On PBS: The Video Game Revolution

[evilmess]

Just caught wind of this. Sorry if it's been posted already

The Video Game Revolution premieres Wednesday, Sept. 8th, at 9:00 p.m. on PBS.

http://www.pbs.org/kcts/videogamerevolution/index.html

Bummer, it's not airing Portland Oregon. :(

[lendelin]

Just caught wind of this. Sorry if it's been posted already

The Video Game Revolution premieres Wednesday, Sept. 8th, at 9:00 p.m. on PBS.

http://www.pbs.org/kcts/videogamerevolution/index.html

Bummer, it's not airing Portland Oregon. :(

Thanks for reminding me, I'll certainly watch it (it is at 8pm here in Milwaukee).

Seems to be a promising show, I'm curious who says what about the impact of gaming on culture, behavior (uh, violence), and game development in general.

I hope there are guys on there who make comments about the 'gaming causes violence'- myth. (like Jenkins; I hope they won't show a clown like Anderson)

[Milk]

The website indeed has an essay by Jenkins, so it's a safe bet the show won't be hysterical "DOOM makes killers" crap. They do have a Pamela Eakes on parents and violent games, though.

[Lady Jaye]

Thanks for the reminder, I forgot about this show.

[TheSmirk]

yes, good reminder, I was told about it this past weekend, and probably ould have forgotten :rocker:

[Gamereviewgod]

Gotta watch a pay-per-view tonight. I'll have to catch a replay. TV Guide reviewed it and gave it a 3 out of 10. Then again, they don't know diddly.

[Nez]

Heh I make a tread about this earlier buy no one respnded. Go figgure, just as long as everyons aware im happy.

[Chunky]

nice, right to DVD it goes!

[RCM]

There has not been one exceptional game doc. created yet. I'm working on it though!!! I've seen em all and they all pretty much suck and are filled with wrong info. Not totally, but enough to discredit them. Fuckin assholes. The best doc. was the one Tony Hawk hosted. Horrible shit really.

THE ONE, THE ONLY- RCM

[Gamereviewgod]

Wait a minute.....You DON'T like incorrect information in gaming documentaries?















;)

[Black Dragon]

whoa cool PBS has something that I would watch?? the end of the world maybe when I watch PBS?!?!? LOL LOL

thanx really really cool!

[Black Dragon]

whoa cool PBS has something that I would watch?? the end of the world maybe when I watch PBS?!?!? LOL LOL

thanx really really cool! 8-)

also can someone pleese delete the my 1st post above this one internet problems thanx :D

[Kepone]

I won't be able to catch it since my class ends at 9pm. Might see parts of it.

Will they be re-airing it after tonight?

[Lady Jaye]

In your case, you're in luck. Mountain Lake has it at 9pm (like almost everywhere else), but Vermont PTV is showing it Thursday morning at 3am. At least, that's the broadcast time listed on the official website of the show for the Burlington/Plattsburgh (and Montreal) area.

[RetroYoungen]

Oi. True, all documentaries on gaming have sucked thus far, but I'll watch it anyway. Should be entertaining when I'm jumping up and down saying "WRONG YEAR, TURD BURGLARS! YOU STOOPED SACKS O' CRAP!!!"

[allsport11]

It's On!!!!!!! ;)

[kainemaxwell]

I'm taping it. :)

[Black Dragon]

SHHHHHH! its on ( LOL quietly)

[kainemaxwell]

So what you guys think so far?

[Hamsnibit]

Ummm, since when was the SNES shipped with Zelda 2?

[mikeetler]

Ummm, since when was the SNES shipped with Zelda 2?

And then Sega countered by traveling back in time to release Sonic two months before the SNES...

Seriously, so far it's a lot better then any of the other docs I've seen but some of the footage they're using makes no sense (ie talking about Star Wars the arcade game in '83 and showing clips of PC Star Wars Galaxies).

[Black Dragon]

its really cool!! I wonder if they will talk about any of the next-gen consoles?

[allsport11]

The PSX era is up next. :)

[kainemaxwell]

Some their video of gameplay of Atari and NES games look horrible.

