I've always hated the term, and i refuse to use it, or allow it to be used to refer to myself or anyone i care about

...makes me wanna punch a squirrel

mAaron

You are right, however, that the hate speech being spewed wouldn't go beyond the hate monger choir were it not for gamer reactions. Thompson and Lawrence are small time, and they really only appear on a network with such an ideological bent that anyone outside of the far-right demographic doesn't watch them and wouldn't know they exist were it not for us. I know I'd get a blank stare from my mom if I told her to tell me who Jack Thompson was.

The sad part of this whole conversation is that most gamers, despite gaming media portrayals, aren't like this. It's just that the internet gives the assholes the perfect avenue, much like griefers. We have to stand tall as gamers who are dedicated to inclusion and the expansion of our hobby, not to shout at the detractors or the asshole gamers, but to bring people in. You don't have to be a white male to be a gamer.

@Spoffoth: First off, what's that got to do with anything? Secondly, if that's true, why is it that NPD charts almost always have only Wii Play w/ Remote and one token Wii game in them, save when a huge first-party mascot game comes out?

RawSteelUT

Spoffoth

It seems to me that exclusivity stemming from a group identity is ridiculous, or rather, very sad. To define yourself as not like others because you are similar to others is fairly futile. You're still not saying very much for your own self and identity. Not nearly enough to make presumptions for meaningful companionship, at least. I'd be a 'gamer' if I could actually respect the thoughts and opinions of more than 5% of them. Well, maybe.

SolFalling

and you know what they say about Assholes and Opinions - a lot of the former have the latter.

Damn the ability to edit! LOL

FunkyJ

I don't dislike gamers as a whole, nor do I dislike the term, but I dislike the way gamers react to ANYTHING negative.

We're shooting ourselves in the foot.

As Wilson says, Cooper Lawrence was a nobody before she was roped into the Fox 8 news studios to spout bullshit about Mass Effect. And she would have remained one if the attack on her Amazon book listing wasn't so fierce that the New York Times picked up the story.

The problem is this: With news aggregators and "digging" being such a popular way to get news in the modern world, these nobodies that Game Politics, Kotaku, 1-Up and other gaming websites constantly dig up in order to put down, in their quest to stay a head of each other, these stories go from their usual 1000 hits to over 50,000 hits in less than a few hours.

Of course, this gets noticed by the web aggregators, which then gets noticed by the REAL news people, who are even more desperate than Game Journalists to get stories.

And, this is the most important, these nobodies know are writing these stories know exactly what they are writing, and how it will get an audience. Likewise with the people from the Games Press and the News Corporations, they write to get an audience. They bank on it, knowing that writing something negative will get them the attention of gamers the world over, which in turn will get them more hits, and maybe even get their name in the mainstream press.

It's a vicious cycle, and the way to stop it is to stop reporting on these morons and their anti-game hate speech. They're just opinions, and you know what they say about Opinions and Assholes - a lot of the former have the latter. They're read by very few people, so why the fuck should we care if they think gaming is bad?

FunkyJ

tzaketh

Despite what some people here may think, this has no effect on people wanting or not wanting to play video games.

lifeinthefridge

I think it'll naturally go away. No need to actively change this.

artofwar420

RawSteelUT

Eville1

WolvenOne

"pwnerers"

kidnicky

The problem isn't the term "gamer." The problem is the people who often associate themselves WITH the term. We need to convince people that there are people other than braindead assholes who play video games. You don't have to be a white male with no interest in the world around them to be a gamer.

RawSteelUT

Jac21

join reality, and stop putting on airs

triclops41

But "gamer" has only meant "critic" since the Web rose to prominence. At one point,"gamers" were people who played video games rather than people who shouted "lack of depth" at Carnival Games or bitched about there not being enough bloom in the latest FPS.
My concern when "gaming" on my 2600* was my high score. Your concern when "gaming" on your 360 is whether or not IGN gave Halo 3 a high enough review score.

