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

[afroebob]

Well, I don't have a problem with the term, I have a problem with how people who don't like video games take it. When they hear 'game' they really hear 'toy' and that could not be further from the truth. Video games are art, not toys.

 

[COMaestro]

Just like movies or novels, video games can be broken up by genres and because of that, there should be no need to change the name. If there is some kind of interactive element that is played on a screen, that is technically a video game. The way you interact with it and what it is trying to convey is what defines the genre of the game.

 

[Matthewmagic]

Well comic books did get respect when they started referring to themselves as "Graphic Novels" I would argue that it is really pretentious yet effective.

But "Interactive Movies", "Simulations", "Titty Slappers" all sound kinda pretentious. Not that it matters, "A rose by any other name ect."

 

[Dead Seerius]

Well, I for one have been calling video games 'Gookins' for years now. I mean, what's taking the rest of you so long to get with the times?

(Because sarcasm is not easily detected via text I feel the need to point out that I am joking and just named the first weird made-up word that came to mind. But seriously. Gookin. It could work.)

 

[TehCookie]

Interactive stories is already a game genre, it's called a VN or Visual Novel. Also I find the people who think games are entirely art to be more annoying than people who think they're toys so I'd stick with videogames.

 

[ResonanceSD]

Because that's what they bloody well are. They're games played through a medium of Video. What would you call them? "Graphic Games"?

Like the same people that insist on calling Comic Books "Graphic Novels"

 

[zehydra]

Not all "video games" are actually games. Minecraft, for instance, was for a long time not a game.

 

[zehydra]

A game is a type of activity meant for enjoyment and friendly competition and serve no direct productive purpose. An example of a game is chess or poker.

There is a "sub-genre" of games that are typically played on a computer or a special console, these games have no physical presence and instead give feedback through a video display, typically a computer screen or a TV. This type of game is therefore called a "video game" to distinguish it from traditional games.

The name still works.

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

 

[Dimitriov]

Daystar pretty much summed up my feelings on this subject. So I can't think of anything to add here...

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

Huh, I never really thought of it that way, but that does make a lot of sense. :/

That is indeed the origin of the word 'movie.'

I am just glad we don't call movies with sound 'talkies' anymore (seriously that was a term).

OT: No new name is required. The current term is more than adequate.

 

[DioWallachia]

Videogames will retain its name for the same reason that movies are still called movies even when, at the start of THAT medium, people recogniced it more as "Those comedy moving pictures starring Charles Chaplin".

If you have to explain to another person that games, just like movies, have a shitton of genres and way to tell a story, then probably those people have living under a rock or work for Fox News.

 

[The_Waspman]

Wait wait wait, what is this about graphic novels? Is that term frowned upon? Since when, and why did no-one tell me?

To play devils advocate, I only ever buy Graphic novels. Or should I say trade paperbacks? Why? Well, for a start, 'comics' are individually expensive and they're also flimsy. I'd much rather have a sturdy book - more often than not containing a full story arc, which I can store easily on a shelf.

Also - and this ties in, I believe, with what the OP is saying - there is such a negative connotation with the term 'comic book'. Well, ok, maybe not 'negative' as such, but its more of... 'a kids thing'. Not saying its right, but there you go.

While I don't disagree that the term 'video game' is now somewhat outdated - its so much easier to say than Interactive Entertainment Media, which is what I would pesonally consider (some of) them to be.

 

[blackrave]

Any suggestions for other name?
Digital games? (Digames, Digigames?)
Simulated games maybe? (Simgames, Simigames?)
In some other languages those are called Computer games.

I personally prefer term computer games, but it sometimes isn't exact

I don't know, term video games works as-well, and we shouldn't fix stuff that ain't broken.

Films and movies also aren't always exact terms, but we still use them.

 

[RJ 17]

Because they're games we play on a video display?

I can't imagine any other name that wouldn't sound pretentious as fuck.

^Well...that about sums it up for me.

Seriously though, most video games are more game than "interactive story". They might indeed have a story that you interact with, but there's other objectives to complete between the major plot points. Almost every RPG requires some level-grinding every now and then before you can proceed. In first person shooters, even in the campaign (i.e. story mode) there are some people who are just better at it than others, implying they're more skilled.

An "interactive story" are like those Japanese games where you just click buttons on the screen to a series of pictures and dialogue. Pretty much a choose-your-own-adventure novel on a screen. There's no way to be better than someone else at it. It doesn't require anything between the next bit of story other than "click next to continue".

My point being that there's a clear difference between what we define as a video game and those "games" that are already classified as interactive stories.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Any suggestions for other name?
Digital games? (Digames, Digigames?)
Simulated games maybe? (Simgames, Simigames?)
In some other languages those are called Computer games.

I personally prefer term computer games, but it sometimes isn't exact

I don't know, term video games works as-well, and we shouldn't fix stuff that ain't broken.

Films and movies also aren't always exact terms, but we still use them.

Two things: One, I now have the Digimon theme stuck in my head

and two, it's interesting what you say about the term "computer games," because in (at least American) English, that used to be the common term for PC games. Console and arcade games were always called video games, but computer games used to be a very common term.

 

[Evil Moo]

I tend to use the term 'computer games' rather than 'video games'. They are, after all, games that run on computers. Though I am quite happy to use video games to avoid confusion if I feel it is necessary.

To me a game is pretty much anything used for entertainment that involves direct user interaction and probably the framework of rules the user submits to in the game environment. This doesn't necessarily need specific goals or objectives to be classed as a game as long as there is interaction in a defined game framework for the purpose of the user's entertainment.

 

[JohnnyDelRay]

The only instance where I would agree is if you wanted to distinguish genres. But in the end, let's face it, they're all just video games. A children's book with furry caterpillars, a thousand page novel or a researched text on thermonuclear dynamics is still a book, much like a facebook app, indie adventure title or AAA shooter/rpg/rts/etc are still just games.

So what? If you think it attaches some unwanted "immaturity" to a medium which you love, well it's just too bad really, it's the people around you or the rest of the world who need to wake up, and even if they don't want to, it's not something to lose sleep over.

 

[grey_space]

More importantly, if you are a player of spunkgargleweewees what should you call yourself?

A spunkgargleweeweesier?

A spunkgargleweeweesite?

A spunkgargleweeweesitite?

A spunkgargler of wee wees?

A wee wee spunkgargler?


a question to truly ponder upon with great seriousness methinks!

 

[beastro]

Because that's how the evolution of language works with some words being hold backs, especially English since it doesn't have some dictatorial government body sitting around to lecture people over what is good English and what isn't like French and German.

A canker sore is not literally a cancerous sore, but that doesn't mean there should be a call to eliminate this "primitive" term.

 

[Brad Calkins]

Because I've yet to hear an alternative that didn't sound stupid.