What 40 years of 'Space Invaders' says about the 1970s – and today via @TC_Africahttps://theconversation.com/what-40-years-of-space-invaders-says-about-the-1970s-and-today-97518?utm_medium=amptwitter&utm_source=twitter …
-
-
Vastauksena käyttäjille @Mindtoggle ja @TC_Africa
As a person who has contributed to the MAME project for the past 15 years, my own mother linked me to this article just half an hour ago, and I have some pretty strong opinions on it. You probably won't care, but I'll vent my spleen regardless, in the hopes that others will hear.
2 vastausta 1 uudelleentwiittaus 6 tykkäystä -
For starters: "An analysis of 'Pac-Man,' for instance, shows ... consumerism, drug use and gender politics," Are you even remotely serious? Toru Iwatani didn't give half a damn about any of those things, he was interested in designing a fun game.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 6 tykkäystä -
Almost nobody in the industry gave a damn about such things then. You have to understand, we're talking about a time frame that is but 5 years after the first microprocessor-based arcade machines existed at all. They were to 1980 what digital computers were to 1950 at that point.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 4 tykkäystä -
"Avoiding an enemy only delays the inevitable; players cannot move forward or back, but can only defend their space." Again, just MAYBE that's because it was 1978, CPU-based arcade games had only existed for 3 years at that point, and the industry was in its infancy.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 4 tykkäystä -
Maybe, and bear with me, the gameplay of SI came about as a result of the enormous constraints placed on its creators by the hardware. Nothing else. It is quite insane to suggest that the designers and programmers - one and the same, back then - had some political axe to grind.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 8 tykkäystä -
"There’s not even a reason why the invasion is occurring." No, of course not. Since when have arcade games given a reason for, uh, *anything*? What's the reason for your spaceship needing to shoot down asteroids in the eponymous Asteroids?
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 5 tykkäystä -
What's the reason for the player rotating blocks around in Tetris? What's the reason for Pac-Man consuming power pellets? What's the reason for the frog in Frogger to hop across lanes of traffic and a river? What's the reason for knocking out a bunch of bricks in Breakout?
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 4 tykkäystä -
At the time, video games were inherently pointless. You're looking at the technological equivalent of a Rorschach Test and trying to ascribe meaning to it retrospectively. As a game developer, I don't want people like you to be doing that 40 years from now to what I worked on.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 5 tykkäystä
"Players know only that the invaders must be destroyed. It’s a distinct cultural perspective, emphasizing shooting over everything else." Oh, PLEASE. It's not a cultural perspective. It's that games literally didn't have the processing power to have any nuance at all.
-
-
Or, for that matter, any plot, or any kind of back-and-forth between enemy and foe, short of simple projectiles being sent in one direction or the other. What a sad and uninformed attempt to relate vintage games to modern culture.
0 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 5 tykkäystäKiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.