*note to hardc0r3 1337 people who label themselves "gamers": 2600 was a video game system from a long time ago. Even before Playstation one! But it wasn't very 1337 because sometimes girls played and Frogger wasn't very deep.

kidnicky

joelface

And i don't see what this has to do with the church of gaming. I don't see Ethan here.

Cchrist

Playing video games, no matter how little time or games you play, does not inherently make you a "gamer." I go for bike rides fairly often, but I'm not a "cycalist." No, I'm sure those guys wearing spandex, spiffy sunglasses, and riding expensive racing bikes don't label themseleves as "cycalists" to coworkers or the like, but I would be considered a poser among them if I touted myself as one of them. I have a few songs from rock ands on my Ipod and I listen to them often, but that doesn't make me a "rocker." There is absolutely nothing to be angry about not qualifying as a "real" (for lack of a better etrm) fan of a culture or hobby.

Same thing with video games. Some people like to play casual games or the newest hyped up shooter fairly often, but that doesn't make you a gamer. You need to make a distinction somewhere to define what exactly the core fanbase is, which is necessary for anything from economic to social research.

Garro

>_<

seriously, i think i get the fist, more or less you have to get rid of the concept of the "Gamer" not just re-labelling it.

but like all conceptional ideas, it is a hard thing indeed to dismiss.

You can no longer shake the idea of nazism, communism or scientology by simply re-naming it.

people are going to hold on to their "Gamer" belief, continue to harass and decry consoles, casual games, arseholes on XBOX LIVE, Nintendo, FPS etc etc etc.

it won't go away, it will take a ub-culture re-education on a grand scale.

A noble idea, but would require un-realistic solutions.

Onizuka-GTO

Not video game enthusiasts mind you, just some.

WolvenOne

Mary Shepherd Sunderland would have some words with you, were she still alive.

bobtheduck

Cheodo

I also just feel good about calling myself a gamer. I feel like I'm part of something. He wants me to give that up to make those who don't really care about the narrative power of Portal or Shadow of the Colossus will feel better about contenting themselves with Bejeweled? Screw that. I like my community. Calling myself a gamer doesn't stop my mom from playing whatever she likes. If anything, the promise of being part of something is a draw, not a deterrent, and I like to think anyone with half a brain is welcome.

Cola82

I do agree that the more social self identified gamers could do with a little less myopia and self righteousness, but so could we all. Too many of us already care about the world beyond our televisions to so generalise us as apathetic pasty young white dudes. I, for one, was more offended by the author's tacit acceptance of this stereotype than the way that it is actually defended by a lot of actual teenaged white males who play games.

Cola82

Eac_o_System

I definitely agree. The gaming community consistently takes the low road in its dealings with those it vilifies. How much crap is there on the internet about Jack Thompson? Did we really resort to Amazon bombing someone because of her negative statements about Mass Effect - especially when she admits to not having played it? Sure, we have positives out there, like the Child's Play organization. But that's only really due to a handful of people. We've got that and then bitch about anyone in the media who criticizes our hobby, so we still come out looking like children.

After that, who doesn't want to be a gamer, right?

Gospel X

Ya'll gave me a lot of criticism - much of it well-deserved and well-argued. But I do promise I'm not some anti-gaming elitist asshole.

There are two things that I should have made clearer in the article:

1. I definitely don't want to see all games get somehow destroyed by the "mainstream." But I don't think that can happen. For example, even though there is a huge market for pop music, there are countless independent bands and musicians of all types and genres. I'm definitely all for sub-cultures; my point is just that "gamers" has become a monolithic sub-culture that, in my view, works against the formation of wildly diverse multitude of gaming sub-cultures. I do think games are somewhat "mainstream" already, but I still think we've only begun to explore the full range of possibilities as to what games can offer, both in terms of game mechanics and subject matter. That's precisely why it's desirable to get as many types of people as possible playing games.

