It's almost as if they had to cater to a broad audience, being on mainstream television and all.
My girlfriend is pretty games illiterate and she thought it was fascinating, and got more out of it than she thought she might. As a gamer I enjoyed it, thought it was really well made.
I really enjoyed it. Great to see Elite again, can't wait for Elite 4: Dangerous to come to PS4.
Overall this is a very good documentary, it tried to cover the necessary games throughout the history of video games.
Sure it'd never touch very niche games, but it covered enough games such as Papers Please, TLoU, or SotC as a general introduction to the mainstream viewers.
It's a very entertaining documentary.
Sure it'd never touch very niche games, but it covered enough games such as Papers Please, TLoU, or SotC as a general introduction to the mainstream viewers.
It's a very entertaining documentary.
Really well done documentary. Enjoyed it. I'll also recommend people watch Gameswipe if they haven't.
Just watched the whole thing: for a 1 hour and a half show it was splendid, it lost a bit of focus at a certain point but also things in gaming industry got more complex and multifaceted.
Question: did this air on public TV in UK? I mean, was it available for everyone to watch, and payed with public money? If it is, I know that probably you hear this a lot but you britishers must have excellent public TV: here in italy it would be practically impossible to have this level of quality and cleverness, with a presenter that fun and gritty.
Question: did this air on public TV in UK? I mean, was it available for everyone to watch, and payed with public money? If it is, I know that probably you hear this a lot but you britishers must have excellent public TV: here in italy it would be practically impossible to have this level of quality and cleverness, with a presenter that fun and gritty.
Great programme. I loled at the the number 1 as it's actually pretty true.
As a look at computer games social effect on us over the years it was a well made documentary.
As a look at computer games social effect on us over the years it was a well made documentary.
No, that's the (very excellent) BBC, it was on Channel 4, which is commercial / ad revenue supported.Originally Posted by ExFalsoQuodlibet
Just watched the whole thing: for a 1 hour and a half show it was splendid, it lost a bit of focus at a certain point but also things in gaming industry got more complex and multifaceted.
Question: did this air on public TV in UK? I mean, was it available for everyone to watch, and payed with public money? If it is, I know that probably you hear this a lot but you britishers must have excellent public TV: here in italy it would be practically impossible to have this level of quality and cleverness, with a presenter that fun and gritty.
It's a channel everyone has though if that's what you mean.
It was on Channel 4, which is not publicly funded like the BBC channels. Its revenue comes mostly from commercials.Originally Posted by ExFalsoQuodlibet
Just watched the whole thing: for a 1 hour and a half show it was splendid, it lost a bit of focus at a certain point but also things in gaming industry got more complex and multifaceted.
Question: did this air on public TV in UK? I mean, was it available for everyone to watch, and payed with public money? If it is, I know that probably you hear this a lot but you britishers must have excellent public TV: here in italy it would be practically impossible to have this level of quality and cleverness, with a presenter that fun and gritty.
Yep it aired on a major national network on a Saturday primetime 9pm slot. Very impressive!Originally Posted by ExFalsoQuodlibet
Just watched the whole thing: for a 1 hour and a half show it was splendid, it lost a bit of focus at a certain point but also things in gaming industry got more complex and multifaceted.
Question: did this air on public TV in UK? I mean, was it available for everyone to watch, and payed with public money? If it is, I know that probably you hear this a lot but you britishers must have excellent public TV: here in italy it would be practically impossible to have this level of quality and cleverness, with a presenter that fun and gritty.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s104/...r-bbc-one.html
860k tuned in to watch this according to Digital Spy. Not bad as it was in direct competition with some huge shows.
860k tuned in to watch this according to Digital Spy. Not bad as it was in direct competition with some huge shows.
Originally Posted by daviyoung
It was on Channel 4, which is not publicly funded like the BBC channels. Its revenue comes mostly from commercials.
Channel 4 is commercially funded, but is still a publicly owned channel. They have a remit which they have to follow to produce innovative, diverse, educational and distinctive content, so a documentary about video games fits that perfectly.Originally Posted by SteveWD40
No, that's the (very excellent) BBC, it was on Channel 4, which is commercial / ad revenue supported.
Essentially, while the BBC has to produce high quality, mainstream stuff, Channel 4 gets to be wacky and independent but still has to make ad money.
If watching this doesn't make you want to play it immediately there is something wrong with you.Now I have to play Monkey Island.
