Authors analyse old Atari 2600 game. They interview identified authors, with emphasis on maze generator used in game ("... it came upon him when he was drunk and whacked out of his brain, he coded it up in assembly overnight before he passed out, but now could not for the life of him remember how the algorithm worked"). After reverse-engineering the game image, they spot a bug in pseudo-random number generator (PRNG). PRNGs implementations with identical bug are then found out in 5 other Atari 2600 games, 3 by the same publisher, suggesting code re-use. As authors state, this work is already close to the gray area of copyright law.
And back to our times: there are games you can no longer get, like the list on https://www.thegamer.com/15-amazing-games-you-cant-play-anymore/ . Most of those are not available due to licences expiration. Such games, distributed via online stores as downloads on platforms implementing strong DRMs, are most probably lost for future generations.
- Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
- Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
- What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
For those interested, Gamasutra magazine published a 3-part series on game preservation a few years back: [Where Games Go To Sleep: The Game Preservation Crisis, Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3]
1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteWell I attended a hackaton where a guy won, because he created platform for securing such old school games, and made a repository with public access. For me personally this is a cool think to know how it all started, but it is not as important to make a huge deal of it. Focusing so much on past and how to keep those super old technologies to work take too much time. It is like with old cars, they can still run with new parts, it is cool to look at them, but it is not so important in general.
2. Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
I think that those technologies are so old, that we do not have to put so much energy and time to learn a lot about them. Even during our studies we had one classes about the history of computers, but some IT specialists know about them and some don’t. It is not necessary for the further development or nowadays technologies.
3. What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
I think that very often rights of publishers are stopping people from doing what is right. Those publishers are so money-driven that their’s pockets are more important than the general improvement and further development. I have seen so many patents that are stopping us from having safe world, because someone went to patent office and it is important for them to gain money in crazy amounts. I think that property and patent rights should be diversified and the monetary value limited because often the law is abused.
Old computers like old cars. I think old cars enthusiasts has it easier though - one can take a machinist course and replicate parts, with computer hardware it is more difficult if replacement parts are to be faithful copies. On the other hand, with emulation - it is much easier.
DeleteThere are places where history of IT is taught, after all - that is good to know. In my opinion some rudimentary knowledge of history helps to see thru the hype behind buzzwords.
1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeletePersonally I believe that games are just a simple entertainment. I usually do not play games at all and maybe that’s why it is not important for me. However, there are probably people fascinated with games and for them it is very important. Of course, it is a part of the history but very small. I think that there are areas that deserve more attention than games.
2. Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
I’m not a programmer but I suppose that the programming as a science may benefit a little from old software studies. For sure it will not be a breakthrough. For fanatics it will be phenomenal - for me it is simply nothing interesting.
3. What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
In my opinion, it should be balanced correctly. I agree that publishers should be protected by law but efforts of digital librarians should be appreciated, too. The right to property is one of the fundamental rights and it does not matter whether it is real estate or software. Likewise, the attitude of the people who promote history always deserves to be rewarded.
Thanks! Very balanced answers.
Delete1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteI think games should be preserved because they are the legacy of the past time. They give us insight into the technology from the times when the game was created. They let you move to the times of our parents. The old games are beautiful because they show that the lack of technlogs of our time could have created games that dragged people in for many hours. They were the prototypes of current games.
2. Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
I think that by studying old games we can learn a lot. In those days when the RAM was 32 MB or less, games were created that could delight and entertain entertainment for many hours. For a novice programmer they can be quite a material to analyze. Students create 2D games based on the climate of those times.
3. What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
It is difficult to answer this question. I think that there should be an agreement between game developers and digital libraries. After a defined period the titles can be archived at no cost and made available for free. This would save many valuable titles for future generations.
But, what constitutes a digital library? Can I set up one tomorrow? Another problem is the medium and platform: how to ensure we will have a way do decypher old media, and run its content?
DeleteDo You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteI do not consider classical games as artifacts altast yet. Those are not that old yest to be classified as items that have meaningful impact.
Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
Software engineering best practices are developing really fast and studying new trends, ideas or best practices could consumes pretty big amount of time. As well new paradigms have roots in previous developments but I think we should focus on designing new things not studying artifacts.