2. I should have made it clearer that I ultimately agree that the term "gamer" is more a symptom than a cause. Nonetheless, I still believe ditching the term would be a good first step towards a healthy change in mentality. I also believe that much of the general public views "gamers" - and therefore the entire medium - as an exclusive sub-culture. I do concede that my evidence is somewhat anecdotal. I would love to see some more (trustworthy) statistics on self-described "gamers" and be proven wrong.

The real point was to encourage gamers to steer those conversation towards political issues that are more important. Of course, that's my own personal bias. But I still would have loved to see Kotaku readers focus more on Fox News (and other major news outlets) rather than Cooper Lawrence herself, for example. This isn't just about "liberal" or "conservative" politics. Even the New York Times suffers from similar issues. I know it must seem easy to jump on the bandwagon of Fox News haters, but I think we can all agree that poor quality journalism is a big problem.

Thanks all for the feedback!

dewilson

oh and by the way i'm not going to mass anymore

subterfunk

Reading "Comics" is infantile and lame. Reading "Graphic Novels" is sophisticated and acceptable.

The term "Graphic Novel" has done wonders for the public image of comic books. But I'm sure that most comic enthusiasts believe that the term "Graphic Novel" is "Only a term".

vellocet

I am tired of looking at games like Carnival Games (I don't even play those games at the REAL carnivals, why do I need a game dedicated to them) and others that are nothing more than GLORIFIED MINI GAMES. Companies and developers are taking advantage of the ignorance of the casual market.

I choose to use the title of gamer because it shows that I have a slightly more refined taste in games. And that is what being a gamer is all about, having standards in what we enjoy.

Tuggie

Sports fan = someone that likes sports

Runner = someone who likes to run

Cyclist = person who likes to bike

Gamer = someone who likes to play games

Until we're omnipotent, we'll be using labels to help group people who have certain interests. There is nothing intrinsically wrong about that -- or even exclusionary. Saying that calling someone a gamer limits the audience is like saying we can't call someone a musician because it might stop others from exploring an interest in music.

The label doesn't need to change -- it's the actions and attitudes of certain gamers that do.

jayntampa

Cheodo

Cheodo

The question shouldn't be: Are you a gamer? The question should be: Do you game?

Ghede

Tell me I should relinquish those titles and I'll tell you to go to hell.

PsycheDiver

Little Gertrude Stein for y'all.

boopadoo

Voteforme2020

But more immediately, I see this as opportunity. New companies tend to thrive in niche markets. If EA and Ubisoft want to ignore the niche markets (gamers like us) because $20 million niche titles don't make business sense, and their culture won't allow $1 million titles to be made, then this is opportunity for a smaller developer to step in and make that $1 million hardcore niche title. Sins of a Solar Empire and Sam and Max come to mind. I suppose this is easiest to do on the PC.

stevesan

Just like 'drivers' are all under-qualified elderly people who can't look over the sterring wheel, are a danger to other road users and pedestrians alike and all drive 10 year old citroens.

Right?
No?

CanaryWundaboy

@IntelSilver:
Good call. Anyone can play, but there is always a group that takes it more seriously, and those will have a name to distinguish them.

fuchikoma

Now don't get me wrong.. I don't have a problem with the casual market.. and gimmicky things like the Wii are innovative and fun. It is the blurring the line between serious games and casual games that is the destructive trend that scares me.

Bastard11

...

YUYU

RonJeremy4Pres

Never really understood how 'gamers' are now all "white adolescent males"... Hell, i'm one of two only white guys in my clan. Plus, both of my parents play (and I daresay are addicted to them, they call it stress relief...riiight...) games more than i do. Last time I checked, they are both far out of adolescence.

I fear this may be another one of these people trying to kill games, following in the hoofsteps of Jack Thompson and Kevin McCullough...

Cheodo

VanFinale

Kid_Kitten

Trawgdoor!

munkah

Spartan1308™

I tip my hat at you good sir.

