Archives: Animation Vs. Videogames
I'm currently working on a presentation for my Film and Media History course that requires me to examine an (film) archive. Over the break for MLK day, we did an assignment like this, but in less detail. For that assignment I examined this site. It seems to me that the idea of an "archive" falls apart when videogames are brought into the mix.
For example, it is possible to own an original print of Citizen Kane on film. Not taking Benjamin into consideration here (i.e. what is an original film anyhow?), the same cannot be said about a videogame, at least not in the same capacity. Sure, I can own an original copy of Super Mario Bros. for Atari 2600, but so can 10,000 people. There's no sense of uniqueness, at least not for me. Also, consider that the above site offers sites of emulation that, in essence, recreate the moment of gaming almost perfectly.
The fundamental site of archiving for videogames is the internet. Even Xbox 360 games can be downloaded in their entirety, placed on a DVD, and played as if the original software is being read by the hardware. Here is where archiving games becomes more an issue of archiving the digital (i.e. the game's design code, zeroes and ones, etc.) becomes more important than obtaining the cartridge. What good is the cartridge without the hardware? A film reel can be examined frame by frame even without a projector. Videogame software is necessarily bound to its hardware and, also, to its controllers. The apparatus defines the game, meaning without the system (Atari, Playstation, Xbox, PC, etc.), there is no game.
What emulation allows is for the hardware to be mutable. You don't need an Atari as long as your CPU can function as such in its place. Further, you don't need the game cartridge because software is easily downloadable more so than emulating the functioning hardware.
So back to my archive project, I decided to work with the Canemaker collection. This is an animation collection housed at NYU. Animation, it seems to me, is a precursor to videogames. As a genre, animation is at the mercy of its creators, which is opposite to any other filmic genre that needs to employ actors & actresses. Animators not only need to create characters, but also the world in which the characters interact. Video game designers have a similar task in front of them. Both areas demand total artistic interactivity at first, but games require gamer interaction later while animated work requires viewing. So then, does the voice of the videogame designer resonate more or less than the animator? The designer imparts logic and limits. Does the animator impart the same thing? How would John Canemaker match up to Shigeru Miyamoto?
For example, it is possible to own an original print of Citizen Kane on film. Not taking Benjamin into consideration here (i.e. what is an original film anyhow?), the same cannot be said about a videogame, at least not in the same capacity. Sure, I can own an original copy of Super Mario Bros. for Atari 2600, but so can 10,000 people. There's no sense of uniqueness, at least not for me. Also, consider that the above site offers sites of emulation that, in essence, recreate the moment of gaming almost perfectly.
The fundamental site of archiving for videogames is the internet. Even Xbox 360 games can be downloaded in their entirety, placed on a DVD, and played as if the original software is being read by the hardware. Here is where archiving games becomes more an issue of archiving the digital (i.e. the game's design code, zeroes and ones, etc.) becomes more important than obtaining the cartridge. What good is the cartridge without the hardware? A film reel can be examined frame by frame even without a projector. Videogame software is necessarily bound to its hardware and, also, to its controllers. The apparatus defines the game, meaning without the system (Atari, Playstation, Xbox, PC, etc.), there is no game.
What emulation allows is for the hardware to be mutable. You don't need an Atari as long as your CPU can function as such in its place. Further, you don't need the game cartridge because software is easily downloadable more so than emulating the functioning hardware.
So back to my archive project, I decided to work with the Canemaker collection. This is an animation collection housed at NYU. Animation, it seems to me, is a precursor to videogames. As a genre, animation is at the mercy of its creators, which is opposite to any other filmic genre that needs to employ actors & actresses. Animators not only need to create characters, but also the world in which the characters interact. Video game designers have a similar task in front of them. Both areas demand total artistic interactivity at first, but games require gamer interaction later while animated work requires viewing. So then, does the voice of the videogame designer resonate more or less than the animator? The designer imparts logic and limits. Does the animator impart the same thing? How would John Canemaker match up to Shigeru Miyamoto?
posted by Hakim @ 10:50 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home