What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
Of Course rights of the publishers. Anyway 75 years after pice author death creative commons license will be in place.
Don't You think when games will be old enough to be worthwhile of preservation, there won't be any to preserve? All those bytes - gone.
DeleteWow, I'm starting to feel like a dinosaur. I think I'm too old to do this doctorate. But refer to the friend's questions ...
ReplyDelete1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
Personally, I think that the classic is the basis for the functioning of today's computers. In the past, when I started my adventure with a computer, I had 64 KB of RAM. Tape recorder, cassettes and software broadcast on the radio on Saturday at 15:00. Atari 800 XL or Commodore 64 was the pinnacle of dreams. Amiga 500 ... it was something unattainable for the average Kolwalski. Today you want to cross it? I can not agree to it !! These are the foundations of today's IT world !!!
2. Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
The old software has taught me everything what I can do today. I repeat ... maybe I'm just a dinosaur and should I let go out? In my professional and scientific work, I often use "relics of the past" as inspiration. In my opinion, we should use what was previously produced and written.
3. What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
Evidently, it is necessary to force old producers to make new versions of old software. Such a return (like for example on the occasion of Syro the Dragon on PS4 today) is something that shows to my children right now. My children are brought up on the history of computer games.
I don't think lawmakers could find a way to create law precise enough to cover all cases of uncooperative publishers. Also, legal entities come and go, many works are left orphaned.
DeleteVery interesting topic. I don't know if it qualifies as Computer Science, but the term 'archaeology' is only somewhat exaggerated. Wikipedia would feature such information, but I don't know if this would be published easily. Anyway, the technology studied there is similar to some esoteric programming. I'm not sure if this can give us many lessons for today ("like xoring both pointers in a doubly linked list and storing them in a single doubleword" - as the saying goes.)
ReplyDelete1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
They are certainly worth preserving. It's a misconstrued copyright law, which was dictated by Big Entertainment ('Military'-) Industrial Complex. Over a lifetime long "protection" (racket?) periods, "protection" by default regardless if anyone of the authors/copyright holders cares etc. This is just a crime against humanity, and Piracy can only go so far in helping to preserve our creative heritage. We need to extend the Public Domain, make copyright shorter (with options to prolong, but only for hefty commission to the public - e.g. for the preservation of the works in the Public Domain, and still not forever).
2. Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
It's just a mental exercise. Like the game of Tic-Tac-Toe - it's solved, but children can still learn from it.
3. What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
These aren't "rights", these are overblown privileges awarded by corrupt lawmakers. The original copyright was very limited, and that was the only way it was sold to the public - sentimental arguments about poor poets dying of pneumonia. But it was a bait and switch scheme - the privileges were extended with no regard to specific cases. There was just one criterion - any copyright bought from the author, should be possible to be milked forever.
For every "something science" there is "history of something science" :-)
Delete1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, we should preserve old games and try to remember it , no matter are they a low or hi end titles because despite hardware and software obstacle of the time, they are great example of building entertainment and a storyteller through time.
2. Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
All old-school games are build based on code, that evolve through time and become lines that we now right now. So yes, we could learn from it as a core and a milestone of today’s work.
3. What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
We should value both: on one hand we should try to bow to the publisher and try to re-engineered old games generating a profits, but most of all make old games more accessible to modern generation of users and gamers. One the other hand preserving games as they were in it primal state give us an opportunity to go back in time and relive our childhood.
1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteI think we should try to preserve as much as possible for future generations. I recently watched a short interview with the lady from gog.com (good old games), who is responsible for recovering the rights to old games (unfortunately I can't find the link). The problem is that the legal situation is often unclear and it is not entirely clear who really owns the rights to the brand.
2. Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
I think that we can and should take advantage of the ideas that were introduced in those games. In the past, we didn't have the resources we have now and we often had to deal with it with clever tricks. Today's games often lack optimisation.
3. What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
I do not think that we can give priority to rights one above the other. A digital library cannot recover a game that has a clearly defined legal situation without an agreement with the owner. However, there should be regulations that will allow for the recovery of the oldest games for which we are not in any way able to determine the owner of the rights.
Oh, GOG... they not only secure the rights, but also have a small army of quality engineers who ensure compatibility with current platforms.