[Black Dragon]

they never mentioned about the nintendo VB i wonder why??? :hmm:

[Algol]

Since when did the crash happen in 1982?

[Phosphor Dot Fossils]

That's when the stock market fallout began for the game industry. Those of us just buying and playing the stuff didn't feel it until the following year. That much that at least got right.

I growled a bit when they credited Molyneux with injecting moral imperatives into gaming. Hello! Richard Garriott! Hello! Ultima IV! Anyone home?

Thing is, we all have our own own personal heroes in the world of game-making that I'm not sure there'll ever be any one documentary that pleases EVERYONE. This is one of the better ones I've seen, even if, as has already been mentioned, there's some serious cognitive dissonance between what's being talked about by the narrator and what's being shown.

A lot of it also seems to be built on the backs of Steve Kent and Rusel DeMaria and Henry Jenkins, so why not just actually have them be the producers and turn their books into a documentary?

I've also noticed the conspicuous lack of our own Mr. Herman in the proceedings. And I've noticed quite a few still photos shot in the CGE museum. LOL

More and more, I'm convinced that this is what was left over from the smoking remains of the planned TV version of Joystick Nation. I understand that this show is a project which has been "grandfathered" a bit, and has been handed down by one or two "administrations" at the PBS station producing it, which would make it about old enough to be JN. Judging by the script, it's like they followed JN through '94 or so, and now they're doing Kent's Ultimate History Of Video Games.

I'm impressed that they spent enough time on the classics to mention Intellivision (and even served us up a steaming slice of vintage Plimpton advertising!), and even show some O2 stuff, but I still stand firmly by my belief that there's a show waiting to be made out there about the 8-bit era alone.

[RCM]

This doc. is almost over now. It's sloppy, boring, and lacks direction. They also just said that the PS2 sold 16 million units worldwide 3 1/2 years after launch unless i heard wrong. Those numbers are very low and are untrue according to Sony. A majority, if not all of the gameplay footage was taken directly from television screens. You can tell my refresh rates and enlarged pixels. They throw in some history, but it's incomplete and at times inaccurate. The human aspects are boring too. A blind girl "playing" pokemon did not interest me or even make me laugh. Yeah, I laugh at shit like that from time to time, so sue me. All in all boring shit. horrible shit really.

THE ONE, THE ONLY- RCM

[asharru]

I switched the channel after about 3 minutes... I also didn't tune in until about 10 minutes ago, but B O R I N G.

[charitycasegreg]

I found it funny how they showed a few of the nes games videos where the game is blocky, gonna freeze. Why didnt they show mario 3 when talking about nes? HTey kept showing mario 2. That show is pretty cool. Im gonna watch it in the morning...of course i taped it.

[syzygy]

You sure missed the point of the blind girl playing on a handheld, and her name was Lily. Her only resonance with the rest of the world was the sounds waves emanation from a handheld device. One can only image the sense of helplessness one must feel with the loss of one source of interaction with our reality. How great it is to have a device that almost removes all handicaps and lets another person enjoy what most of us take for granted. I thought the underlying message was that video games are another way in which all humans can experience that which makes us human, the feeling of creation and control of our surroundings. To interact with and get a response from someone or something outside of ourselves.

I was amazed at how Lily was able to tell a pokemon character by their attack sound ( or was it just each characters general sound?).

I also though it was astounding how she was holding the gameboy. It just point out the hard truth that what one person takes for granted (holding a gameboy with the screen facing up) makes no sense to someone with a handicap.

Sorry for rambling, I was very touched by that section of the show.

[YoshiM]

I watched about an hour of it. Ugh. One of the things I didn't like was that it didn't adhere to a descent flow. If you are gonna follow a time line with something...stick with it. They seemed to bounce around too much. And I agree with mikeetler...what's up with the narration and video footage? I thought the same thing when the narrator talked about the Star Wars arcade game and showed a modern SW game.

It seemed as though it was slapped together to quick grab the attention of viewers during the whole "televising video games" craze that's been going on lately (the other documentaries, the award shows, the recent merging of TechTV and G4, etc.). Flicked off the tube and stopped Tivo from recording it.