Witzbold

Kris182

Aethyr

Senator Clinton has latched onto gaming as an opportunity to appeal to a different audience that she normally would. She would not take a militant stand against gays and the pro-choice movement because that would be political suicide for a Democrat seeking national office and I doubt that she genuinely would be anti-choice and anti-homosexual. She can be anti-gamer because it is politically easy. She can appear to be on the side of the "values voters" without taking a strong stand against anything important. This is a lot like a Republican who supports the anti-flag burning amendment; politically easy, wins votes from people who don't "get" politics. Importantly, she does not really care about gaming at all and she would focus on other things if she were actually elected.

Senator Lieberman has been a far more dangerous threat to our freedoms as gamers because he has actively taken a stance against freedom of expression time and again, and not in an opportunistic way.

There is nothing wrong with supporting your interests in a political way. Hunters support the NRA because they want their right to hunt. The movie industry has an enormous lobby in Washington. My uncle used to work for the corn lobby. Corn may be unimportant in the grand scheme of things, but there are people who vote only in relation to a politician's views on farm subsidies. There are a substantial amount of voters whose only issue is abortion. My big issue is the economy, but I also value the environment, the war in Iraq, health care, digital freedoms, free expression (including games), and other things. Some people vote on just one issue, but their vote counts as much as mine does.

I disagree with gamers lowering a person's Amazon reviews to make a point, but I do support people being politically active about gaming and digital rights. Mr. Wilson mentions viral epidemics as something for people to be politically aware of, but is there some pro-virus candidate running in his jurisdiction? He mentions environmentalism, the faltering economy, genocides, healthcare, terrorism, war, and the state of our foreign relations. What does he value more? While I feel that genocide is awful and I would never elect a pro-genocide candidate, I also feel that foreign intervention is best left to the international community at large. We intervened in Iraq and our people in New Orleans suffered because of that. I believe that you have to get your own house in order before you go out and interfere in world affairs, and that is a political difference between candidates. Terrorism is another sticky topic because there are several ways to tackle it.

As for opening games to everyone inviting innovation, I think he is being naive. Populist films aren't the innovative ones, it is the niche films. Maybe he found Epic Movie to be the best thing to happen to the movie community, but if that is what populism gets us, leave us as a niche. Gamers are diverse enough to where there are Halo enthusiasts, Madden enthusiasts, fans of fighting, puzzle, 2-d platforming, racing, RTSs, RPGs, etc. There are enthusiasts within each genre as well as generalists.

As mentioned in my earlier post, I think that we could use a greater vocabulary of terms to describe gamers, but as it is, gamers are not just adolescent, white, racist, homophobic males. Gamer is a nice word because it is so general that it includes players of Solitaire, Halo, and Ultima and everything inbetween. Including the 80 year old grandma in the category of gamers doesn't hurt us, but it also doesn't by itself encourage innovation. I think that perhaps he should be encouraging developers to value quality over profitability, but that would be equally naive.

I can agree with him that we should hold ourselves to a higher ethical standard than the critics, but we should also not be naive about it. The fact is, dirty politics are what wins elections, so while I may agree that we should take the high road, we should also hold people accountable for their words and actions. JT may be a "nobody", but he matters more to the Faux News crowd than Crecente, Croal, and Bogost combined. We may be a niche group, but that doesn't mean that we have to be silent about it.

kingofallcosmos

Is this some cyclical history we have here?

Leanid

jbliton

It only seems that recently we've been talking about the split between 'casual' and 'hardcore' gaming, as if before now gaming was some sort of secret Masonic hobby only practiced by the select few. But pretty much all the peers in my age group had a system from each generation, from childhood on. Many of them are probably not as passionate as some of us about gaming, but they still had the gear and they still purchased games.

If by going 'mainstream' we mean that the market is opening up to the 40+ crowd, then there might be some sort of generational rift we can mark and discuss. But give it a few more years and we become the so-called 'status quo', part of a generation that grew up with this technology and see it as neither new nor novel.

