Gameology: Commentary and Resources for the Game Studies Community

I may be misreading Ian's comments, but I'd have to disagree with any assertion that a game which makes significant use of computation is a videogame by default. (Please feel free to correct me) This is the same reason that I agree that 'interactive entertainment' and 'digital games' are empty calories terms. Ian mentioned genealogy and I think that should be the operative word in this discussion. Broad definitions of videogame and terms like 'interactive entertainment' and 'digital games' narrow our discourse at a time when we need to radically expand it.

Is Cruel 2 B Kind a videogame because it employs computation? I'd argue not. I think it is something else. Is Electronic Battleship a videogame (or any other electronic-ish boardgame for that matter).

I will go out on a limb here and say that Electronic Battleship is, in fact, a boardgame. I'd also argue that the Battleship game I picked up on a GBA cart last week still remains a boardgame. GBA Battleship doesn't take advantage of any conventions which we generally associate with the videogame medium. People can probably argue with me on that one, but I will still contend that GBA Battleship is still fundamentally a boardgame despite its use of computation and presentation on a video screen.

In a similar vein, I'd also argue that the Texas Hold'em GBA cart I have, is still fundamentally a card game.

What does this have to do with "videogame" vs. "video game?" You might have noticed that I have referred to "videogame," "boardgame," and "card game." Someone could probably dig up some polarized argument I've made on the issue in the past, but now, I don't see that a space really matters. I think the what is important is we retain a conscious record of where the games we play came from, and when those games evolve into something else, we call that spade a spade.

...which is why I'd argue that Cruel 2 B Kind is not a videogame. It shares some qualities with videogames (computation of action.), but it is truly something else. I'd call it a pervasive game, but I know the game's co-designer calls it a ubiquitous game. Does that differentiation matter? Truthfully I don't know- but it seems slightly more significant than a space.

Finally, I think terms like 'arcade game' and 'computer game' still hold value because they refer to distinct traditions within the broaden medium of videogames.