Tuesday, February 16, 2010
ASSIGNMENT: Ed Halter, From Sun Tzu to XBox: war and video games
Choose a term from Halter's book to blog on. Gather images or even better video related to your topic. Then you'll need also to write 2 paragraphs, one summarizing what Halter has to say about the term you have chosen. The second paragraph should reflect on something that came up in the reading related to your research term. (For example, about the aesthetics of portraying the enemy, or about how the military starts to think about "training time.") You can post your paragraphs and links to this post as a comment or start your own post if you want to include images.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The first computer was released in 1960 and was named PDP-1, that stood for Programmed Data Processor-1. With the release of the computer, only certain schools and organizations had access to the computers. One of the schools that had access to this computer was MIT, where Spacewar!, the first video game, was created. The main coder for Spacewar! was Stephen Russel but Peter Samson, Martin Graetz, Wayne Witanen, Alan Kotok, and Dan Edwards helped with the process and the game was released in 1961. http://simh.trailing-edge.com/photos/spacewar.jpg
ReplyDeleteThe game Spacewar! has three main components. First there is the star, the gravity well. Then there are two armed spaceships called “the needle” and “the wedge”. Two players are required to play this game. The objective of the game is to fire missiles at each other until one of the spaceships explode. The controls in the game are rotation, thrust, fire, and hyperspace. You can play the original Spacewar! game from 1962 here: http://spacewar.oversigma.com/ and watch more in depth history of Spacewar! here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X58CdkLVr6A.
The inspiration of the game came from the Cold War era during the 50’s and 60’s. Sputnik was launched by the Soviet in 1957 and that sparked imaginations of what could be “out there” and became a part o popular culture. Spacewar! was part of this popular culture. According to J.M Graetz, one of the original developers of Spacewar!, he wrote “After some preliminary foofaraw to get everyone’s name right, a bunch of overdeveloped Hardy Boys go trekking off through the universe to punch out the latest gang of galactic goons, blow up a few planets, kill all sorts of nasty life forms, and just have a heck of a good time.”
With the release of Spacewar! and its immense popularity, a lot of people wanted to join in the world of computer programming. The PDP-1 was a government funded device but because of a handful of MIT students who wanted to create something a bit more fun, it sparked interest in other people and got them involved with developing the computer to what it is today.
ABOUT ARPANET:
ReplyDeleteARPAnet was a project of the Advanced Research Projects Agency part of the US Dept. of Defense. ARPA is now known as DARPA. The agency is responsible for developing new technology for the military (internet, GPS, graphical user interfaces, unmanned aircraft, etc). ARPAnet was an early form of the internet, based on packet switching, when is when parcels of information are sent along a circuit that is shared by multiple users, and processed at unmanned stations called IMPs (Interface Message Processors). ARPAnet was developed as a collaboration between ARPA, educational institutions, and computer science contractors.
MINI-TIMELINE
1957: ARPA founded as response to Sputnik
1969: First successful communication on ARPANET, only four computers connected.
1971: 23 computers connected.
1972: ARPAnet goes public
1973: Email and File Transfer Protocol invented.
IN THE BOOK:
Ed Halter cites ARPAnet as a military-funded project that allowed programmers to communicate (and play games) with one another. ARPAnet was so heavily funded and involved such highly "intellectual" constituents that programmers had free time to develop games, such as Mazewar and later, Minesweeper and Chess. Eventually, Mazewar was banned on ARPAnet because almost half the traffic on the network was due to gameplay. ARPAnet also enabled players to play against other actual users, instead of against the computer.
REFLECT/RELATE:
ARPAnet is a prime example of how games emerged unexpectedly from military/defense-related initiatives from the government, in contrast to later moments where the games were directly supported and encouraged by the military. ARPAnet differs from the PLATO network, which was primarily for educational purposes, or the SIMNET, which involved simulation gaming and training, since its purpose was to advance the United States' systems of communication for defense. In ARPAnet's developement, there is a clear gap between the people working on it (computer science scholars at premier educational institutions) and the people meant to use it (defense strategists and military communicators). At this moment, games were seen as a distraction rather than a useful tool for training or persuasion.
http://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/history/ivh/arpanet.gif
(extremely simple schematic of ARPANET)
http://limalimao.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/arpanet.jpg
(ARPAnet users at work)
"Tennis For Two" is known as the first video game developed by the physicist, William Higinbotham, from the Brookhaven National Laboratory in 1958. It was later transformed into the game, "Pong". Looking at the oscilloscope—a type of electronic test instrument that allows signal voltages to be viewed, usually as a two-dimensional graph of one or more electrical potential differences (vertical axis) plotted as a function of time of some other voltage (horizontal axis)—the tennis course is represented from the side rather than from the top. Inside the machine, the circuit senses the paths of the ball movements, reacts to and emits sounds when the ball bounces. With the analog aluminum controller, two users from each side could interact with the ball by clicking the button to hit the ball and using a knob to control the angle. “The device was designed in about two hours and was assembled within three weeks.” (wiki) Higinbotham originally wanted to design something inviting to liven up the visitors to the lab but it then became popular among the local kids.
