Talk:Timeline of computer and video games

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note: Restored discussion that was deleted by User:24.173.71.114 on 13:58, 10 Dec 2004 without comment. (If the talk page becomes too long, archive it instead.).

This is the most brilliant and comprehensive chronological timeline of the history of videos games that I've found so far on the web. Cheers to the creator of this page; also another cheers to him for his ever-lasting stamina of efficiently updating and maintaining this blossoming site of eternal fountain of knowledge. :.)

Sincerely,

170.63.192.32

Is it necessary to have anything before the creation of the first video game? I found it misleading. Rmhermen 13:12, Aug 12, 2003 (UTC)

Good Point, I have modified the format of the Timeline to specify the dates which are 'Before The Video Game Era'.

Is it necessary to include dates of when an important person is born? Possibly not, yet it states the timeframe in which the people grew up, which cultivated their importance.

These dates are the birthdates of the major players of the video game industry.

Tonius 13:08|2003.08.14

Readability[edit]

I feel that the format of this timeline makes it unreadable and sometimes not very useful. Things like

Sega Corporation
· is incorporated

especially stand out to me. I'm going to start reducing the formatting and make it a bit more like the year pages (including adding actual dates when I can find them). A few other points of whining:

  • For categories, I think simpler would be better. How about just Events, Business, People (births/deaths). And/or maybe also Games and Hardware.
  • Don't forget that this is about video games and not only video game companies ;)
  • Reduce verbiage (goes overboard on Corp., Ltd., Inc., Co. in places; don't need to wikilink something multiple times in the same entry; don't mention years where it's obvious -- i.e., "E3 1998" under the 1998 heading)
  • As a timeline, I think we can stick with present tense.

Feedback would be appreciated. Also, I removed the "Eras" section because the list was unsubstantiated and periodization would be better suited for the history of the video game article. --Mrwojo 19:11, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Split[edit]

This timeline is rather unwieldy. I propose moving all content to per-year pages and keeping history of the video game as the main article. It should be expanded with thorough per-decade overviews and links to the individual years, of course. Fredrik 19:14, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I was thinking about doing that. When you say "It should be expanded with [...]", are you referring to this page or history of the video game? --Mrwojo 23:12, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
The history page. With content merged into history of the video game, this one should be made a redirect. By the way, would "history of video games" be a more appropriate title? Fredrik 00:44, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I think there should be a central page for the list of years in video games. Perhaps the timeline could redirect back to list of years in video gaming. History of video games is probably a better title; it is shorter by a word. :) One more naming thought concerns "2003 in video gaming" -- I was considering "2003 in video games" but didn't know if that title was better enough to change the few articles named that way. Thoughts? --Mrwojo 01:00, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Or "2003 in computer and video games"? "History of computer and video games"? Or do we need separate lists? Darn, this is a problem. Fredrik 01:17, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
So, are there any objections? If not, I'll go ahead and start the "XXXX in video gaming" pages and move the content from this timeline over to them. Fredrik 19:29, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I agree. I also suggest calling it "XXXX in video game industry" or some such. As it is, there is actually very little said about the games, it's mostly lawsuits, M&A, PR, etc. Either someone should actually add the missing info about, you know, games, or it should be renamed to "blah-blah industry". There is also too strong an emphasis on console video games. It can't be seriously called timeline of video games and computer games now.Paranoid 21:03, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Good idea, here are some useful links for formatting.

List of musical events 1969_in_music History_of_the_video_game Timeline_of_video_games

Also your idea from the chat to get a poll on this to ask ppl and get more ppl involved is a good idea. To join the project come here: Wikipedia Video Game Project --ShaunMacPherson 18:24, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

My proposal[edit]