DeleteAs for regulations, for USA there is mandatory deposit for Library of Congres. Interesting interview: https://blogs.loc.gov/thesignal/2012/09/yes-the-library-of-congress-has-video-games-an-interview-with-david-gibson/
1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, I do not have a definite answer. On the one hand, I think that this is yes, due to the attitude to the games should be, on the other hand - this is not a good topic for me , since I am not an uninteresting topic.
2. Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
I think no, all that could be learned, all that was important - already implemented in current projects, and all secondary - has long been outdated
3. What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
It seems to me that today, copyrights strongly block the development for other developments, although on the other hand they help other developers to secure their project. This is a very complex philosophical topic. When I began to study the topic of my doctoral work, I was surprised by the number of patents that hinder the development, dull the motivation of developers
I still remember my surprise when - as a child - I've learned that Marching Cubes algorithm is patented :-)
DeleteHi Przemek,
ReplyDeleteThanks for original subject.
As for your questions:
1. Honestly, I can’t see any problem. I am not fond of playing games (mainly because I have 11-old son very keen on that), but I’ve tried to imagine, how this market works. In my opinion, if the specific game is worth developing, then the fans won’t let it to be forgotten. On the other hand, if something has its five minutes and is not on top for longer, then it’s no use to concentrate on that, and it is better to find new games worth playing, isn’t it? Artificial coming back to old-fashioned items is like entering once again to the same water, while we’ve left it a long time ago. For me it is better to go forward.
2. For the reasons mentioned above, I would rather leave them alone, maybe subject to some kind of inspiration they maybe can bring sometimes. But generally, more inspirations come from everyday life and technology as such, so let’s better forget the old software artifacts. The only one exceptions are historical reasons indicated in point 3 below.
3. This is the same issue as this one concerning books. After 50 years there is no problem with copying, so in this case the publishers’ rights shouldn’t be the most important thing. For me, saving old software and hardware from oblivion shall be treated analogically as other old-fashioned items, kept in museums. This is important part of human’s history and it should be possible for further generations, to learn about them directly.
BR, Marta
It might be a hard to store such old software and hardware in museums, but even harder would be to present such collections to researchers or general public.
DeleteAd1.
ReplyDeleteGames are the product of a human - this is not negotiable. Games provide not only entertainment, but also a lot to learn. For example, while playing EU4, I got to know a lot of historical curiosities. I also learned how geopolitical saturation looked like in the Middle Ages. In addition, the continuous development of games is the main predictor of the development of increasingly efficient computing systems and algorithms, resulting in an increase in the speed of scientific research flickering.
Ad2.
At the time when the first games were developing, the processors were very slow. For this reason, algorithms had to be as efficient as possible. Nowadays, algorithms are underdeveloped. Games achieve low FPS even on very efficient hardware. It also seems that the old games were more playable and had their own ambience. The latter is rather related to the nostalgic.
Ad3.
There should be a law that applies to books. Each newly published copy of the book must be handed over to the main library. A similar law can be applied to Games. The stamp must, of course, be devoid of DRM and other security features. It should be provided with the documentation and preferably the source code.
I think low FPS can be partially attributed to much larger differences in performance of players' hardware.
DeleteVery interesting problem to think about in the context of video games. I think that digital products will be more important for future anthropologists than for example tableware.
ReplyDeleteGames should be treated as every other cultural material but maybe it's not so important to have an access to any actual executable file. Maybe it would be enough to have some detailed description or something like scenario. I think that such approach would also solve the problem of copyrights.
Unless such scenario or description also falls into copyright.
DeleteFrom time to time, something even better than executables is found: actual source code (for old games - it's still assembly though...).
1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteThere is no problem. Games are timeless. Many people use old games (younger, older). Others use old style games like Minecraft.
When I was young, I remember I played on Atari XT. My favourite game was ROBBO, and Sometimes I like to search on the Internet where I can find the one.
2.Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
Old software artefacts are more like arts now. The software is individual because the game code is like a "soul" of its author. Now, software based on modules that were created by many people. I think yes, we can find a lot of interesting algorithm in the code because there is own solutions for many people.
What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control the distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
According to Intelectual Property regulation we need 70 years for using a work with no author's consent. However, I think the period should be shorter for software because computers change faster than books.
