Doug Lowenstein, head of the ESA, is unhappy with the term "video game" being used to describe the industry. Say what? He thinks that by calling them games, the industry can't be taken seriously; whereas, if the terminology were changed, the industry as a whole wouldn't be as susceptible to negativity. Alright, we're with you so far ... what's it gotta be?
The suggested changes are "interactive entertainment" or "entertainment software." Interactive entertainment doesn't make much sense, since board games and outdoor sports are also interactive; entertainment software, however, is a better choice. There is a bigger question at hand, though; will a simple name change really work?
Gaming has a terrible public face and political presence. Without serious political lobbying and PR pushes within more traditional media outlets, gaming may never get any respect. Will a name change make gaming more acceptable (err, rather ... make software entertaining more acceptable), or will the politicos simply play the name game as well, and call it the Entertainment Software Decency Act instead?
See also:The ECA, a consumer advocacy group for gamers
