"Video Games": why is this primitive term still used?

[FalloutJack]

Can't really think of a good reason to change it. It's quick, it's functional, and instantly recognizable by all persons.

 

[MiriaJiyuu]

Any suggestions for other name?
Digital games? (Digames, Digigames?)

I got to here before I started singing the original Digimon theme in my head.

OT: Why would we change it, there's no reason that wouldn't be applied to the new term and we'd all continue calling them video games anyway.

 

[burningdragoon]

A game has to have a victory condition and/or loss condition

"I'm no longer enjoying this game" sounds like a loss condition to me.

Edit: Right the topic. Come up with a 2-3 syllable word that doesn't sound pretentious and maybe it will catch on. It won't, but maybe.

but that is not an example of victory/loss condition

And your rigid view is the correct one because...?

 

[GangstaGeek]

Well for one abbreviations is a good way to do it.

Also making up a term seems better than just stuffing two terms together.

"interactives" my favorive easy simple and respectable

"short for interactive media"

 

[zehydra]

A game has to have a victory condition and/or loss condition

"I'm no longer enjoying this game" sounds like a loss condition to me.

Edit: Right the topic. Come up with a 2-3 syllable word that doesn't sound pretentious and maybe it will catch on. It won't, but maybe.

but that is not an example of victory/loss condition

And your rigid view is the correct one because...?

Victor/Loss conditions are defined with respect to the game. However you feel has no bearing on these conditions; they are objective.

For instance, just because you find chess boring doesn't mean you lost

 

[COMaestro]

A game has to have a victory condition and/or loss condition

"I'm no longer enjoying this game" sounds like a loss condition to me.

Edit: Right the topic. Come up with a 2-3 syllable word that doesn't sound pretentious and maybe it will catch on. It won't, but maybe.

but that is not an example of victory/loss condition

And your rigid view is the correct one because...?

Victor/Loss conditions are defined with respect to the game. However you feel has no bearing on these conditions; they are objective.

For instance, just because you find chess boring doesn't mean you lost

Is Skyrim a game? You never "win" the game as it keeps going on and on. You can finish a quest path, but you will always be able to roam round the world fighting monsters. You can die, but you simply reload and continue from where you left off, so it barely counts as a "loss". By your definition, many open world games cannot be considered games, which I completely disagree with. Do you consider it winning when you complete the main storyline? When you do that and all the side quests? When you have acquired all acheivements/trophies? For games like Skyrim or Fallout, this is totally subjective as it depends on the person playing and how they determine when they have "won" the game.

 

[burningdragoon]

A game has to have a victory condition and/or loss condition

"I'm no longer enjoying this game" sounds like a loss condition to me.

but that is not an example of victory/loss condition

And your rigid view is the correct one because...?

Victor/Loss conditions are defined with respect to the game. However you feel has no bearing on these conditions; they are objective.

For instance, just because you find chess boring doesn't mean you lost

Why do the win/loss conditions need to be explicitly written into the game to be valid? And why do games need explicit win or loss conditions to count as games?

If you're in a chess competition and then just stop for whatever reason, you've still lost even if you didn't lose by the explicit state of checkmate.

 

[zehydra]

A game has to have a victory condition and/or loss condition

"I'm no longer enjoying this game" sounds like a loss condition to me.

but that is not an example of victory/loss condition

And your rigid view is the correct one because...?

Victor/Loss conditions are defined with respect to the game. However you feel has no bearing on these conditions; they are objective.

For instance, just because you find chess boring doesn't mean you lost

Why do the win/loss conditions need to be explicitly written into the game to be valid? And why do games need explicit win or loss conditions to count as games?

If you're in a chess competition and then just stop for whatever reason, you've still lost even if you didn't lose by the explicit state of checkmate.

Technically speaking you didn't lose so much as forfeit the game. That is, you giving up is external to the game itself, not a part of the game. The Victory condition of checkmate is part of the game.

 

[zehydra]

A game has to have a victory condition and/or loss condition

"I'm no longer enjoying this game" sounds like a loss condition to me.

Edit: Right the topic. Come up with a 2-3 syllable word that doesn't sound pretentious and maybe it will catch on. It won't, but maybe.

but that is not an example of victory/loss condition

And your rigid view is the correct one because...?

Victor/Loss conditions are defined with respect to the game. However you feel has no bearing on these conditions; they are objective.

For instance, just because you find chess boring doesn't mean you lost

Is Skyrim a game? You never "win" the game as it keeps going on and on. You can finish a quest path, but you will always be able to roam round the world fighting monsters. You can die, but you simply reload and continue from where you left off, so it barely counts as a "loss". By your definition, many open world games cannot be considered games, which I completely disagree with. Do you consider it winning when you complete the main storyline? When you do that and all the side quests? When you have acquired all acheivements/trophies? For games like Skyrim or Fallout, this is totally subjective as it depends on the person playing and how they determine when they have "won" the game.

Typically beating the "main quest" is usually considered beating the game, but though it's not really clear in open world video games. Their status as a game is fuzzy. You might consider something like Skyrim to be an entity that has many different games within it.

 

[McMarbles]

Because we're not incredibly pretentious?

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

Well, we still call games played on a board board games, games played with pen and paper, pen and paper games, ect.
So, why shouldn't we call a game played on a video display a video game?

