released in 83 in Japan as the 2800). See how stupid that is?

Edited by high voltage
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was displeased when they stopped printing written instructions that came packed with each new title. I remember Christmas of 1982 I got a Colecovision and the kids next door got a 5200. We spent the rest of the Christmas holidays making a trail back and forth playing both systems. It got to the point that I would be at there house alone playing the 5200 and they would be playing Donkey Kong at my house. Fun times indeed:) I eventually came across a game they had called Star Raiders and asked them about it. They said it was complicated and they had no idea how to play it. I started messing around with it and the first time I accidentally hit a red alert I knew I had to figure this thing out. The game manual compared to anything I had previously read was huge! I took it home that night and read it cover to cover and the next day the three of us had a blast playing Star Raiders on the 5200. A very well written instruction booklet and overlays for that game. I would also like to add that even though Swordquest sucked total ass the comics and posters that came with the games were very cool.

Onscreen instructions, tutorials, and menus kinda obviate the need for printed manuals. Take the VCS vs 7800 versions of Asteroids, for example. The earlier game has a massive "game select matrix" where you choose a numbered variation by holding the Select button and choosing it from the array. The later version lets you select the options up front from a menu.

 

I enjoyed the documentation when it was necessary and added something to the experience, and I've bought companion books for things like Skyrim. With a few exceptions, it seems like games since the NES could get by with little more than the "bootleg" instructions given at video rental places.

 

Heh, video rental places. I do NOT miss scrounging the bins at Blockbuster Video, but I'll wager at least a few people reading this thread might.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colecovision released August 1982

Atari 5200 released November 1982

Vectrex released November 1982

Atari 7800 released May 1986 (with a test run 2 years earlier)

NES released September 1986 (with a test run in October 1985)

 

If NES marks the beginning of its generation/era, then anything that released prior is part of the previous era. Timelines only move one way. You can certainly make a case to move the 7800 up to the NES era, given the leapfrogging test & full release dates- but I'm sure many a folk will argue it was intended to release in 1984, same as its test run, so it sound count as pre-NES.

The NES was released in Japan in July 1983! Only 8 months after the 5200

 

7800 is an interesting case. It was more a course correction by Atari than a new gen proper. Tech-wise it doesn't really leapfrog the 5200. Sure it has a better sprite engine, but it has a much worse soundchip. I would say it belongs to the same generation as 5200/CV/NES

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hello, the NES was released in July 1983 (Japan, it just had a different name (Famicom)). Always the original release date counts.

Otherwise you could say the Atari 2600 was released in 1983 (released in 83 in Japan as the 2800). See how stupid that is?

 

Oh, I'm very aware of how stupid this all is- it's why the first thing I said was the real divisions happen based on cultural significance. Anything non-Nintendo or Sega from the NESish time or before gets shoved into one big, weird 'generation' becuase my fellow 30-somethings decided what they grew up playing mattered & the rest didn't. I'm sure in another 10-20 years, those now 50-somethings will be complaining that 8 & 16 bit got shoved into one big pre-playstation lump as those become old & unimportant to whoever makes the rules next. Maybe they'll make everything pre-playstation one big cartridge generation. I don't know. It's gonna be interesting to see it play out.

 

I was displeased when they stopped printing written instructions that came packed with each new title. I remember Christmas of 1982 I got a Colecovision and the kids next door got a 5200. We spent the rest of the Christmas holidays making a trail back and forth playing both systems. It got to the point that I would be at there house alone playing the 5200 and they would be playing Donkey Kong at my house. Fun times indeed:) I eventually came across a game they had called Star Raiders and asked them about it. They said it was complicated and they had no idea how to play it. I started messing around with it and the first time I accidentally hit a red alert I knew I had to figure this thing out. The game manual compared to anything I had previously read was huge! I took it home that night and read it cover to cover and the next day the three of us had a blast playing Star Raiders on the 5200. A very well written instruction booklet and overlays for that game. I would also like to add that even though Swordquest sucked total ass the comics and posters that came with the games were very cool.