Fredrik (talk) 16:35, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

As far as I am concerned, every single point is absolutely correct. The chronological way of organising it is the only one that seems feasible. And judging from the number of one-line entries in the article now, a decent writeup can be made on almost every year. The structure should first be drafted, discussed and edited here and then the content should be gradually exported from the timeline. Paranoid 19:15, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I filled in 2002 in video gaming with what's in the timeline. How does it look? I think we can ignore the issue of naming right now since that can be changed later. --Mrwojo 15:01, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The release section seems like it's going to be a pain to update and keep going for all years. Instead why not link (or something?) to the category XXXX computer and video games? Perhaps make a change to the title: "Notable releases" for big titles such as GTA:VC and Warcraft 3 (AAA titles). K1Bond007 19:33, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
Sounds good. --Mrwojo 14:08, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This article is no longer one of the largest on the 'pedia anymore, as I've split the 1980s-2000s. I'll continue splitting the 1970s, but will stop there. Anything before that can perhaps be moved to a "timeline of early video games" or be mentioned on the appropriate history page. At this point, everything listed before the 1950s is hardly relevant (birth years, company creations, etc.). --Mrwojo 15:44, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I stopped at 1971 in video gaming. Computer Space (or Pong) is a good point to mark the beginning of modern era. --Mrwojo 16:01, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Looks really good. K1Bond007 17:35, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks! All that remains is to use proper headings for most of the years before 2000 and then do something with this article. --Mrwojo 18:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

MSX[edit]

The MSX system is missing from the timeline. Andete 16:13, 2004 Sep 19 (UTC)

Tengen start[edit]

Under 1988 "Warner Communications' Atari Games Corp establishes the Tengen division" - According to the Ultimate History of Video Games, Tengen acquires a license from Nintendo in December of 1987, so I can't see how the division was started in 1988. Tengen did release their first games in 1988 though - Gantry 02:46, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I moved Tengen's establishment to 1987 - Gantry 04:10, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Timeline[edit]

I removed the section on "before the video game era" and other entries that were trivial bits about companies that later made video games. With all that gone, this article could now be merged into history of video games. I don't really care at this point, since I found that many other timelines in the 'pedia are actually just lists of years. --Mrwojo 17:30, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well, I'm not so sure removing it altogether is the right thing to do. Perhaps a seperate article instead? OR we can revert to how it was by rearranging the years to put 2005 on top and thus the "before the video game era" on the bottom? K1Bond007 18:59, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
The timeline can just go away, as User:Fredrik suggested earlier. The latter bit is a list of years mostly superfluous with Category:Computer and video games by year (and a probable Category:Years in computer and video games). The early developments should be (and mostly are) mentioned in the history of video games.
IMO, the corporate details give the timeline a bizarre fixation on the industry, especially before the 1970s when there was no industry yet. Computers, fantasy fiction, and other types of games have had at least as strong an impact on computer and video games, yet their events are correctly not listed. I guess I'm generally more of a fan of directly related statements such as "197x: Nintendo releases its first video game" rather than "1889: The company later known as Nintendo is founded". --Mrwojo 19:54, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Oh ok. That makes sense then. I agree with you. Make it so :) K1Bond007 21:42, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)

Year standards[edit]

On XXXX in video gaming, here's the sort of standard layout I've evolved after looking at them all (each bold item is a heading):

  • Events
    • General computer and video gaming-related events that can't be categorized under the lower headings.
    • Notable releases
      • Include a sentence to explain the significance of the release ("7 million copies", "the first Star Wars game", etc.). Should also include game-related software, such as game engines/middleware, emulators, open-source games, PunkBuster, Roger Wilco, etc. Arcade games should generally go here too.
    • Hardware
      • New consoles, peripherals, gaming-related advances in PCs (graphics cards).
    • Business
      • Companies founded, renamed, murders and executions, business-v-business lawsuits, and that kind of thing.
  • Trends
    • A metaphorical screenshot in history. Not necessarily "events", but info on the state of gaming at the time.
    • Top consoles
      • A short list of the dominant video game consoles.
    • Top-selling games
      • Preferably, top 10 or top 5 lists for computer and video game sales.

This format should be flexible in that sections can be omitted if there's no need for them. Try to find actual dates for events. --Mrwojo 17:30, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Timeline_of_computer_and_video_games&oldid=1204481871"