 

[Something Amyss]

I see what you did there.... *twitch twitch* sorry I always think the world is out to get me..er is against me..er dose not agree with my opinion >>

LOL

Happens to the best of us, sometimes. It's even harder on the web, since it's easy to misconstrue text.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

I see what you did there.... *twitch twitch* sorry I always think the world is out to get me..er is against me..er dose not agree with my opinion >>

LOL

Happens to the best of us, sometimes. It's even harder on the web, since it's easy to misconstrue text.

In order to get stuff into my single brain cell everything is put through a blender. And the voices don't help much when they argue with my imaginary friends...

 

[Davey Woo]

I suppose you could just use 'games' but in order to specify, there is nothing wrong with video games.
Board games are called that because they're played on a board.
Card games are called that because they're played with cards.
Video games are called that because they are essentially interactive videos.
Also computer games takes longer to say, so screw that.

 

[Something Amyss]

I know that the definition of game used here is word for word from the dictionary, but I would recommend altering it to say a game is an INTERACTIVE activity, to avoid the argument that the definition is too loose and could be applied to reading or watching TV. So reading a book or watching TV is not interactive, as no matter what you do, it does not change the story you are watching/reading.

Yeah, but he was specifically endorsing it as dovetailing with his idea of a game.

As far as driving around, that CAN be a game, depending on your mindset at the time. How fast can I get to my friend's house or can I beat that other car off the line would be games of sorts. Ultimately, I say a game is something interactive done for entertainment purposes.

Just to clarify on that, would driving around out of boredom count as a game?

I do agree with you Xanadu, that games can definitely have a productive purpose. Otherwise, why are there so many educational games for children? I remember playing Math Blaster and such when I was a kid. It was fun, and I learned basic math. Gamification is a wonderful thing and can make dull routine tasks fun when done correctly.

I remember playing around with educational games when I was a kid. I liked logic games most of all, but Math Blaster was fun.

To refer back to Microsoft Flight Simulator, you can make your own victory and loss conditions. Simply, if I land the plane without crashing it, I technically have a victory. If I crash, I lose. Alternately, if I wanted to mess around, I could consider it a victory if I crash the plane into the ground creating a spectacular fireball. It's all in the mindset. Same as D&D, as Xanadu mentioned. It is a game, and while your characters can die, that is not a loss as long as the group had fun. So the only win/loss conditions are really did the people playing enjoy themselves or not.

That's interesting, but....

Okay, here's the thing. A sandbox isn't a game in itself. You can make a game within it. This is why I contested Minecraft. Minecraft was a series of tools, and even now I'm told it doesn't really have a fully implimented game mode. My GF is a Minecraft junkie, but it bored me. I think it's mostly beause it's first person; I love screwing around with stuff. Anyway, I'm not here to rant about Minecraft, I'm just explaining I don't know first-hand.

Now, Microsoft FS gives you an environment and tools in which you can make your own entertainment, but it does not provide goals or games in itself. I get where you're coming from, but I disagree that it's a game simply because you can make your own fun. You can play games with a calculator, but that doesn't make it a game in itself.

 

[Zipa]

Funny story, in the UK a lot of people refer to them as computer games and have done for as long as others have called them video games. Makes sense I guess since no matter how technology changes they are still games played on a computer of some sort be it a smartphone a PC or a console of some form.

 

[The_Echo]

For the same reason we still call movies "movies". 'Cause the picture, y'know... moves.

It's what they got called way back when the world was young and nobody bothered to come up with anything new before it stuck.

Do we need something new? Not really. Besides, at this point it would just sound pretentious.

"Excuse me? I'm not playing some "video game" for babies here, I'm partaking in interactive entertainment multimedia thank you very much."

This reminds me of the whole, "It's not a comic book, it's a graphic novel" thing.

*Shudders*

I thought graphic novels were technically different? Like, if it exceeded a certain number of pages, it was a graphic novel. Sort of like how regular books get split between novella and novel.

OT: I don't... I don't see any problems with the term "video game." It's not as though it's inaccurate.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

Why is it still used?

Because the primitive term 'video games' works? We also call cars 'cars' because the made-up word instantly reminds us of the man-made thing that didn't exist until a century ago, and if you extend the meaning of 'car' we can even go back to horses & carriage type deals. Why do we call cats 'cats' and dogs 'dogs'?

Give me an example of what you think games should be called and what video games should be called. I'll wait.

 

[Lord Beautiful]

I can hear the screaming of the Shut Up and Jam: Gaiden save points.

 

[Jodah]

You need some way to differentiate it from other forms of games. "Games" could mean board games, card games, sports, tabletop games, drinking games, party games, etc... One thing you should notice is that all of those (except sports) use the same naming syntax as video games IE descriptor + game(s). Video games are games played with a video aspect. This can then be further broken down with other terms such as console game, pc game, PS3 game, role playing game, etc.

We could start calling them computer games, I suppose, but even though that is technically correct (all consoles are computers) I suspect many console users would feel insulted/upset. Furthermore, use of said term could lead to confusion, though more limited than the generic word "game." Currently when someone says "computer game" most people think of PC/Mac games.

TLDR: When describing a game, terms are added to specify what you actually mean. "Game" could mean anything whereas "video game" means a certain subsection of games and "computer game" is an even more narrow subset.