What does the term "game" imply? Well, back during the dawn of games, when technology was very limited, it usually meant obtaining a high score so you could compete with other players. Think classic Pong arcade cabinets with people standing around all sides of the machine, cheering at the two players; or y'know, that scene in the original Tron where Flynn was playing Space Paranoids as onlookers cheered. It was a social experience centered around competition, which is very much the base definition of gaming.
Then fellows like these came along.
They gave games a personality. The player's avatar (as well as the antagonist) now had a face and a relatable goal to identify with. So began a natural evolution of the medium towards more narrative based games with characters and stories that would soon begin to rival movies and television. In summing up the last decade or so, I find the industry to be at an interesting level of development. Like most forms of mass media that are designed to entertain us in exchange for our monnies, most gaming companies by and large have stuck to predictable formats for games. We see the same basic and well understood mechanics, and that's all well and good for many genres, but rarely (especially for American companies) have we seen games that took risks with what qualifies as a video game.
Basically what it comes down to is that in order for games to make sense to a wide audience, they need to be identifiable as games, in that they must possess objectives and game mechanics that enable the player to achieve those objectives. There have been several examples of mainstream games that have attempted to re-evaluate the idea of "game mechanics" and "playability", typically with the underlining goal being to put more emphasis on the presentation or narrative of the game. Some examples would be Shenmue (one of my all time favorites), Heavy Rain, and Indigo Prophecy. Despite the cult success and at times ridiculous budgets (Shenmue being the current biggest budget for any game), these games weren't very commercially successful, typically because mainstream American audiences still aren't prepared for games that don't resemble the cultural idea of a video game. Usually these games have been lacking in some area or another, maybe it was a wonky control scheme or pacing issues, I'm not going to lie and say these games were anywhere near perfect. But I see them as wonderfully flawed in their own right, stepping stones towards the next evolution in game genre. Though, we also have to understand, the majority of American audiences prefer to be entertained over anything else, and there isn't anything wrong with wanting that every so often (I know I'm guilty). These types of games however, asked more from the player than the standard fare, in that more emotional involvement is needed to immerse oneself in the worlds created. Commercial fiction is called that because it is indeed commercial, and submits to the expectations of what's in demand; and while I wish standards were somewhat different, I'm not really anyone to make sweeping judgements... or maybe I'm just saving those for another entry... but I digress.
These narrative heavy and immersion based games are really beginning to push the boundaries of what we can call a game, and I'm okay with that; I mean, we're always going to have games that do what they've always been doing, and I love them all too. But with the advances of technology and the exponentially growing indie culture, I can't wait to see more interactive narrative type games. If we go into the past, we can actually see how this somewhat awkward genre has had strong roots that go back to the arcade. I'm sure we all remember Dragon's Lair right? That game was hardly a game at all, but hell was it entertaining, and quite the coin muncher at that. I'm also pretty sure that most old school gamers still have a favorite point and click adventure or even a text based game, which are both genres I think of as being grandfathers of current gen interactive narratives.
All in all, what I'm getting at is that this genre (if you can call it that) has been around, has an audience, and is definitely progressing. With the thriving culture of indie game developers and awesome mainstream support systems like the Xbox Live Arcade, I think we will see game-less games really flourish. In turn, I believe that this genre will truly bring games into the hands of everyone. Once the challenge, competition, and play mechanics have been reduced and simultaneously perfected for the genre, then we will be left with a medium that is accessible for anyone. Which in turn may bring about it's own brand of overly commercialized and predictable banality, but will ultimately pave the way for more revolutions in interactive art and storytelling; endless possibilities will be in store.
But y'know, talking about these particular elements in games as if it's just one genre is doing a disservice to the many other beautiful works of art that mastered fluidity and simplicity while focusing on the emotion of the game. But these particular titles deserve their own entries, and I'm definitely looking forward to giving them all the individual attention they deserve.
So here's to games and all those that dare not to be.
Never stop exploring digital rabbit holes.