[RCM]

You sure missed the point of the blind girl playing on a handheld, and her name was Lily. Her only resonance with the rest of the world was the sounds waves emanation from a handheld device. One can only image the sense of helplessness one must feel with the loss of one source of interaction with our reality. How great it is to have a device that almost removes all handicaps and lets another person enjoy what most of us take for granted. I thought the underlying message was that video games are another way in which all humans can experience that which makes us human, the feeling of creation and control of our surroundings. To interact with and get a response from someone or something outside of ourselves.

I was amazed at how Lily was able to tell a pokemon character by their attack sound ( or was it just each characters general sound?).

I also though it was astounding how she was holding the gameboy. It just point out the hard truth that what one person takes for granted (holding a gameboy with the screen facing up) makes no sense to someone with a handicap.

Sorry for rambling, I was very touched by that section of the show.

I wasn't touched. Instead of being totally immersed in the "Lily" piece I was repelled. I was turned off instantly by the amateur presentation and the details and facts that were missed far too often. It was horrible shit really.

THE ONE, THE ONLY- RCM

[evilmess]

Thanks for all the mini reviews and opinions. :)

I'll try to watch it if it airs over here just because I like watching shows that are about my hobbies. It's always interesting to watch something like this and try to view it from an outsiders perpespective, ie not a gamer/collector.

[rolenta]

I've also noticed the conspicuous lack of our own Mr. Herman in the proceedings.

I learned about this about two months ago and I was dismayed to see that their website has a suggested reading list and Phoenix wasn't included (although Joystick Nation was). I contacted the producer and he said they'd include Phoenix when they redo the website (which needless to say hasn't happened).

I got a kick when they mentioned the Coleco Telstar and then showed the Colecovision (which wasn't mentioned at all). Then they mentioned that Bushnel didn't like the 5200, but they said it in a context that suggested that Bushnel was still with Atari when the 5200 was released. Only later did they say that Bushnell left in 1978.

In addition the documentary seemed like a big advertisement for GDFEST which didn't interest me at all.

I could go on but it's late.

[Jibbajaba]

I liked the first 30 or so minutes when they talked about the older stuff, but overall the program seemed disorganized. The high point for me was the mere mention of Steve "Slug" Russel and SpaceWar on the DEC PDP-6 at MIT. Ive never seen SpaceWar in action before so tha made it all worthwhile.

Chris

[lendelin]

It was very good. Plain and simple.

To rolenta and RCM: Look, we are videogame nuts, there were no facts or details in there which were new for us, no surprises at all. Granted, the pics and the comments were sometimes out of sync and a bit misleading, but nothing dramatic or terrible mistakes were made.

A strictly chronological or detail-rich entire history of videogames wasn't the purpose of the show. It wasn't intended as a documentary; furthermore, two hours on TV isn't a book which can present details and can describe processes in-depth or at least with lots of detailed information.

The major intent was to show the role and impact of games today on society, and a broader audience was certainly the target. I was actually surprised how much history was shown and discussed, and to what extent the overarching development of the game industry was described.

Maybe they tried too much, and addressed too may aspects of videogames today; but interesting problems were addressed, from game development, impact of games on behavior, to the state of the industry. The comments were interesting, sometimes even thought-provoking, and most important at all, there was no simplistic babble or bla blah at all.

Imagine how a PBS show about videogames would have looked ten years ago. The simplistic violence talk and the scream 'does no one think about our children' would have dominated. It wouild have been belittling, arrogant, mixed in with hysteria.

Today, games made it. Finally. You know they made it when PBS shows in two hours something realistic and even positive. They were shown as what they are, and recognized as what they are. A terriffic and fun form of entertainment, creative, innovative, captivating, and reinforcing our basic demand to 'play' which goes for kids and adults.

Games were belittled like country western music in the 60s. They both are now established and respected. That is even more important than the otherwise intelligent and entertaining two hours tonight.

