As the videogame industry grows and holds increasing cultural significance, so too does its history and development. This article discusses whether Wikipedia should be responsible for videogame history, and reminded me of Kevin’s discussion in my week 1 tutorial about the problem of formal and informal literature documenting gaming history. He used the example of the forum website 4chan.org, which one the one hand contains ridiculous and bizarre information, but also holds strong informal cultural weight.
This is a pressing issue for video games, as the article outlines. While Wikipedia is rich with information and history on some gaming subjects, for example there is more written about Call of Duty than World War II, the further you go back in time the less solid information exists. This issue became particularly pertinent for multi-user dungeon (MUD) games, when Wikipedia was accused of blocking the rich history of this game format as little information qualified as official references for Wikipedia’s standards.
Of course this relates to wider issues, such as the purported democratization of information on the Internet. Lee Siegel disputes this idea, arguing that Wikipedia is “full of inaccuracies and constantly changing according to the prejudices of its administrators. Mounds of facts are constantly shifting.”
Another relevant point comes from the Erkki Huhtamo reading, as he describes the still burgeoning history of videogames being problematic as first generation writers, whilst engaged with the powerful formative experience of gaming, they often lack critical distance and cannot relate to wider cultural framework.
Whether or not you believe in the democratisation of information online, Wikipedia does not have to be all-controlling and have the final say on these issues. In order to manage and properly document and report the history of videogame developments, theorists from all standpoints need to investigate themselves this history that is so important for understanding today's videogame culture and developments.
The role of wikipedia for history of all forms is an interesting one, and will be a site of conflict for a while, and I think you're absolutely right that gaining the right balance about critical frameworks for videogames is an ongoing process.
ReplyDelete