ReplyDeleteWhether "Tennis For Two" was the first video game has remained controversial. One of the reasons was that Higinbotham never patented his invention as a game. In the same time, the game used oscilloscope rather than CRT monitors or television displays. Halter mentioned "Tennis For Two" in his text in comparison with the "Spacewar!". Both of the games served higher purposes such as academic setting or promotions rather than pure entertainments. He said, “It was not an arbitrary circumstance that video games would emerge out of these venues rather than, say, the booming toy business or the nascent consumer electronics industry.” (p.78)
I would agree with his theory about the origination of games came from technology and science development. “The computers as we know them would not have been possible without massive government funding, largely through military channels, is a concept many today would find surprising.” (p.79) When I play video games, I have never considered the first games were originally developed for simulation trainings and even the relations to the government. I would consider "Tennis For Two" as a social tool which diminishes the gaps between people. It could be competitive; however, since the game does not contain score counts, I believe most people who play the game would just enjoy bouncing the ball with their friends.
---------------------
Interesting Links:
[Brookhaven History] The First Video game?
http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/history/higinbotham.asp
[Youtube] Tennis for Two – The second ever computer game
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2E9iSQfGdg
[iPhoneskinning] Tennis for Two http://www.iphoneskinning.com/2008/03/tennis-for-two.html
[gamesquarter] Tennis for Two
http://www.gamersquarter.com/tennisfortwo/
---------------------
Sources:
[Wiki] Tennis for Two
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_for_Two
[Book] From Sun Tzu to Xbox, Ed Halter
Buckminster Fuller’s World Game was a proposal that started in 1969, during escalated Cold War tensions. Also known as the “world logistics game” or “world peace game,” Fuller wanted the people of the world to consider each other as one family, as humans. He claims that the nations state systems of the world are “blood clots in the world’s global metabolism.” The game itself plays out with a mechanical board that unfolds the world, called the dymaxion map, such in a way that connects the continents together. The Game would show the world’s most current statistics of all the countries categories such as energy, resources and pollution. The idea was to play a global game that would end wars, hunger and pollution by having the world work together for the betterment of all human beings, where in order to win, every singe human must win. He claims that if the military and political leaders can play with global consequences such as nuclear war, then the everyday person should be able to play as well but through peaceful methods.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Ed Halter’s Sun Tuz to Xbox: War and Video Games, Halter states that Fuller’s World Game went against most war games. Unlike other popular “training” games at the time, such games produced by the Rand Corporation, Buckminster Fuller’s game aimed for a 100% win as opposed to having one side lose 100%. By simulating world current events and country resources, the game intends to teach the general public how the world works and how that system is flawed which ultimately create a change in society for the better of the world.
The World Game that Fuller envisioned was to be a place where individuals or teams of people came and competed, or cooperated, to:
“Make the world work, for 100% of humanity, in the shortest possible time, through spontaneous cooperation, without ecological offense or the disadvantage of anyone.”
(EXCERPT BY MEDARD GABEL TAKEN FROM “BUCKMINSTER FULLER ANTHOLOGY FOR THE NEW MILLENIUM” EDITED BY THOMAS ZUNG.)
pictures:
http://www.geni.org/globalenergy/assets/swf/Dymax_grid_flows.jpg
http://blackmaps.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/dymaxmap.png
http://www.geni.org/energy/shop/geni_products/jpg/spaceship_earth.jpg
http://www.orbit.zkm.de/files/Dymaxion_map_folded.png
Igloo White
ReplyDeleteThe Vietnam War (1959-1975 ) was an armed conflict fought between North Vietnam and its communist allies and South Vietnam, supported by anti-communist allies among which we find the United States.
Aiming to put an end to the conflict the United States developed a technologically advance plan that would target the forces and supplies streaming that were sustaining the enemies. This military operation was called Igloo White and consisted on the use of sensors that once air-dropped on predetermined geographical points along the Ho Chi Minh Trail would determine whether a man or a vehicle was moving in a range of 33 or 109 yards respectively. Through calculated algorithms then, the computers connected with this system would determine a spot where the pilots from aircrafts would shot on the target, eliminating it.
Her’s is a link to a video that sums up the Strategies behind this mission and offers some prospectives on why it was a failing act:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbO30to1f60
Some of the reasons behind this complex and expensive strategy were that the trail ran through difficult paths that were difficult to control otherwise and the climate and vegetation made it impossible for the pilots to locate their targets without using a radar system and shot with precision.
Here’s a link to a website that has in depth information about the Igloo White mission and images of the devices utilized in this occasion:
http://thefutureofthings.com/column/6369/igloo-white-the-automated-battlefield.html
In his book From Sun Tzu to Xbox, Halter introduces the Igloo White mission as an example of the connection between technological research and the military field. In this particular case this new technology modified the way wars are fought as it propose a “clean, efficient machine” that would reduce risks for our troops, thus inflicting the maximum amount of damage to the counterpart.