Or this for that matter.
Last edited by godelsmetric; 12-02-2013 at 02:56 PM.
I'm the snob, yet you are the one dictating to me what arguments I should make?Originally Posted by wildfire
Besides, you are making the mistake of not realizing that for anything to have impact it has to have a large amount of exposure to begin with. The only exception are pieces of work so influential that they are imitated by the people in charge and their works become popular even though the original source is lost on the general audience.
Don't make such a disingenuous and snobbish argument next time.
What in the world is disingenuous about my position? I'm sorry but even though I love Charlie, that show was guilty of many of the list-show tropes that he himself has railed at in both his columns and on Screenwipe! Particularly the one about people who are clearly too young to actually remember the events they are talking about as their own memory.
The constantly jumping perspective, UK-centric, to global, from arcades, to computers, to early consoles, etc. Produced a distorted picture of the evolution of the scene. Which as I pointed out is fine if you are just interested in producing light entertainment, but as a far as representing a factual, historical, perspective, its a complete bust.
I don't begrudge any of the games that got a mention, but I really do wish that their obvious antecedents at least got a mention, their innovation deserves to be remembered. Most of all though, I was puzzled by the way speccy vs 64 was spotlighted, whereas the whole ST vs Amiga era didn't even warrant a mention, especially given how important that era was in Europe as a whole, and how many people who started out in that era are still influencing gaming today.
I thought the show spent too long talking about the beginning of games, everyone knows pacman, space invaders and pong are seen as the same thing these days. Games like Elite were worth spending time on but in comparison to Mario it isn't as influential. Sonic never even got a mention.
It seemed to me like they skipped over the 90s as the degenerate phase of video games that wasn't important and revolutionary compared to the very early days where games were for everyone, wholesome and friendly. Portraying the last 25 years as if industry was run by immature men who only indulged in violence and misogyny but didn't do anything revolutionary. With an all too positive and Sony focused outlook for the future. Most of the positives throuout modern gaming were featuring Somy properties. Wipeout, Parapa, SotC, the Last of Us all shown in a glowing grown up light to the exclusion of others. Unsurprising considering the sponsorship Sony made to Channel 4.
The program had some solid points but overall was shallow and had many glaring errors. Like where was FIFA and Pokemon! This to me was a 2 hour infomercial to get people nostalgic for old games and remove fear of the immaturity of gaming and that gaming is now a more than acceptable past time and is culturally equivalent to movie, tv and twitter. If we were going in chronological order shouldn't TLOU have been the final game?
It seemed to me like they skipped over the 90s as the degenerate phase of video games that wasn't important and revolutionary compared to the very early days where games were for everyone, wholesome and friendly. Portraying the last 25 years as if industry was run by immature men who only indulged in violence and misogyny but didn't do anything revolutionary. With an all too positive and Sony focused outlook for the future. Most of the positives throuout modern gaming were featuring Somy properties. Wipeout, Parapa, SotC, the Last of Us all shown in a glowing grown up light to the exclusion of others. Unsurprising considering the sponsorship Sony made to Channel 4.
The program had some solid points but overall was shallow and had many glaring errors. Like where was FIFA and Pokemon! This to me was a 2 hour infomercial to get people nostalgic for old games and remove fear of the immaturity of gaming and that gaming is now a more than acceptable past time and is culturally equivalent to movie, tv and twitter. If we were going in chronological order shouldn't TLOU have been the final game?
I see what you're saying but how was Sonic important in comparison to Mario, barring the rivalry?I thought the show spent too long talking about the beginning of games, everyone knows pacman, space invaders and pong are seen as the same thing these days. Games like Elite were worth spending time on but in comparison to Mario it isn't as influential. Sonic never even got a mention.
Elite is massively influential. Sure, there are few space sims these days but every other game is open world and it is one of (if not) the earliest example of the format.
Is FIFA more important than or did anything massively different from say SWOS?
I didn't notice the Sony bias till you mentioned it. Good call.
Sonic's importance might be overblown as it relates to modern day but well worth spending time with it compared to the time devoted to Space Invaders.Originally Posted by Screaming Meat
I see what you're saying but how was Sonic important in comparison to Mario, barring the rivalry?
Elite is massively influential. Sure, there are few space sims these days but every other game is open world and it is one of (if not) the earliest example of the format.