[nildem]

Hmm, it seems the only way to see this in my area is throught PBS HD. :o

Hopefully someone will make this into a torrent. (hint, hint)

[lendelin]

To the comment about the LANfest (rolenta):

It was great that they showed it. First, it is an important phenomenon; second, it shows that games are (and always were) social events. The dumbest stereotype about games from fifteen years ago and still alive today was the 'social isolationism' proposal. Kids and teenagers playing videogames are deprived of social skills. We all know that's not true, and the Lanfest showed that players cooperate and meet each other. Maybe, just maybe, playing games create more social interaction than reading books. (which is a pretty lonely enterprise)

To the comment about the blind girl (RCM):

I liked the scenes. They showed a phenomenon which is incredible and often taken for granted: videogames can spark imagination, and they work best when they put us into a different world. You sit in front of your TV, manage a controller, and sometimes we get lost for hours in a different world of racing, football, fantasy, war, adventure, and sometimes simple challenge. How in the world do simple videogames achieve such an identification with their content like novels and movies? When we play, adults and kids are in a little magical kingdom which is very interesting to explore psychologically.

[Professor Hector]

I thought this documentary was pulled off fairly well, all things considered. I did find the flow of the show to be a little odd (maybe the folks behind this thought some people would switch this off if they included nothing but older game footage for the first forty-five minutes), and there were some minor mistakes and some pretty fanciful speculation about the future of gaming, but this is still probably the most enjoyable documentary I've seen on video games so far. Most of us here are serious gamers with a lot of dedication to and knowledge of this hobby, so its only natural that no show of this type is ever likely to please us completely.

My favorite mistake was where they narrator mentioned Dragon's Lair, whereas on the screen they were showing the boxart of Dragon Slayer: LOH instead. Interesting screw-up there.

[kainemaxwell]

The blind girl part was pretty touching. Nice to see what an Odessey, Channel F and Bally Astrocade look like.

[davidleeroth]

Hopefully someone will make this into a torrent. (hint, hint)

That would be awesome. Pwetty please?

[qbertandernie]

i thought it funny that the little girl playing the game boy advance (when they spoke of the 'original game boy') was playing one without a battery cover...

and they apparently couldnt get duck hunt to work properly on their nes...wouldnt you think theyd try harder to get better examples of the systems? i know its PBS, but come on...

[evilmess]

and they apparently couldnt get duck hunt to work properly on their nes...

Did they try to blow on the cart. LOL

[RCM]

lendelin-

It's clear you enjoyed it. And it's should be clear that I along with some others didn't.


we are videogame nuts, there were no facts or details in there which were new for us, no surprises at all.

Actually, there were quite a few facts and details that were in there that I didn't know were true. Actually they were false. One mistake alone might not be dramatic, but the consistent false information and misleading order in which they showed gameplay footage was very dramatic and shameful in RCM's opinion of course.


A strictly chronological or detail-rich entire history of videogames wasn't the purpose of the show. It wasn't intended as a documentary;

I didn't say it was strictly a history of videogames. It's not, but when you present something as fact make sure you're right. They were not right many times and were misleading many times. It was clearly a documentary by the way.


Imagine how a PBS show about videogames would have looked ten years ago. The simplistic violence talk and the scream 'does no one think about our children' would have dominated. It wouild have been belittling, arrogant, mixed in with hysteria.

If you say so.


Today, games made it. Finally. You know they made it when PBS shows in two hours something realistic and even positive. They were shown as what they are, and recognized as what they are. A terriffic and fun form of entertainment, creative, innovative, captivating, and reinforcing our basic demand to 'play' which goes for kids and adults.

Yeah, that's the mark of success. I've seen other videogame docs and they were pretty positive. but when PBS gives you attention, that's the mark that our beloved hobby has made it!


Games were belittled like country western music in the 60s. They both are now established and respected. That is even more important than the otherwise intelligent and entertaining two hours tonight.

How was country music belittled in the 1960's? Was that on after the videogame doc. last night?


it shows that games are (and always were) social events. The dumbest stereotype about games from fifteen years ago and still alive today was the 'social isolationism' proposal. Kids and teenagers playing videogames are deprived of social skills. We all know that's not true, and the Lanfest showed that players cooperate and meet each other.