 

Oh MAN, YES! Considering I buy a lot of used games, and want complete copies for my disc based titles, it drives me insane that I have to stand around Gamestop or wherever, games in one hand & phone in the other, looking at Ebay photos and unboxing videos to see if the game came with a manual or not! I miss how Nintendo handled it on the Wii U- you'd either get a manual, or a paper telling you how to reach the digital manual so you'd know there wasn't supposed to be one!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some "displeasure" milestones for me

 

~1982: I wish that there were some good new games on the Odyssey 2, the only system I have as a tween. I write letters to Parker Brothers and Imagic, wishing they'd help me out. They write back that O2 isn't popular enough for them to be profitable. I didn't find out about the O2 Imagic games until many years later. I descend on the Video Game Crash like a hungry coyote and grab everything I can.

 

~1985: I observe that many of the new games in the arcade are "run to the right, hit all the guys," a genre that doesn't do much for me. I get over it by embracing the NES a few years later.

 

~1990: Why are these games $50 and $60? This is an expensive hobby. I drown my sorrows in Funcoland exchanges.

 

~1991: The first Star Wars game on console in ages appears on NES. It's like Journey to Silius but with worse controls. I am sad.

 

~1992: All the magazines are talking about Street Fighter II, to the exclusion of all else. Why? I reluctantly join the herd and buy a copy for $70. It's a good party game. I'm still bad at fighters, but I kinda see the appeal.

 

~1994: Star Wars Arcade! Holy shit! Flat shaded polygons are gorgeous. But it's on the weird 32X add-on, and I never see the arcade game. I eventually play a discount version. It doesn't feel like flying through space, because control is severely limited.

 

~1997: Sega Saturn fails to thrive. I liked that system.

 

~1999: Star Wars Episode I games land with a wet thump. I guess Racer is OK. Why isn't that on GOG/Steam yet?

 

~2000: Battlesphere for the Atari Jaguar is finally released. I shaved my legs for this? Also see: Perfect Dark N64. Blurry, slow mess.

 

I think that since these days, I've gained enough perspective (and disposable income) to find stuff I like, emulate memories from the past, and buy the market leaders when there's something I want to play. I just wish there were more time to do so.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some "displeasure" milestones for me

 

~1982: I wish that there were some good new games on the Odyssey 2, the only system I have as a tween. I write letters to Parker Brothers and Imagic, wishing they'd help me out. They write back that O2 isn't popular enough for them to be profitable. I didn't find out about the O2 Imagic games until many years later.

 

 

Aww. That's cute. Poor kid. :sad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aww. That's cute. Poor kid. :sad:

 

I often wonder if I could have gotten the "gaming" thing out of myself system if I had unlimited access to everything like some of my friends did. C64 with a modem = infinite everything. I was strung along with only enough gaming at arcades and friends' houses to keep me on the hook, never to excess. Always left wanting more.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I often wonder if I could have gotten the "gaming" thing out of myself system if I had unlimited access to everything

 

Later part of 1982, I wanted a ColecoVision so frickin bad it was an obsession. I constantly stared at the 2 page ad in Electronic Games magazine. I believe I started saving for it, but never made it happen. Then sometime in 83, I lost interest for the most part. Except through the mid 80s, I'd go over to a friend's who had a Texas Instruments (I think) computer with some (illicit probably) classic games on disk. Which I enjoyed playing. Played tons of Gyruss on that thing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Later part of 1982, I wanted a ColecoVision so frickin bad it was an obsession. I constantly stared at the 2 page ad in Electronic Games magazine. I believe I started saving for it, but never made it happen. Then sometime in 83, I lost interest for the most part. Except through the mid 80s, I'd go over to a friend's who had a Texas Instruments (I think) computer with some (illicit probably) classic games on disk. Which I enjoyed playing. Played tons of Gyruss on that thing.

 

My folks caught me completely off guard when I got my Colecovision for Christmas 1982. My Dad did very well with his job but I wasn't a spoiled brat or anything. The other factor was that you couldn't get them anywhere! It was definitely my Red Ryder moment as a kid! The topper was those neighbor kids I spoke of in my earlier post. They were nice but the older one was a bit of a one-upster. If you had it he had hit first or had done it twice as well. I remember at Easter my brother and I would usually just get lots of candy while they would get toys like it was Christmas again. I have to admit I will never forget the look on his face when he walked in Christmas day and exclaimed.....YOU GOT A COLECOVISION!!! Donkey Kong was the shit and the 5200 wasn't playing it that Christmas!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...