Although Igloo White practically failed, it potentially remains a very efficient war strategy. I have doubts on the actual targets of this strategy, for not only supplies and armies were shot but people, civilians and occasionally targets that were not related to the conflict itself, as the direction on where to fire were not always precise. Also I wonder what effects this dehumanization of the subjects of the aircrafts had on the militaries that were involved in that mission and on the way we perceive war today, for the target appeared on the screens as white dots. The striking similarities between the gaming strategies of today and the actual war environment make me wander if this very war plan isn’t indeed one of the major factors to the blur we experience today between war games and real war.
Operation Igloo White
ReplyDeleteA secret United States Air Force electronic warfare operation during the vietnam war was called Operation Igloo White. The operation lasted from January 1966 until February 1973. The tactic consisted of placing electronic sensors all along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, along truck roads and bike paths within Vietnam's "elbow". The sensors were deployed usually by two men from an overhead (aircrafthttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/Khe_Sanh_Operation_Niagara_Sensor_drop.jpg). The long line of sensors was sometimes called the "McNamara Line," named after Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. These 20,000 camouflaged sensors would pick up many different types of reads such as sound, motion, heat, and odor. Information from the sensors would go to two IBM 360/65 computers which would translate it into data as white streaks of light on a screen called "worms" pointing to coordinates on a map which a bombing jet, such as an EC-121R (http://www.stinsonflyer.com/batcatsf/ec-otisc.jpg) would receive and take action to destroy and remove that blip on the screen through computerized guidance.
Ed Halter explains that most of the time, the multi-billion-dollar bombing operation was wasted on destroying virtually nothing, or herds of elephants and other animals. I would say that Ed Halter is in opposition with this tactic of using computers to fight a war. He explains that the North Vietnamese caught on to this procedure and used "recordings of crickets to mask the sounds of their trucks" and started fooling the sensors into "bombing wild buffalo for their troops to eat". I would agree that it would have been a waste of time and money for the U.S. if they could not see what they were blowing up across the globe, they are in the long run destroying themselves.
Video Explaining Operation"Igloo White":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbO30to1f60
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePlayspace/Worktime 2.16.10
ReplyDelete"Battlezone" is an arcade game that was released in 1980 by Atari. Unlike most games of this time "Battlezone" used a vector based program, meaning it would assign colors to individual pixels on the display, "which are generated thirty (or more) times a second by a horizontal scanning beam" explains Halter. Visually it was a black screen with a 3-D world constructed by thin green lines. This game was one of the first that allowed players to move back and forth as well as the typical side to side motion. This allowed the player or viewer to see the illusion of depth on the screen. It looked very geometric, with lines, boxes and wire frame shapes. Created by Ed Rotberg (including a team of designers/programmers). Later he was approached to create "Battlezones" brother, to be titled "Army Battlezone," for the Army. Many of the original creators showed no interest because of the affiliation with the Army. But Rotberg agreed on the terms that he would never be asked to work on anything else for the Military. "Army Battlezone" was created as target training for gunners on the Bradley Fighting Vehicle(or a Tank). The different between "Battlezone" and "Army Battlezone," is that "Battlezone" contained features that the "Army Battlezone" just did not have, "'Battlezone' features helicopters, missiles, and machine guns; furthermore, the actual tank does not move - the guns simply rotate" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlezone_%281980_video_game%29). When looking at the two games side by side, "Battlezone" has multiple layers within the game, not only are you driving a tank, moving and seeing 360 degrees, but not to leave out the many other destruction besides shooting at a target i.e. helicopters, obstacles, and missiles. "Army Battlezone", only has one goal, shot and do not miss. "Army Battlezone" was molded and changed to fit the specifics of the Bradley (the tank) including, the number of off rounds that the guns could really fire, choice of guns, and ballistics to configure, Rotberg continues, "You had to have identifiable targets because they wanted to train gunners to recognize the difference between friendly and enemy vehicles. So, there were a whole slew of different types of enemy vehicles and friendly vehicles that had to be drawn and modeled. Then we had to model the physics of the different kinds of weapons."(pg. 133 Halter) The Army's involvement with the games development may seem confusing but think in these terms, missiles cost $7,000 each, gunners or shooters tend to miss. If the training from this game (which costs $3,500) can save one of these missiles it would more then cover the expenses. (http://www.mikesarcade.com/cgi-bin/spies.cgi?action=url&type=info&page=ArmyBzonePt2.txt0
---------------------
interesting links
---------------------
http://www.atari.com/arcade
-http://www.atari.com/arcade/battlezone
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTaESz-9vko
....
http://www.plyojump.com/classes/computer_games.html
http://www.system16.com/hardware.php?id=759