I don't know how one example of some people getting together disspells the view about gamers being "social isolationists." It's not true to everyone certainly, but where are you getting your info? You're making extremely general claims, where can you back up those general statements? Furthermore, if they had shown gamers playing alone in basements would that prove the point that they all do?


I liked the scenes. They showed a phenomenon which is incredible and often taken for granted: videogames can spark imagination, and they work best when they put us into a different world.

It has been done before but mostly in a negative light, like the whole columbine disaster. Nothing new here.

The show sucked and while there are many videogame docs out there not one is more good then bad.

THE ONE, THE ONLY- RCM

[RetroYoungen]

It did feel a bit disorganized overall, not much at the beginning but definately later on. My biggest beef was the showing of the right franchise, wrong game secments. They spoke about the Original Game Boy, and showed a GBA. Only late in the short segment did they show the original thing. Also, I was a bit annoyed that they didn't get better shots of the games being played, it seems like they stuck a camera right in front of the screen and let it record. That's just a bit of a peeve of mine.

And their next segment names, like the "Moral Combat Mortal Kombat" titles, were a bit annoying. But their showing Lily surprised me, and showed me that truly anyone can enjoy these games in some fashion. Overall, pretty well done. Definately at the top of the docs made so far.

[kainemaxwell]

It did seem disorganized, mainly starting with LAN parties and online gaming, then going back to Spacewar and Pong. Seemed to have alot of coverage, maybe too much, on online gaming- though I can see how it's becoming big.

Nice they had no mention of how the PSX came to be thanks to Nintendo...

[NE146]

Man that film must have been made locally because so many of their shots are of places within a couple blocks radius of me LOL

[Lady Jaye]

That's not surprising. The documentary was produced by KCTS Seattle.

[rolenta]

That's not surprising. The documentary was produced by KCTS Seattle.

Both Steve Kent and Rusel DeMaria are local to that area. And if you watch the credits you'll see that Lee Krueger, Hans Reutter, and the NorthWest Classic Games Enthusiasts played some part in the production.

[Phosphor Dot Fossils]

I do know that some of the vintage console stuff was shot on Lee's premises.

[Wavelflack]

I thought it was a very poorly done documentary. And yes, it IS supposed to be a documentary. Look on a PBS station website. The description says "documentary".

Most of the points have already been covered by other posters here, but I'll still add my thoughts:

The show really looks like the documentaries produced by high school and college students. I actually felt embarrassed for it, much in the same way you feel embarrassed for a comedian who is a failure. I also felt somewhat embarrassed for myself, for I wrote this down on the calendar weeks in advance and made a big deal to my wife about it (ie; "this is what we're watching tonight").

Anyone who thinks the discrepancy between narration and onscreen images in unimportant is out of their mind. What is the primary feature of video games? Right. The "video" part. If there is any topic which needs to be presented with accurate visual details backing the narration, it is video games. The onslaught of discrepancies (they just kept coming and coming and coming...) absolutely destroys any credibility the program might hope to achieve or maintain. The only facts I had confidence in were the ones I already knew to be true. Would you keep watching The History Channel if they repeatedly inserted pictures of Mussolini behind a narrative about Hitler? How about a documentary about airplanes that had the F-15 coming out after the Mig 29, then showing a picture of an F-16? If you kept watching, it would only be for the fun of error checking and compiling.

I could go on for quite a bit, but I'm distracted at the moment, and not sure how coherent this will all be if assembled in bits and pieces.


I think Joe and co. should pool their resources and help produce a genuine, accurate, informative AND entertaining video game documentary. Look at the resources available to DP and the dp community! It wouldn't have to be a money losing endeavor, either. Sell it to The History Channel, Discovery Channel, PBS, etc. If it was well produced (professional post work, good narrator and narration, not entirely consisting of geek minutiae, good music, etc.), completely accurate, and featured interviews with all sorts of VG luminaries (not 20 minutes of Jason Rubin), then it would sell in a heartbeat. The gaming community could have something they are proud of, archived in video form, that is actually informative and entertaining.

