[game_preservation] Game preservation in 2008

[Andrew Armstrong]

Sorry, Simon! I'll hold my tongue a bit and say that the /advisory board 
of our peers/ lost points with me instead. Not much better, since they 
should know how important preservation is. Oh well, I don't like talking 
negative, I was a bit annoyed when I read that though. :(

It's something that doesn't necessarily need a session if we can 
organise it to still occur every year as a SIG thing as Henry said though :)

As for bad feedback? A highly polarised debate on /what game you think 
is "best"/ sure is to get some, or a lot, since obviously their choice 
wasn't included (well, that's my angle since I've talked to some gamers 
and game makers before :-) ). However, I am sure there was valid 
criticism of it, I just hope Henry got some of it back for any future 
preservation events involving lists, for GDC sessions or not. If it was 
kept private, oh well.

It's certainly a ton different to most talks, since history doesn't 
really fit in a "GDC track" as such, being about game history (it's 
importance, and some games which need securing for the future and why) 
and not how to do something. I can see the argument for not having it at 
all of course. Perhaps the preservation SIG, well mainly Henry, can 
think of other things to propose to GDC instead of the canon involving 
game preservation.

Thanks for the info, hope you find a definite answer on Monday whether 
yes or no :)

Andrew

Simon Carless wrote:

> Hold your horses on this, guys, I'm poking again and should have an

> answer on Monday.

>

> To be clear - and not to be too harsh - the Advisory Board, not CMP,

> rejected the Digital Game Canon talk. The advisory board meets in

> closed session and so I can't really say why other than the fact that

> attendee feedback was below average.

>

> Nonetheless, I'll try to do something about it. But it's a point worth

> making that, at least with regular sessions at GDC, a jury of industry

> peers decides who is included.

>

>

>

> On 1/4/08, Andrew Armstrong <andrew at aarmstrong.org> wrote:

>   

>> Shame about the Digital Game Canon :( CMP get major down points for that

>> I'm afraid, along with IGDA getting less slots (why?! bizarre...it's the

>> same venue as last year isn't it? the DGC was popular too I recall

>> reading!).

>>

>> Not good, compared to film it's a bit of a setback. Could a "podcast" be

>> done with the DGC participants? we could at least do with another 10

>> games, and some critical commentary on why they are chosen. Even if it

>> isn't a public event, keeping the momentum going would be great... maybe

>> next time it can be put on again, or organised out of session time

>> unassociated with CMP.

>>

>> At least your have your roundtable(s) on preservation, if nothing else!

>> Gather what support there can be, maybe the new UT Videogame Archive

>> will help spur a few things on as well as the virtual worlds project.

>>

>> Keep us posted on it! Is there a website for the weekend Stanford event

>> I can use in case news gets posted about it? (and so I can find more

>> about it myself)

>>

>> Thanks,

>>

>> Andrew

>>

>> Henry Lowood wrote:

>>     

>>> Andrew and others:

>>>

>>> I have been meaning to get a message out on this topic, so thanks for

>>> the prompt!  I'll just go right down the list of items:

>>>

>>> 1.  Yes, there will be a preservation roundtable at GDC, not sure

>>> about two.  There were two last year, but this year IGDA did not get

>>> as many slots.   I hope to see many of you there; we'll have just had

>>> the kickoff meeting for the Library of Congress project and can talk

>>> at length about it and how this group can participate.

>>>

>>> 2. Digital Game Canon.   GDC, believe it or not, rejected the panel,

>>> even though it included a few very well-known game developers.  (Quick

>>> editorial remark: A friend of mine just sat on the committee that made

>>> the selections for the National Film Registry in the U.S.  The film

>>> preservation efforts around that are actively supported by numerous

>>> film directors and other personalities in that industry.  I was

>>> envious.)    Simon tried to rescue the panel for GDC, but clearly that

>>> is not going to happen.  So I will work on another venue or perhaps

>>> just organize and announce the 2008 list via the SIG.

>>>

>>> 3. Technically, the Library of Congress project started on 1/1/2008.

>>> In reality, the work will kick off with a workshop at Stanford Feb.

>>> 18-19, i.e., the two days before the GDC conference (also the days

>>> that the GDC workshops take place).   So I should have details about

>>> participation, information about ongoing work, etc. at the GDC roundtable.

>>>

>>> 4. Andrew needs to be commended for his great work on the Wiki and

>>> esp. the Digital Game Canon page -

>>> http://www.igda.org/preservation/files/dgc_gdc2007/.  Not news, but

>>> hey, I just needed to say that.  Simon, as well, for the fine series

>>> of articles on several of the games available via Gamasutra; links

>>> here -

>>> http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2007/11/digital_game_canons_first_10_g.php

>>> .  By the way, Andrew has also put together a page covering articles

>>> with historical content here -

>>> http://www.igda.org/wiki/Game_Preservation_SIG/Resources#History_Articles

>>> , some from Gamasutra, some from elsewhere.  Additions welcome, I'm sure.

>>>

>>> Henry

>>>

>>>       

> _______________________________________________

> game_preservation mailing list

> game_preservation at igda.org

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_preservation

>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_preservation/attachments/20080105/034d0e44/attachment.html>