Game Design Theory

Good afternoon, and welcome to one of the final two posts for Game Design Theory, and our overall history of game development. With Thanksgiving Break having passed and Christmas Break fast approaching, I figure I would culminate everything within the history of game design into two final posts: What was achieved, and what we can expect to see and play in the future. Today’s entry will cover the former; what was achieved in the forty to fifty years since Tennis for Two was created. With that being said, I hope you enjoy!

So as it’s been stated several times in previous entries, video games did not start off as the visual, titanic phenomena that they are today. The very first seed to be planted was in fact William Higinbotham’s “Tennis For Two”, despite rumors falsely pointing toward Atari’s “Pong” as the first. From this seed sprouted a Hyperion tree, so to speak, with millions of different branches harboring vastly unique titles and systems. From this tree came the first arcade systems, and subsequently their later re-release for the familial household. From this tree the first rivaled branches were watered; pitting the first of this new generation of gamers against one another. From this branch sprouted the First Console War where, as it usually goes with conflict, some branches were sawed off; left forgotten to be dissolved by time. And yet, despite all the modifications, the droughts–leaves falling left and right with no suitable replacement in sight–this very tree still manages to pervade the households of millions of people around the globe.

Following the aftermaths of the fabled Console Wars, however, there was always one specific seed that would revitalize the tree, and the industry as a whole. After the bout between Atari and Genesis, the mythic plumber brothers swept the stage. When hand-held consoles walked to the pitch, titles like Tetris and Pokémon were instant home-runs. And finally just when the feud between Xbox and PlayStation had supposedly run its course, Virtual Reality blipped into the scene, completely revolutionizing the overall visual experience.

No matter the conflict, the ramifications from poor sales or out-lash from horribly managed game releases, the industry as a whole always seems to find some route, some crevice to retreat to; only to bide its time before the next revolution. I really hope you enjoyed the first of the final two entries into the history of game development and Game Design Theory as a whole. Tune in tomorrow where I address in my final post where the industry could possibly go from here. Until then, and as always,

Cheers,

Ethan