You guys should really look into this. You've seen what kind of "documentaries" the 'outsiders' produce. It won't get any better until someone who really cares steps in to make it right.

[NE146]

You guys should really look into this. You've seen what kind of "documentaries" the 'outsiders' produce. It won't get any better until someone who really cares steps in to make it right.

Not taking into account the costs involved, I actually think that's a pretty good idea :) Something I personally would be happy to see happen (but on the other hand.. not expect). Still though.. it'd be cool :)

[lendelin]

Imagine how a PBS show about videogames would have looked ten years ago. The simplistic violence talk and the scream 'does no one think about our children' would have dominated. It wouild have been belittling, arrogant, mixed in with hysteria.

If you say so.



It would have been the case, trust me.


I don't know how one example of some people getting together disspells the view about gamers being "social isolationists." It's not true to everyone certainly, but where are you getting your info? You're making extremely general claims, where can you back up those general statements? Furthermore, if they had shown gamers playing alone in basements would that prove the point that they all do?


Do you mean the 'social isolationist' assumption? That's not an extreme general claim by me, and I don't have to back it up, it is out there since I'm interested in videogames. I read it a zillion times in newspapers, I heard it on TV, it is one of the researched topics in psychology about videogames, it is one of the biggest myths about videogames since they exist.

Maybe I misunderstand your criticism.


I don't know how one example of some people getting together disspells the view about gamers being "social isolationists."


It doesn't. That's not the point. A TV show is not a scientific poll or analysis. We know from research that gamers aren't red-eyed, socially isolated geeks (this goes in particular for children).

On TV you show pictures, and combine it with a narrative. You paint pictures, and give an impression; and the impression given in the documentary was not only positive, more importantly it was realistic, unbiased, and well informed confirmed by research. That is why I liked the pics shown about the LANparty. It demonstrated (or like TV-journalist like to say, 'visualized') that gaming can also be a social event.

[lendelin]

Me thinks that I'm part of an extreme minority who actually liked the show. God help me, why am I such a minority guy? :)

I agree with everyone who pointed out some mistakes. I noticed them myself. I think at one point they talked about the release of the SNES and showed a pic of Zelda 2, and all the other minor mistakes which slipped in which are pointed out are absolutely true. I watched it with someone who isn't interested in videogames at all, and I corrected most these mistakes;

but...they didn't bother me at all. I love historical accuracy, they should have gotten it right, but the mistakes were not tragic. It wasn't the equivalent of talking about Hitler and showing Mussolini at his desk. When they talked about Bushnell or Baer, they showed Bushnell or Baer. (I officially declare that it is not my intention to compare Ralph Baer and Nolan Bushnell to Adolf Hitler! :) )

I also agree that the structure could have been better, I would have structured it a bit differently, but it was a minor flaw at worst.

While most of you emphasize the accuracy of historical details, I emphasize the presentations and discussions of the show about the role of games in society and their impact on culture. I agree that the historical accuracy for some details was the the big weakness, the big strength was to show the role of games in a societal context.

Here is why I liked the show:

1. I never watched a documentary about videogames in which very important distinctions were made when it comes to play time, motivations about playing games, impact on behavior by games, and game development.

2. The important issues above were addressed. They focused on them. They stayed with them throughout the documentary. (which, in turn, came at the expense of a chronological structure, and the latter revealed some weaknesses)

3. Stereotypes were avoided, and intelligent remarks were made about the important issues above. Jenkins threw in even some results of modern research, which attacked commonplace stereotypes and corrected them.

4. It was very informative for a broader audience on both the hostorical level and the cultural context level. It wasn't the most informative show for us videogame nuts who are already familiar with game history; but keep in mind that this show was not done for 'hardcore' gamers with a broad historical knowledge.

5. As a PBS show, the cultural elite finally recognized games not as something evil and played the role of concerned educational dictators, but discussed games in an intelligent and realistic way. The cultural elite most often than not fall for the dumbest stereotypes like we all do for some topics. These times seem to be over, at least when it comes to videogames. This is something incredibly positive and outweighs some mistakes of historical details.

[lendelin]

I thought it was a very poorly done documentary. And yes, it IS supposed to be a documentary. Look on a PBS station website. The description says "documentary".


