As we have been discussing “play” and what it means for something to actually be classified as “play,” I found it very interesting that video games, according to Stephen Kline, essentially started out from military research. As these “hackers” began to experiment with video games, they turned something that in no way could be considered “play” (wars, fighting, military research, etc…) into the very essence of “play.” There seems to be nothing as serious as fighting a war, and yet, this is how “play” came to be. What if the origin of video games had come from something different entirely? So many of the first video games were “war” themed (shooter games). Would these games have developed differently if the creators of some of the first board games had learned to create video games instead?

Also – as video games really began to develop, I found it interesting how the creation of these games became so competitive so quickly. It was as if the creators knew that video games were not going to die out. Kline mentions that many people thought that the video game fad would not last, but the creators seemed to know they would grow more and more popular. As the video game creators switched companies, made their own companies, re-made games, this “fad” grew more and more until it has become what it is today. My question is, why? Why did people latch onto this craze so quickly and so readily? Why have video games held the interest of people for this long? Perhaps it really is just because we all want to play. But somehow I don’t think the answer could be that simple. Perhaps it has become imbedded in our culture, but I guess I want to know how it came to be imbedded.