Point being: I think it's a mistake to see us as part of a gaming 'subculture'. While I aired my concerns about the term 'subculture' above, I think it's especially misguided to think that a gamer subculture existed in the first place--especially since this so-called subculture is an industry that has always produced absurd amounts of money. The hardcore/casual split is, I think, a recent invention with absolutely no historical or logical grounding.

JustThisGuy

How do I reconcile this? Simply bad business by Ubisoft. They are limiting themselves to high-budget titles only. What they need to do is invest in low-budget games as well. I would absolutely buy a low-budget R6 that had the good ol' tactical gameplay, even if the graphics sucked compared to R6:Vegas.

The reality of it is, high-budget games aren't economical if you limit yourselves to the hardcore market. That's OK - but not all your games need to be high-budget.

Another way to look at this: This is an opportunity for a smaller developer. Look at Sins of a Solar Empire - a very deep, hardcore game. No major developer would touch that genre. But a small indie dev did it on a low-budget (Sins looks good enough, but no one would call it graphically impressive) and is currently reaping the prophets.

If an indie developer made a good tactical shooter or Mech-sim game, and marketed it properly (just post on the relevant forums/blogs!), I would be very interested. And clearly, I think you would be as well. This is an opportunity.

stevesan

Witzbold

A game like Rainbow Six is precisely the "hardcore" game you're saying developers should be making, yet, look how they are absolutely butchering it to simply reach a lower common denominator.

Hell, look at where Unreal Tournament 3 has ended up. Previously one of the most hardcore FPS games of the last 10 years, again, dumbed down to insane extents to reach a new, much more casual, much less capable audience, again, completely and utterly alienating their supposed "core" audience.

Shrimp

But here's a good example: The Sims. They make tons of easy money for EA, and that gets reinvested into crazy stuff like Spore. Maybe not directly, but I doubt Will Wright would've been able to pursue Spore without a smash mass-market hit like The Sims.

And that just goes to show, mass-market doesn't necessarily mean "dumbed down." It just means different.

stevesan

excel_excel

Deer Hunter was a bad example, cuz the developer just ended up making more [insert animal here] Hunter games, but a smarter developer would take that easy money and make something really great.

Of course, another route is for the industry to rewind time back to simpler days, where a game only took 10 people to make. This is happening with XBLA and indie games, and I think it's great. You're seeing tons of innovation that hardcore gamers find appealing. And even un-innovation, where you just make a game that hasn't been done for a while (shoot em ups come to mind).

We need that, and we need to widen the audience to sustain this industry. And you need to take the good with the bad. It's just the reality of things.

stevesan

Black-Dog-Howls

I honestly lol'd

Fbu

Back in the day, this wasn't much of a problem, cuz games were much cheaper to make. But now, with the hardcore audience demanding better graphics, longer games, it's hard for developers to deliver. But if developers can make simpler games that will sell to the mass market, then this helps them financially to make those elaborate, innovative hardcore games.

stevesan

thats fair enough, but the fear is what happens when publishers look over their yearly profits and see that Deer Hunter cost half as much to make as some niche game they released, but sold twice as many copies.

an example for another medium would be TV. tv networks realise the reality shows where they don't have to hire writers, pay actors, etc. are more appealing than 'real' tv shows.

i know it's not gonna happen, but i say alienate the mainstream. they're only lowering the industry's standards.

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

One more thing I have to add to this debate is that a lot of times,I wear game-related T-shirts to the mall or where ever. So usually someone will come up and shoot the shit about games,and these are people from all across the spectrum. If I had to pick one group to associate myself with exclusively,I'd pick the Wii Sports guys over the Gears of War guys. Partially because of hygene and social skills,and partially because some of the Wii Sports guys are actually girls!

kidnicky

Generally speaking, however, I'm highly suspicious of the idea of the gamer 'subculture.' I think the idea of subcultures is outdated and outmoded, since--to be quite frank--everyone is a part of one or more so-called subcultures. The split between 'mainstream culture' and more--ahem--subversive culture values is growing fuzzier and fuzzier, as traditional communication mediums continue to break down and once-subversive values sneak their way into general cultural discourse.

