what is a video game

[risbolla]

sniping the 2nd page is a video game ???

[Zomber_Jesus]

No, but sniping the 3rd one is

[grue]

some games ask you to imagine more, some ask you to read entire books, some are almost like watching a movie. but this isn't what makes them video games. the one defining characteristic is interacting with imposibility.

reading tolkien and imagining legolas isn't the same as playing legolas in a game. which has nothing to do with your level of enjoyment of books vs games, that's not what the argument is about. the isolated defining characteristic of video games is that they emulate rules outside of real life possibility

you can play with an RC car and it's great. you can also play sega rally and it's great. what's the difference? one's pretending to be an actual race that doesn't work within the rules of real life.

heck even sims are games insofar as they immitate real life conditions in impossible to reproduce means

[Zomber_Jesus]

I get you and agree with you up to a point, but there's a lot of strong edge cases that pop up because of the broad definitions of emulation and 'impossible in real life'. What you're classifying as pivotal for games is a matter of fine degrees. A ton of games are devoted to reproducing the most mundane aspects of life as realistically as possible, and besides that, the borders between emulation via game and emulation via other mediums are very thin. Playing as Geralt and reading the witcher share a bunch of similarities. In both cases you're supposed to be identifying with him and experiencing his story and world, including their impossibilities. What I'm arguing is that the way that interaction is framed through mechanics carries more significance than the mere fact you're emulating a universe with different rules.

[Kentucky Fried]

the interaction with a created world is the defining trait of a videogame in my opinion
regardless of whether the scenario is impossible or not
although the interaction with impossibility is certainly one of the greatest assets of videogames

[Tyler_Legrand]

Books are seen as a more "intellectual" hobby, compared to movies; and moreso than video games.

Yet, a video game can do everything a book can (i.e. give you words to read). It can do eveything a radio can, and also everything a movie can. And more! It has more power than any other medium. However, despite all that power we (by which I mean the average joe) also expect video games to be "dumber" or more of "a waste of time" than books. Are we wrong in our assumptions, or are we right and most developers do squander that power to make "wastes of time"?

[Zomber_Jesus]

Movies were also very bland for their first 30 years (compared to today - they were still awesome ) until we learned how to utilize the language of cinematography. Also note that making a high end game is a lot more labour, money and technology intense than any other medium. As a result, when people invest into games they absolutely need them to have a big return in terms of profits. So they tend to focus more on entertainment and occasionally slip some art in there as a luxury. A very Hollywood kind of approach. That's not to say that art games don't exist, they just get less money, publicity and credit. God knows the menu theme of Yume Nikki on it's own is enough to make me cry like a bitch.

[grue]

A ton of games are devoted to reproducing the most mundane aspects of life as realistically as possible, and besides that, the borders between emulation via game and emulation via other mediums are very thin. (...) What I'm arguing is that the way that interaction is framed through mechanics carries more significance than the mere fact you're emulating a universe with different rules.

The thing about impossibilities isn't simply fantasy. Sims are a good example for this. You can be playing a plane flying sim, for example, that does its best at being as "plane-like" as possible. The "game" there is pretending to be a pilot, namely, by people who don't have the means to. I am able to "fly a plane" without the burden of killing people and causing millions in property damage in case I did badly. I imagine that a pilot that comes home and plays a flight sim for fun would also get a kick out of the lifted responsibility. His impossible conditions are met differently from mine: my impossibility is actuall being in a cockpit, his impossibility is doing it in his underpants while being free to crash without consequence.

This is to me the fundamental characteristic of video games. Now you can say that there's a lived experience in flying a plane through the power of imagination from a book and I agree, but you'd be missing the "game" quality there. You're drawn into a world but you have no interaction with it, zero, it plays out in front of you and you either go with the flow or you set it aside.

Now I agree interaction through mechanics is fundamental but I would argue that that is fundamental to "games" as a whole. All games are about interaction and mechanics. Only video games do it through impossibility. You can't do impossible things in a board game - you can imagine them, you find ways to act upon them, but what you actually do is a very possible dice roll or card draw. And by "possible" I mean working within the limits of reality. "Video games" are a subset of a larger "Games" category that is definitely all about interaction/mechanics/fail state and whatever.

Now I imagine computers also follow the laws of physics so video games are absolutely an illusion. The impossibility isn't real. That's why I call it an emulation (even though the dictionary tells me this may be the wrong word to use here).

[grue]

I think the grayer area would be Pinball machines. They are maybe the precursors to video games. Never thought about that but it's an interesting notion.

[grue]

Like I guess the real question is would you play Magic the Gathering on a computer if

a) you had a full collection of cards available,

b) there were people around willing to play with you and

c) the video game were no different in any way from the real thing (no cool animations, no automatic dice rolls or whatever, nothing a computer could do that a human can't or takes longer to do)?