You're right and wrong. It was part historical documentary, and part essay about the role of videogames today (reflected by the official announcement). Obviously it was much more than a historical documentary, and I think Phosphor Dot Fossils is spot on with his speculation that an earlier prepared documentary was used and expanded. Maybe not a good decision, becasue I had the feeling they packed the two hours with too much.

It is not easy to make an entertaining historical overview of game history on TV without loosing a broader audience. It should be made, but tons of historical details and lots of anecdotes without a good analysis won't do it either. I'm still waiting for a book with good historical analysis which goes beyond a plethora of rich details and mere anecdotes.

[Wavelflack]

"I think at one point they talked about the release of the SNES and showed a pic of Zelda 2..."

It wasn't just that they showed Zelda 2. It was a coupound fuck-up. They said that the SNES was released with "miyamoto's next Zelda game". The indication was that the SNES was packed in with Zelda 3. Only it wasn't. It was Super Mario World (which was not mentioned at all), which the smallest possible amount of research would have revealed a hundred times over. Zelda 3 wasn't released until many months (almost a year, wasn't it?) after launch. THEN they put the finishing touch on and display Zelda 2 footage in it's place.

This is indicative of the quality throughout the program. I suppose I could take the time to pick it apart second by second, if I felt like it. What a mess.

[Lady Jaye]

I've watched only the last 15 minutes, but I did tape it (I just haven't watched it yet, will do so over the weekend). My impressions from that 15 minutes? I do see where Joystick Nation could have been an influence. It seemed to take the intellectual (even a bit high-brow) route, and not just because they were interviewing Henry Jenkins (that's aside from any accuracy, or lack thereof, regarding the history of videogames).

My problem is that I HATED Joystick Nation. It was such a pretentious, badly-written book!!! IMO, it was the worst videogame-related book written since Zap!

[gavv]

Since when did the crash happen in 1982?

Well, the arcade saturation & crash started then

gavv

[YoshiM]

Hmm, it's on again next week (at least in my neck o' the north) so I think I'll Tivo it to see the hour I skipped. Is that where the "Social impact" of video games was discussed in more detail? The first hour I know touched on it but to me it didn't really put a lot of emphasis on it beyond the historical aspect that we already know (the big boom of the arcades, Pac-Man "fever", etc.).

I suppose for a video game nut a lot of this invoked responses of "well, duh" but to those who only know that their kid plays "games" involving "video" it was like seeing into an alien world. So to be honest this show wasn't really meant for "us" but more for those who approach the world of gaming casually and might be interested to find out more about it.

[omnedon]

I too liked it.

The screenshot and occasional timeline inaccuracies, while annoying, did not take away from the intellectual approach.

Only us die hards catch the detail errors. Any non 'hard core collector' who watched this got a better, more balanced view of our hobby than they ever really do.

Who cares if they came away thinking trhe SNES came bundled with a Zelda game. Only we care about such minutiae.

Lily was amazing. Wow. In a simple scene, they show how our hobby can help people go places, and transcend the mundane, if only for a little while. How can that be bad?

[mikeetler]

"I think at one point they talked about the release of the SNES and showed a pic of Zelda 2..."

It wasn't just that they showed Zelda 2. It was a coupound fuck-up. They said that the SNES was released with "miyamoto's next Zelda game". The indication was that the SNES was packed in with Zelda 3. Only it wasn't. It was Super Mario World (which was not mentioned at all), which the smallest possible amount of research would have revealed a hundred times over. Zelda 3 wasn't released until many months (almost a year, wasn't it?) after launch. THEN they put the finishing touch on and display Zelda 2 footage in it's place.

This is indicative of the quality throughout the program. I suppose I could take the time to pick it apart second by second, if I felt like it. What a mess.

To further add to the SNES launch screw up, their next line was how Sega countered by releasing Sonic for the Genesis. Except Sonic was released in June '91 and the SNES launched in August '91. Even my wife rolled her eyes at that one.

-Mike

[allsport11]

Did they even mention the Sega Saturn, if they did I must have missed it. @_@

[bargora]

I'll have to catch this when it plays again in Cleveland.

