State of Games Introduction and Part I: A Brief History

My name is Sergio Ortiz and I play video games.

A simple enough statement. As a statement, it tells people two things about me, my name and something I do. Now when people read that or hear that, instead of envisioning me playing video games, they tend to imagine something else entirely. They tend to see in their mind's eye a guy who whiles away his time mindlessly staring into a dark glowing abyss of bleeps and bloops and pixilated images of fantasy violence and nothing more. Or at least that was the case when I was a youth.

Nowadays, with games being a far more omnipresent medium, people tend to conjure up images of annoying teenagers or men-children talking loudly at virtual worlds that, to onlookers, appear entirely devoid of purpose or meaning. While video games have indeed become a generally more potent figure in the public conscious, as far social norms go, the stigma experienced in its earliest days still exists and often thrives, especially in light of such inflammatory situations as the now well talked about Fox News/Bulletstorm incident.

As such, I am here to talk about the state of games, and specifically why is it that in an age where progressiveness and tolerance are taught first, such a rich and promising artistic medium as video games is still treated like the dirty, childish step-cousin of cinema, television and literature. As a gamer, I have spent much time thinking about the state of games and I wish to share with you some of my thoughts on the matter.

Part I: A Brief History

1950s to 1980s

To begin, it is very important to understand the genesis of video games and their place in the social hierarchy of artistic entertainment. Video games were, at their birth, little more than flashing lights on obscure computing equipment that some scientists, curious and bored, figured out how to control with knobs and buttons. Many of the earliest games were basic virtual analogues to real world games, often mathematical or logical in nature, such as nim, tic-tac-toe, chess and tennis for two (with a later similar implementation being known as "Pong").

Alongside these arguably "simple" games, there were also the more complex, such as a very early game called Spacewar!. In this game, two player controlled graphical representations of space-faring vessels were forced to navigate through the simulated gravitational pull of a star with a limited supply of fuel, all the while attempting to destroy their opponent through use of limited warheads. In addition to this arguably intricate system, players were also given the ability to "jump" to hyperspace which resulted in the random relocation of the vessel somewhere else in the gamespace (the caveat being on each additional use the chances of one's ship simply exploding on use increased significantly).

While this game still relied upon the more rigid mathematical and scientific rules, what it demonstrated was a singular potential within video games as a medium, namely the possibility of supporting infinitely more complex, underlying systems. This unique capability of games, to accurately simulate designed systems independent of creator input that can then be altered by the end-user, is something that no other artistic or entertainment medium can achieve.

However, it is important to recall that at this stage of our brief history, games were still as far from the public conscious as the distance of Phobos from Mars. But that is not to say that they were wholly unknown objects. As more than often is the case, those at the forefront of the technological developments of the 1950s and 1960s were very much aware of the capabilities afforded to them by the continually evolving technology that was the computer. By the 1970s, the idea of bringing these "games" to the masses was well on its way to becoming a reality. With the release of the Magnavox Odyssey in 1972, the slow march of video games into the purview of the public eye began.

And so video games, for the first time, entered the home of consumers worldwide. As objects of wonder and fancy, these first iterations were seen by most as entertaining novelties for those who could afford such luxuries. With the first available games being the simplest of their older cousins, it was no wonder that few, if any, looked upon the game medium as one with artistic potential. As the years progressed and the technology behind the games matured and became more accessible to the average household, this initial sense of thoughtless whimsy began to fade for as increasingly complex games began to be developed.

By the 1980s, video games had found themselves quickly becoming a ubiquitous presence in the newly growing culture of youth. While they had matured far beyond their initial simplistic vestiges, they remained to be seen by society at large as "toys" for children and a sign of the frivolity of youth, regardless of their constantly evolving artistic merit (in the form of more robust graphical engines, the introduction of plots and character motivations and musical accompaniment). This sense of childish entertainment, compounded with the varying degrees of generational divisions occurring at the time, was key to the social view towards video games being cemented for the decades to follow.

And with that, we have now reached what is arguably considered the "Modern Era" of video games. This period, existing from the 1990s to today, has often been characterized as the "coming of age" of video games, especially with regard to the exponential growth we've seen in the tech behind games and the complexity of the art within them. Now the question arises, if this "Modern Era" fundamentally redefined the state of games from the previous generation, how is it that we have yet to see a significant change in attitude towards them? That in itself will require a more deeper examination of the changes that occurred within gaming and, perhaps more pertinently, the changes that occurred in society. So be sure to tune in next Sunday for Part II of the State of Games.