Is FIFA more important than or did anything massively different from say SWOS?
I didn't notice the Sony bias till you mentioned it. Good call.
I would have framed Sonic as pushing into the edginess of gaming, directly marketing against kiddy Nintendo, and driving towards Mortal Kombat and the mature content that was the focus of the NES to present day portion. As well as a comparison to games growing with technology where Mario flourished and Sonic failed to translate to modern consoles, which would have been an ideal time to show SM64 and Galaxy.
I think they missed the Sports sector all together which is strange when sports games have been driving gaming for decades, a real world translation into the digital world. Where many games are about escapism, the sports genre is about reality. SWOS might have been the game to highlight.
Yes, it is the only mixed private/public channel.Channel 4 is commercially funded, but is still a publicly owned channel. They have a remit which they have to follow to produce innovative, diverse, educational and distinctive content, so a documentary about video games fits that perfectly.
Essentially, while the BBC has to produce high quality, mainstream stuff, Channel 4 gets to be wacky and independent but still has to make ad money.
Got to be honest (if controversial) but I'd say Mario64 was a vastly more influential title than Super Mario Bros.
Not to say it wasn't important or influential, but its still just a waystone along the path of evolution of the 2d platformer, and in that regard no more significant than Sonic the Hedgehog.
Not to say it wasn't important or influential, but its still just a waystone along the path of evolution of the 2d platformer, and in that regard no more significant than Sonic the Hedgehog.
I'm not sure Sonic deserves a spot over Space Invaders (which, as was stated in the show, brought a unique oppressive atmosphere to gaming and solidified the shooter language that would birth the Bullet Hell style that dominated arcades for decade) nor do I think it introduced edginess to gaming (the Amiga had loads of adult themed games). It is only important in relation to Mario really.Sonic's importance might be overblown as it relates to modern day but well worth spending time with it compared to the time devoted to Space Invaders.
I would have framed Sonic as pushing into the edginess of gaming, directly marketing against kiddy Nintendo, and driving towards Mortal Kombat and the mature content that was the focus of the NES to present day portion. As well as a comparison to games growing with technology where Mario flourished and Sonic failed to translate to modern consoles, which would have been an ideal time to show SM64 and Galaxy.
I think they missed the Sports sector all together which is strange when sports games have been driving gaming for decades, a real world translation into the digital world. Where many games are about escapism, the sports genre is about reality. SWOS might have been the game to highlight.
Why do you think FIFA is actually important? It's just a reiterated formula that's only superficially changed. By your reasoning Track n Field would more appropriate.
SWOS did most of the stuff FIFA does now decades ago, but is SWOS really a turning point for the whole medium like the games mentioned in the show arguably are? Which game out of the list would you replace, out of interest?
Watched this kast night on youtube, you brits got alot of unique games. You magnificent bastards. (But why no amiga son?)
Space Invaders was worth a mention as part of the arcade beginnings of gaming but they really stretched it out. They spent too much time on the start to the detriment of more important games.Originally Posted by Screaming Meat
I'm not sure Sonic deserves a spot over Space Invaders (which, as was stated in the show, brought a unique oppressive atmosphere to gaming and solidified the shooter language that would birth the Bullet Hell style that dominated arcades for decade) nor do I think it introduced edginess to gaming (the Amiga had loads of adult themed games). It is only important in relation to Mario really.
Why do you think FIFA is actually important? It's just a reiterated formula that's only superficially changed. By your reasoning Track n Field would more appropriate.
SWOS did most of the stuff FIFA does now decades ago, but is SWOS really a turning point for the whole medium like the games mentioned in the show arguably are? Which game out of the list would you replace, out of interest?
FIFA by itself isn't important, no one game is a standout and maybe SWOS should have been the game on the list evolving into a discussion about sports sims and the unique experience they bring in trying to replicate reality instead of escape it.
Really the flaw was having a list to begin with and through massive chunks of the show it was forgotten as wider discussion of genres happened. The whole concept was restraining the show, there was no reason for 25 games instead of 20 or 30. The game list is superfluous, the time spent on discussing the hot gaming genres and games through the years would be a much less restrictive program.
I haven't played Pokémon since 1998 but its fingerprints are ALL OVER countless games ever since. Plus it's the biggest selling gaming franchise in the world. With one of the biggest merchandise machines to go along with. And it's a portable game. And an RPG. It ticks so many boxes.
