By reading the introduction of Manovich’s book, I realized the necessity of analyzing and theorizing the present new media. Manovich used the example of cinema art theory to clarify his idea. He also said, “The advantage of placing new media within a large historical perspective is that we begin to see the long trajectories that lead to new media in its present state, and we can extrapolate these trajectories into the future”
This is actually very similar to an old Chinese saying: knowing the history, knowing the future. For a better understanding, maybe we can take a close look at the history of TV game console development. The earliest Nintendo FC is in red and white, with one direction button and two action keys on the control panel. The graphics processing chip was in 8 digits. 10 years later, PS2 has 32-digits graphics processor built in it, and also more than 10 buttons on the control panel. The complexity has been greatly increased both in graphics and game control. In the year of 2006, Nintendo released the revolutionary Wii. Wii doesn’t really have much improvement in graphics (maybe PS2 graphics is better than Wii). But the way of game control has been created in a more nature-simulating manner. Swing the remote as swinging a real tennis racket. This kind of interation makes people more involved in the game.
We can see some orientations in the 15 years of TV game console development: better graphics, more complicated game story, more reality-simulating game (Guitar Heroes, Wii Sports), control in a more natural way, etc. By summarizing all these trends, we can get player’s needs and then we can come up with some idea about next generation of TV game console. Maybe we are not able to fully depict what the future Wii 2.0 will look like, but we can tell some by analyzing the flaws of the present Wii. (At least the remote and nunchuck have plenty ways of improvements)
I guess the TV game console is part of the new media, and it is also a really good example to study interaction culture besides film theory.