Some of the opposing sides of the argument here remind me of how I felt when I watched the movie "The Fellowship of the Ring" for the first time, and then subsequent times. I've read the book at least a dozen times, and so the first time I watched the movie I was stunned, nay, outraged at the inaccuracies perpetrated by Peter Jackson. How dare he cut Tom Bombadil out? What right did he have to take one character's dialogue and have it spoken by another?

At last I could understand the people on online forums, quaking with rage, typing worst movie evar.

Then I watched it a second time, and a third. By the third viewing I had gotten over my snit regarding Jackson's playing fast and loose with plot details, and I could appreciate that it was a nice piece of movie-making. So he omitted the Numenorean lineage of the hobbits' blades from the barrow-downs, instead having Strider hand them out like party favors on Weathertop. I got over it.

So while historical inaccuracies in a documentary are lamentable, I'm probably going to try to take a "big picture" view of the show when I catch it and see if I can avoid becoming a volcano of rage when I see that OMG THEY SAID THAT ZELDA 2 WAS THE PACK-IN THOSE WORTHLESS IDIOT SCUMBAGZ.

[Wavelflack]

Lord of the Rings is fiction, whatever form you find it in. It's not supposed to be an accurate catalog of events in documentary form. People are entitled to debate their interpretations of others' interpretations of fictional work. Facts are not open to interpretation. They are either facts, or they are not. We can't debate whether or not Sonic was released before Super Mario World.

Furthermore, most of the LOTR nuts criticizing the movies were complaining about omissions of characters and scenes, not that the right lines were being spoken by the wrong characters while wandering through the wrong world. Can you imagine?

Lily was nothing more than a device, included to swell the emotions. I don't see anything particularly touching about a blind girl who listens to her Gameboy. I understand that there is supposed to be this compelling juxtaposition of a blind girl and her love of video games, but it turns out that she's just listening to the thing. If they wanted something more interesting in the way of handicapped accessories, perhaps they could have featured the Nintendo hands free controller? At least it allows people to play who otherwise couldn't.


More later.

[youngamer]

I heard all of the reviews u guys (and girls) said. im just going to watch it to laugh my ass off and to make fun of the ass holes who made it LOL

[Phosphor Dot Fossils]

Well, the folks who made it probably had the best of intentions, but budgets get slashed, personnel come and go (keep in mind this was a PBS station), and stuff, as they say, happens.

I might have a few problems with their end product, but being in that line of work myself, I'd have a very hard time attacking the people who put a lot of time into putting it together.

[bargora]

Lord of the Rings is fiction, whatever form you find it in. It's not supposed to be an accurate catalog of events in documentary form. People are entitled to debate their interpretations of others' interpretations of fictional work. Facts are not open to interpretation. They are either facts, or they are not. We can't debate whether or not Sonic was released before Super Mario World.
Save the sophistry, sir. The Lord of the Rings novels were not interpretations, but rather original text. For the purposes of my post, therefore, the novels are the facts. Thus, changes = WRONG, at least in the view of the "LOTR nut".

Regardless, I don't doubt that they got some facts wrong, and I don't doubt that you are outraged by the errors. I was just pleased to hear that a documentary was treating the subject matter seriously and with a degree of respect.

[charitycasegreg]

Freakin vcr didnt record it. :angry:

[Wavelflack]

"The Lord of the Rings novels were not interpretations, but rather original text."

I didn't say they were interpretations. I said the movies were interpretations, and the controversies (what there were) were fans' interpretations of those interpretations.

In any case, LOTR is a work of fiction (much as the fans would like to believe it isn't so..). Works of fiction are always open to analysis. Haven't you read "The Great Gatsby"? Didn't you have the secondary and tertiary meanings and shadings drilled into you? Of course, the author may or may not have meant any of that, but since it is fiction, it cannot be corroborated with other accounts of the same event.


I think much of this comes down to a number of people are happy just to have a videogame "documentary" air on TV (even if it is PBS), and are content to ignore or overlook the incredible errors and amateur production that we got.