I am a person who respects private property. I prefer to talk about this how to protect private property not how to destroy this. I am an author I am a god of my work. I can do everything that I want, and no public value should be able to change this.
I like Your observation that old games was more often work of individuals while now - of teams.
DeleteIt is also interesting to see such a fundamental disagreement (with Tomasz) over nature of publishers rights.
1.Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteIt is always hard to imagine, but maybe some day someone will be interested in how even volatile entertainment looks like in our time. It was funny, but in younger generation a lot of people even doesn't know, what was floppy disk and they think, that it only an icon of 'save'. So I think the more we preserve the more they will have to analyze.
2.Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
In my opinion current software is so much more complicated and advanced, that there is not a lot of things we can learn from old software. I think the best ideas from old software are foundations i.e. of modern operating systems, so something from this old software is still alive, but the rest didn't pass the test of time.
3.What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
I think there should be some expiration date of rights of publishers, i.e. 30 years and after this time base code or technical documentation should be open and possible to save for future generations. The same like i.e. in classical music.
There is an expiration date, there is even a slight chance it will not be extended further, but what until then? How to prevent "bit-rot"?
Delete1. I think this is a problem. Games are a very important and big part of the development of current entertainment. One can even think that they are the next stage of entertainment evolved from theater or cinema. Now we can delve into virtual worlds thanks to VR. Old games and consoles are part of our history. For sure, a lot of people played games at Atari or the first Playstation in their youth, which are no longer available. We will sooner see them as exhibits in a museum of technology. I think it is a great shame that the young generation will not have the opportunity to play old games anymore and get to know this thrill of emotions when you have little life and you cannot save the game.
ReplyDelete2. An interesting question. In my opinion, we will surely find similar elements. However, now technological difference between even two generations is very big. Progress in the gaming industry is currently too fast, and the difference in the appearance of games from 2000 to 2018 is incomparable.
3. Both are right. Digital librarians are doing really hard work trying to save old games and equipment from oblivion. At this point, there are a lot of games that we will probably never see again. Their licenses have expired, and the studies have disappeared. Thanks to librarians, we can remember them and find them somewhere else. On the other hand, publishers have their own rights. Some studios sell licenses for their titles. The main creators change their workplace and take the given brand with them. Sometimes refreshed remasters of old games appear. However, sometimes the reception of the remaster is not as good as the original game, and the publishers only lose money. So maybe sometimes it is good to create compromise regarding old titles?
Remastered version can also find way to whole new platforms and ecosystems, like mobile phones. Some old games - visually and gameplay-wise - fit very well to mobiles.
Delete1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteI guess games that are perceived as cult, iconic will be preserved. The most popular ones, the ones that everybody used to know. Should we worry about the remaining ones? I don't think so. If they weren't interesting, they should and surely they will sink into oblivion. As for games, the same rule as in case of books applies. All the books that have ever been written, couldn't be preserved. Some of them are kept in libraries, private homes, some of them are constantly being republished, but also some of them were burnt, got lost, sank into oblivion. The same stands for games and any other human creation. It's natural and we can't do anything about it.
2.Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
We might find some interesting algorithms in them, but nothing more. Of course, one might also want to study them to get a better insight of their creators' minds.
What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control the distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
One cannot compare those two things. Right of publisher is regulated by law, specific rules and regulations. The publisher has a lawful right to a particular creation, game, book, whatever. Digital librarians, of course, can and should try to save old hardware, but only as long as they act in accordance with law. Librarians are not rightful owners of creations they want to save and so they cannot be perceived as equal partners in the discussion regarding future of old hardware and software.
So, seems that after long enough time, only pearls and diamonds of games are left.
DeleteDo You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteThank you for this article. I think this is interesting point of view. I have never think about games as an artifacts of our culture but after reading article I noticed that it is worth to consider. Many games have some story to tell similar as some book, movie or a paiting. Moreover people are emotionally engaded when playing games similary like when watching a movie etc. In my opinion games may be considered as a part of a culture. Some of them are better some of them not but this is similar to other kinds of art and culture.
Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
I think yes, we can learn a lot from old software artifacts in example what makes people want to play such games even if their graphics was not perferct? It can be usefull to see what algorithms were used. Additionally many traditional bord games are played by people since ancient times or even earlier so why this can't happen to video games? The aim of a game is entertainment and this do not always require a novelty. I think we can back to play old games and still have fun.
What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
It is not an easy question. A buisnesmenn would say that the rights of a publisher. A digital librarian would be on the opposite side. I think that a good old game that could be played by generations should be valued as a culture artifacts, protected from publishers and available to users. Our culture shouldn't be only about money and this is what publishers mostly take care.
I think for board games, what is alive is sort of abstract - rules of game, strategies built around it. For computer games, the equivalent would be whole sub-genres even maybe, like "all pac-man clones". As such, it is much easier to preserve than any particular release for some platform now obscure.
Delete1.Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteTo be honest I have never been fan of video games. I know that for group of people it is more than just entertainment. They organise rally, "gaming" party and identify with them game character...but I don't understand it. I don't mind if only someone is interesting in it to save this game for next generation, but it is have sense? I don't know
2.Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
Maybe about culture, because games trying catch trends to sell as many game copies as it is possible.
3.What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
If I have to say I propose solution which let only official digital librarians to save old games/hardware without rights to copy/reproduce.
1. Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeletePersonally, it is not important for me because I do not play computer games at all. I prefer board games, they are timeless for me. The games which we can see in link, are the hit games and from them everything was started. Currently, some of mentioned games have a lot of modification, for example Tetris. I can understand that the information about disappearing video games and consoles from the market could be terrible for fans. The modifications of game is not the same as the first version of the game. On the other hand, nowadays we have better IT technologies so we can create more advanced games which are replacing the past games. In twenty years, games that are brand new today will be old. To sum up, it is not worth to maintain all of old games but some of the best old games should be remained for those who really appreciate them.
2. Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
Yes, I think we could learn something from studies of old software artifacts. Some of current IT software is based on old software. The good examples are the banking systems, they were developed long ago, but they are still used nowadays, they were partially modified, but many components are still used today. The modern computer products has roots in the old software so we need some studies of it. It does not mean that we should not learn, use and develop new software. It is like history, you need to know it to understand some modern process.
3. What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
It is a pretty difficult to answer the questions. On the one hand the publishers want to control distribution of their products – and they have the right to do it. If the distribution of products are unprofitable, the publisher will not distribute them. On the other hand, from a customer's point of view, the digital librarians are very necessary and valuable. I cannot unambiguously answer this question.
Do You think it is a problem? Should we treat games as other artifacts of our culture and preserve, or more like low-end, volatile entertainment not worth second look?
ReplyDeleteI think that for sure we can't generally say that all the games are just volatile entertainment, not worth the second look. There are some games that in fact don't have any impact on the culture, but also a lot of them are really great piece of work. We also can't forget that from the 90's games are the important element of the culture. In the past the main entertainment for the poeple were books or boardgames, nowadays there are also movies, videogames or computer games. Culture depends on the popular interests and to ensure the full picture of it, we can't erase some of its elements just beacuse they may seemed as less important or less creative. It should be also underlined that some of the games are really the masterpiece and request a lot of skills to be designed. So to sum up I would say that generally we should treat games as the artifacts of our culture.
Do you think we could learn anything from studies of old software artifacts? Or is the field today so different there is no connection?
I am not sure exactly about the meaning of these question - about what solutions in the software or games are we talking ;) but I think there is always something we can learn from the previous software, from games to applications. During wrting the code we usually have o lot of problems which need solutions and always analyzing the codes from - for example - an old games can be helpful with this, both by using part of such codes or even by eliminating the mistakes that were in the old games.
What should we value more: rights of publishers, who want to control distribution of their products (possibly with intention to issue re-editions on new platforms) or efforts of digital librarians who attempt to save old hardware and software from oblivion?
I think that it is a delicate matter, where border between two values - copyrights and access to the products - must be rightfully balanced. In my opinion efforts of digital librarians are important to save the cultural achievements from dissappearing for good. The main goal of the computer games is to entertain the people and make their life easier. It is also the purpose of creator's actions. So I think that also in their interests is providing the long life of the games, not limitated only by the lapsed copyrights.