Drawing a line of demarcation between what might be the mainstream and any given subculture is, I think, a futile and ultimately absurd task.

JustThisGuy

It doesn't matter if you try to change the term, people will only bastardize it like before. Gamer is only a condensed version of video game player used to define what a person does. People are what need adjusting. If everyone hates being called a gamer due to the negativity around it, go blame UberHaloFan1337 who can't resist the urge to make every videogame fan look bad because he has the biggest mouth. Hopefully, Douglas Wilson realizes that kind of 'fan' will always be the exception, not the rule.

KeroseneClimax

Or to just make another deer hunter, and then another, and another, and then, oh, another one.

This is Wizardworks wasn't dead, of course.

Abriael

Bastard11

He's got some friends that pay more attention to Clinton's and Obama's gaming policy than their health care plans, and that suddenly constitutes the "Church of Gamers"?

He's playing with a straw man of identity politics: how many gamers shape their whole identity by the very term "gamer"? My guess is that many of them might first self identify as "American," or "Asian," or "Christian," or "accountant," or "student" well before they would proclaim themselves-- first and foremost-- a "gamer." It's equivalent to the anime otaku phenomenon: how many people who watch anime identify themselves primarily by the (at times derogatory) term otaku? Very few. And those that do, well, that's where you get your stereotypes.

The Mass Effect example he uses is more illustrative of the subversive popular power of contemporary media than it is of gamers behaving like a cult.

I'm not buying it.

bluetom00

Infradead

To you, and me, it may be dumbed down. Fine - don't fucking play it. I don't play Deer Hunter. But I'm glad that it's exposing more people to gaming.

And you know why it's fucking great for the industry? Because WizardWorks now has revenue from Deer Hunter to potentially go on and make better, more innovative games for the hardcore audience.

If every movie was an unapologetic David Lynch movie that only a snobby minority could enjoy, Holywood would be fucking dust.

stevesan

Contrary to what excel_excel wrote, I would say that there are several terms used to describe people with interest in movies and films:

Filmie-This is an insider term used to describe film students at film school.
Cinephile/cinemaphile-A term for someone who follows films academically. This is someone who would argue for films as high art.
Film Lover-Someone who is interested in indie and mainstream films. Probably wouldn't go to a film festival, but would love to see something on the Sundance channel, the Independent Film Channel, or at the local arthouse theatre. They would also like a lot of mainstream films, like Brokeback Mountain and There Will Be Blood.
Movie Buff-Someone who takes an interest in movies as a hobby, knowing all of the trivia about mainstream movies, but not really into indies.
Movie Goer-Someone who goes to see lots of movies, but mainly mainstream films in the comedy and action genres.

The same goes for books (bibliophiles, book lovers, avid readers, etc.) and music (concert goer, indie music lover, musicologist, music critic, etc.), so why not games. Gamer may be too general, but right now it is the best term that we have.

kingofallcosmos

achabac

tnx3

Anyway, the way I look at it is saying you're a "gamer" is the equivelant of saying you're a movie buff. No one says they're a watcher, reader, or sportsman for seeing movies, reading some novels, or jogging/biking occasionally. With video games in a "socially ifantile" stage, anyone who picks up this new thing will describe themselves as a gamer, but there's no one saying "Im a video game buff."

College frat boys who only play Halo and Gears, someone whose addicted to Sims and Wii tennis exclusively: they're not "gamers" to me in the sense that they don't thave the depth or breadth of experience to label themselves as someone who frequently plays los of types of games. I think you really need to make that destinction because you get into trouble when you look at "gamers" who are really just some dudes who think the most recent hyped up shooter is the shit, and start judgeing the rest of the crowd based off of them.