#JUSTICE4POKEMON
#JUSTICE4POKEMON
Last edited by keep; 12-02-2013 at 11:49 PM.
Can't watch this from Canada, and proxy doesn't work because of mandatory sign-in. Any other mirror?Originally Posted by Roland1979
^
EDIT: think i got a good link. If for some reason not allowed (content was blocked by region) then please request to or remove.
Oh my word!!
Can someone please create me a gif of the guy being interviewed about weather he knew anyone who took drugs?
Its at about 55:03 on this vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYi886-5Tps
I would love you for ever.
It could go viral!!
Can someone please create me a gif of the guy being interviewed about weather he knew anyone who took drugs?
Its at about 55:03 on this vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYi886-5Tps
I would love you for ever.
It could go viral!!
Which is odd since the last big leap happened during that time, the 2D -> 3D leap.It seemed to me like they skipped over the 90s as the degenerate phase of video games that wasn't important and revolutionary compared to the very early days where games were for everyone, wholesome and friendly.
It was worth watching but it stuck to a reliable formula. They did it before with how 'Hip Hop changed the world' 25 through to 2 was a brief history step by step and then for 1 one they claimed hip hop got Obama elected.
I think this docu was pretty spot on.
Wait...wait wait wait.It was worth watching but it stuck to a reliable formula. They did it before with how 'Hip Hop changed the world' 25 through to 2 was a brief history step by step and then for 1 one they claimed hip hop got Obama elected.
I thought dubstep got Obama elected?
yeah, this. People don't seem to realise that the NES meant next to nothing to brits at the time - we were otherwise engagedOf course it had a british perspective. The show was made for us. It was more relevant to me than the usual nes wankfest.
as for the ST v Amiga omission - it was a great time! but i think covering C64 v Speccy was enough. I guess it should have pointed out how the demo scene really thrived during that war with each side trying to out-do each other but i'm not sure how that would fit in with the flow or whether it was just too nerdlinger for viewers.
All in all, another great piece by Booker. The man is insanely talented. Oh and nice to see lots of the Yak! More Yak please!
this was way more thoughtful than any mainstream games show had any right to be. they touched on a good amount of the diversity of games, tracked a few major trends and illuminated on how they've changed over the years. the guests if a little straightforward and quick were better than most on these kind of countdown shows which are normally completely mindless. the guardian guys anecdote about his autistic son playing minecraft was lovely.
it was nice to see stuff like parappa and shadow of the colossus get on national tv, as well as a look at the history of games from the uk too.
it was nice to see stuff like parappa and shadow of the colossus get on national tv, as well as a look at the history of games from the uk too.
Oh fuck off Labyrinth.
Exactly how I felt.It's almost as if they had to cater to a broad audience, being on mainstream television and all.
My girlfriend is pretty games illiterate and she thought it was fascinating, and got more out of it than she thought she might. As a gamer I enjoyed it, thought it was really well made.
Reaffirmed my love for gaming too :-)
Watched this last night, WTF at Twitter......left a real HMMMMMMMMM in my mind.
The rest of it was great though, a really good insight into gaming and how it's evolved.
I wish there was a series on this subject matter, there is so much that could be discussed/debated, this was really the tip of the iceberg.
I love Charlie's sense of humour.
The rest of it was great though, a really good insight into gaming and how it's evolved.
I wish there was a series on this subject matter, there is so much that could be discussed/debated, this was really the tip of the iceberg.
I love Charlie's sense of humour.
Do you know that it's not coming to Next-Gen consoles?No.
I thought I had read that it will be. I've had a quick search around (I'm at work at the momment) and couldn't find confirmation...but have found a few links that hints that there is a good chance of it:
http://www.edge-online.com/news/fron...-gen-consoles/
Where Braben has said he'd be "mad not to."
http://elite-dangerous.wikia.com/wik..._Dangerous_FAQ
Where Braben "have confirmed that they are interested in supporting next gen console platforms"
and
http://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=5197
Where Braben says "but I have every expectation it will come to new consoles, too."
Shame I can't find the article I remember reading, which implied that it was happening, but looking at it, it looks like it's something that they want to do, even if it's not confirmed yet.
So, do you know that it won't be coming to next-gen consoles? If so, I bow to your superior knowledge. It's just that your denial sounds like you are in the know and you know it won't happen.
| Thread Tools | |