I don't think you would. You seek a computer/console whatever because it gives you something that physical things can't or aren't giving you.

[GeorgeBubbinzInSpace]

Like I guess the real question is would you play Magic the Gathering on a computer if

a) you had a full collection of cards available,

b) there were people around willing to play with you and

c) the video game were no different in any way from the real thing (no cool animations, no automatic dice rolls or whatever, nothing a computer could do that a human can't or takes longer to do)?

a.) yes 
b.) yes if they wanted to play online too  
c.) wait what? the fact is if you put mtg on a computer, there would at the very least be some conveniences added, auto shuffle, dice rolling, taking cards out of the graveyard would even be less of a hassle if you could just click the deck and all the cards in there came up. I've never played mtg I just have the most basic idea of how it's played, and I am pretty sure the mtg online client is just a black screen with your cards on it, with those basic conveniences, and I have friends that play it together.

[risbolla]

trick question,,,,no !! cos magic the gathering is for nerds

[grue]

Like I guess the real question is would you play Magic the Gathering on a computer if

a) you had a full collection of cards available,

b) there were people around willing to play with you and

c) the video game were no different in any way from the real thing (no cool animations, no automatic dice rolls or whatever, nothing a computer could do that a human can't or takes longer to do)?

a.) yes 
b.) yes if they wanted to play online too  
c.) wait what? the fact is if you put mtg on a computer, there would at the very least be some conveniences added, auto shuffle, dice rolling, taking cards out of the graveyard would even be less of a hassle if you could just click the deck and all the cards in there came up. I've never played mtg I just have the most basic idea of how it's played, and I am pretty sure the mtg online client is just a black screen with your cards on it, with those basic conveniences, and I have friends that play it together.

exactly. that's my point. I think if computers gave you an experience "as is real life" like that, nothing gained or lost, there would be no point to video games.

to me the idea that a group of people in the same room with prepared decks would prefer the computer instead is completely bonkers. mtg online is cool bc, well, that group isnt always around, and you can play whenever (therefore, meeting an impossibility)

[GeorgeBubbinzInSpace]

is this entire thread a ruse for you and ben to advertise your new podcast, "Completely Bonkers"

[Ben]

i like daniel's point about impossibility

Like I guess the real question is would you play Magic the Gathering on a computer if

a) you had a full collection of cards available,

b) there were people around willing to play with you and

c) the video game were no different in any way from the real thing (no cool animations, no automatic dice rolls or whatever, nothing a computer could do that a human can't or takes longer to do)?

a.) yes 
b.) yes if they wanted to play online too  
c.) wait what? the fact is if you put mtg on a computer, there would at the very least be some conveniences added, auto shuffle, dice rolling, taking cards out of the graveyard would even be less of a hassle if you could just click the deck and all the cards in there came up. I've never played mtg I just have the most basic idea of how it's played, and I am pretty sure the mtg online client is just a black screen with your cards on it, with those basic conveniences, and I have friends that play it together.

exactly. that's my point. I think if computers gave you an experience "as is real life" like that, nothing gained or lost, there would be no point to video games.

to me the idea that a group of people in the same room with prepared decks would prefer the computer instead is completely bonkers. mtg online is cool bc, well, that group isnt always around, and you can play whenever (therefore, meeting an impossibility)

i think its worth mentioning that it would be impossible for a video game to be "as is real life" and not not a video game. what i mean is, once you make a game as real as real life- it is real life and wouldnt be a game. the two are mutually exclusive. this is a good confirmation of his point, though i think a) and b) are kind of irrelevant

Books are seen as a more "intellectual" hobby, compared to movies; and moreso than video games.

Yet, a video game can do everything a book can (i.e. give you words to read).  It can do eveything a radio can, and also everything a movie can.  And more! It has more power than any other medium.  However, despite all that power we (by which I mean the average joe) also expect video games to be "dumber" or more of "a waste of time" than books.  Are we wrong in our assumptions, or are we right and most developers do squander that power to make "wastes of time"?

with great power comes great responsibility. i agree and will say more later but i gotta go soon

i think daniel's pinball example is funny. surely, pinball is just a score and a set of conditions predicated upon sensors, mechanical flippers, and springs. does classical mechanics invalidate something for being a video game? are all the flippers and sensors just a "controller" that is hard as hell to use? what are other examples of games that do this?

i had another one: in one of the final destination movies, you can... press a button on your remote to decide whether a character survives a thing, like a choose-your-own adventure. is this a video game? obviously i think in both examples the definition arises from the context. the pinball table evolves from a mechanical analog game and the second one evolves from film