Basically to truly call yourself a gamer, I think you should look at it like "I'm a video game buff, because I love video games and I play them so much it's a hobby." I will never be offended if someone says I'm "not a film buff" or "not an athelete" because I just don't do either of those things often enough to start labeling myself as such. Everyone has a couple of favorite movies, everyone has a particular book they like, but you'd never say that movies or novels are exclusively your hobbies (unles they actually were). Likewise, I don't think anyone should be offended if, having limited gaming experience, the so-called "hardcore" of us don't consider them gamers.

Garro

So how do we shut these people up? Overwhelm them. Make it clear that they're a minority. But we hardcore gamers - the rest of us - can't do it alone. We need the help of non-gamers to fix this. We need more games about subject matter that more people can relate to, so we drastically change the demographic make-up of the gaming consumer. (Goldwin's Law alert!) Most of Germany didn't really believe in the Nazi ideology, but that wasn't enough to fix things.

Most games these days are post-apocalyptic shooters, fantasy RPGs, etc. etc. And I realize that to us gamers, most of these games are actually quite diverse in some not-so-subtle ways. But that's preaching to the choir. To the average non-gamer, all these games look the same, and they don't find them appealing at all.

Nintendo has taken the lead with Wii Sports. But that's just one avenue. There's so much other stuff games can do. Why are there no games about life as a stock trader, like "Boiler Room"? And don't tell me that wouldn't be fun, because it doesn't matter. It may not be fun to us, the hardcore gamers, but that's OK. We're covered - there will be no shortage of hardcore games any time soon. We need more games that we would never care to play.

We need more Deer Hunters. Seriously. Any developer who will put away their hardcore gaming egos and make a game that non-gamers will enjoy stands to make some easy yet well-deserved money. And stands to help fix the stereotype of the "gamer" by bringing in more reasonable people (by "more" I mean as in numbers. I don't mean that non-gamers are more reasonable than gamers) to the past-time/hobby.

In conclusion, we need Deer Hunter Wii.

stevesan

Abriael

DeBurgo

It's hilarious to see someone act so high and mighty and claim to sumarize all "gamers" with broad, sweeping generalizations. Not only that, but he doesn't know a shit about what he's talking about.

Because games are already mainstream, there have been tons of games (and pretty much an entire console) dedicated to a wider audience of gamers (not "gamers" in the sense that he describes. The problem is that these games appeal to the lowest common denominator of gamers which in turn alienates what the audience he calls "gamers".

Meh. What a douche.

7ucky

Or, a general dumbing down of games so they can appeal to the new lowest common denominator, as has been happening for years as games became more mainstream.

I'm not some sort of elitist, and it's still a good thing that more people can get into games, but that doesn't mean I need to be ecstatic about developers trying to appeal to the new guys and alienating us hardcore players.

QualityJeverage

I love computers and every thing about them. Devoting lots of time and money into building, upgrading, tweaking, etc. them which basically makes me a PC enthusiast, I don't care if everyone and there dog has one that does not make them PC enthusiasts. Just like even if everyone and there dog has a Console system that does not make them gamers, A gamer is like a treky, you can like the star trek shows and movies but that does not make you a treky. A treky is someone who LOVES star trek, is immersed in its lore and on occasion dresses like a moron for the love of it, just as a gamer is some one who LOVES games, is immersed in them and on occasion talks like a moron for the love of them...that and each of them can talk you ear off for a month about them if you even slightly mention the subject =P

Borathian

Films - term with a more "intellectual" connotation.
Movies - moving pictures, does not carry the same connotation.

In the film industry, there are "movies" that have no practical "high art" value. The same can be said for games. But we can all list MANY games that do have this high art value (fuck you, Ebert,) in the sense that video games seem to ever change the definition of high art.

So just like "moviegoers," we have gamers. And gamers are those that aren't actively enjoying the artful games. Without the "gamer" term, we don't have the differentiation of game players, that respect the industry as a medium, and have respect for all games, but truly cherish the deserving few.

