Next Gen? A Critical Examination of Historical Periodization in Video Games

This extended abstract critically examines how video game history is periodized, focusing on the widely used notion of "platform generations" as a case study. It argues that periodization is a foundational act of historical sense-making, since naming a period presumes beginning and ending points along with implicit spatial, social, and cultural assumptions. Drawing on traditions from general history, art history, media history, and film studies, the paper contends that existing video game historiography has been shaped by linearity and a US-Japan centrism, and it seeks to open discussion of alternative periodization methods.

The authors observe that the traditional presentation of video game history typically seeks to identify the first game, build chronologies, mark turning points such as the 1983 video game crash, and introduce new hardware generations or genres. Such presentations appear across academic writing, magazines, online forums, and marketing materials, and they usually produce some form of periodization. The generational model, despite academic skepticism, remains dominant in gaming press, encyclopedias, and game databases.

The paper advances three main arguments against treating generations as a serious periodization basis. First, the generational divisions function more as marketing than as precise categories, since hardware boundaries are often arbitrary; the Nintendo Wii U, architecturally close to the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, is a notable example of this ambiguity. Second, the model is centered on the American console market and fits poorly with the 8- and 16-bit microcomputers popular in Europe during the 1980s and 1990s, and it cannot consistently apply to PC hardware. Third, mid-generation hardware revisions such as the PlayStation 4 Pro and Xbox One X further undermine the coherence of the concept even as a marketing tool.

The study is based on a systematic review of existing literature and a critical examination of dominant temporal categories; it is presented as an exploratory overview rather than an empirical survey. The authors intend the work as a reference point for game history researchers and for memory institutions such as museums, archives, and retrogaming networks, particularly when designing or updating exhibitions on game history.