https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjadmWl1Mz0

A long but informative video .

Watched it last night. Been waiting for his next video, and it did not disapppoint.

Seems like he is skipping over a lot of stuff, like for example, he only says one single sentence about Intellivision and ColecoVision and then says nothing more about those subjects.

So calling it "the entire history" of video games is certainly not accurate given his skimping on details about certain matters.

He squishes all of the early PC gaming history into about 13 minutes of an "oh, by the way..." section. I've noticed that with some similar projects, the creators have difficulty in connecting the arcade, console, and PC sides of the industry in a clear, insightful way so they tend to default to the standard "boom period, 1983 crash, Nintendo saves everyone! 16-bit wars, etc." pattern while treating the home computer as an odd sideline.

Is the real old computer gaming history all that relevant?

I mean, it is of course relevant to a good bunch of folk, for very good reasons, but to the vast majority, one would hardly think so. I personally want every morsel of history ... but that's just me and my nerd side.

Once upon a time it was only some nerds who gamed. Now every person and their dog games, and you can no longer really call a gamer a nerd, just on their gaming basis.

For me, there was a time when I thought computer games were kind of nerdy or childish. That was based on trying a few on my original PC, the Apple IIE. It wasn't until I came across Quake on a work PC a few years later, that I suddenly saw how great computer games could be. I then went back a few years and educated myself with some older worthwhile games.

I guess going back much further, I did enjoy a few games found at gaming arcades or the local Takeaway (Fish & Chips) shop. But that was before the Home PC revolution. So I wasn't totally anti-gaming. And I did dabble a bit with Pong on the TV using some cheap crappy console or other. I also had a couple of handheld (pocket) game machines. One just played Reversi (Othello), the other was some kind of Monkey ladders game with levels.

Here's a hint: The Entire History of Video Games - the beginning.

No idea why you think I need a hint. I said what I said and was very clear about it ... no hint needed, and certainly not silly oneliners.

Here's a hint for you, that is becoming more necessary nearly every time I post something and you reply ... read me properly and entirely, expand your thinking, broaden your horizons, don't fall for the obvious traps dictated by your biases and snap impressions.

In nearly every case I have thought what you have thought, and then thought beyond that. So go deep my friend. ;)

Thank you for sharing!

i think the hint is that it is not called "A partial history of video games" or "The history of video games that Timboli cares about".

Its like writing a complete history of engineering, but not mentioning the pulley system developed in Mesopotamia, becuase Timboli don't care about it.

And while it is about video games, it is alos missing the early ectronic games, such as the cathode ray amusment device. while they are not strictly video games (they do not strictly have "video") they are still important precursors. A few lines could have been mentioned.

Well, here's another hint for you, since you obviously need it:

the word "entire" has a meaning.

And the majority of the world's population agrees on that meaning, and really don't care, if your personal definition is more loose, or if you personally think certain aspects of the "entire" history are hardly important to a majority of gamers.

Maybe the video's title should be "The Entire History of Video Games - the beginning...with exception of systems X,Y and Z, that the vast majority of gamers isn't interested in", instead, to fit your own definition better.

He posted a new ( longer ) video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=argpSxB1NQE