The basic gist is that the video game industry parallels other industries, and deserves to be treated as such.

indiemike

I'll tell you why.

Because "Games" as we know them were created and driven by people with a deep understanding of their potential as tools to express ideas and allow a user to manipulate an environment in a way real life doesn't allow.

The more the public accepts them, the more companies see dollar signs, and the less deep they become. 90% of games now (A statistic backed up by absolutely no evidence :D ) are just shelf decoration.

Groodle

If waving a remote in random pattern is your idea of game, then by all means suit yourself. Just as I'll suit myself at defining it absolute trash totally devoid of any depth based on a franchise that retains the charisma of a shovel, no better than the ton of shovelware that unfortunately crowds the wii's title lineup, even more unfortunately choking the few gems like No more heroes and very few others, that don't sell well due to the fact that Nintendo marketed their console mainly to non-gamers.

Abriael

Cyanotic

if by that he means dumbed down fodder he's absolutely right. when was it gamers decided games becoming mainstream would be a good thing?

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

Xander

TheEngineer

ketenol

excel_excel

I also completely agree with his comments on the Mass Effect 'controversy'.

ErinIsADrunk

excel_excel

You're a perfect example of what I was just saying. WarioWare is "trashy"? It's a great series that does well citically AND commercially. Unfortunately it doesn't fall in a preset genre so to a certain subset of people it's a HURRRRR NON GAME KIDDIE!!!!
Star Wars fans don't call Shallow Hal a NON MOVIE because it's a comedy,there are different genres of movies. Why can't the same hold true for games.
My friends and I have played Wario Ware and DoDonPachi in the same day,the same way I sometimes watch the news and the Simpsons in the same day. Of course,I'm not a hardc0re televisioner like some 1337 people are. If I was,then I would hate casual shows.

kidnicky

I agree that the "gamer" subculture is really what needs to demand depth and progression in games, particularly in say the "mini game" as well as "mediocre shooter genres", but we all know that won't happen.

Changing the term "gamer" won't do shit. By his logic, should we not call people who follow Christianity Christians because I think it forms a negative connotation to uncorrupted religious followers over the corrupt?

Maybe I don't wanna expand my subculture if all its going to get me and my fellow gamers are a plethora of shitty party games and more bad digressive shooters.

Imo

Gamer4250

kidnicky

Knight-Zero

But on the other hand, maybe games are still a niche and are to be treated as such.

HUmonster

Game Enthusiast?

Player?

I wonder why GameStop's new motto is "power to the players" instead of "power to the gamers". Sounds like they are trying to be more inclusive.

figaro1010

Abriael

Oh...wait a second. This isn't the New York Times. I'm sorry gamers. I did not intend to intermeddle with the likes of societal recluse. I dare say if I wasn't too busy playing FFXII, I might have noticed my error.

wabbitfa

Barf#1

excel_excel

tnx3

TalKeaton: A Force to be Reckoned With

Acute Gamer

TheLastGunslinger

daibondo

HawaiianActor

Candlejack

Brutalitarian

The real issue is what the word gamer entails. The ingroup qualifications may require some standards in order to qualify oneself as that group. Someone may be reticent about calling themselves a runner because it entails a level of expertise, experience, and training. I wont call myself a runner because perhaps another runner may challenge my "runner" credentials; making me feel less confident about the running I actually do. The same can be said for the term "gamer". If I say I am a gamer and I have mastered TF2 (I have actually by the way) then someone will challenge me on it call me a n00b and be on their way.

Gamer though also entails outgroup responses that other groups dont have. If I say Im a runner someone else might be impressed, the ladies might swoon, or someone may ask for advice. Doubtful the same type of response will come if you call yourself a gamer.

robbie158

pandafresh

I think the vast majority of people who actually visit gaming news websites are into the hobby BECAUSE it's niche and quirky, I know I am. And that applies to a lot of hobbies, not just gaming, I think.

I don't really care if Steven Spielberg is making games, or whatever the hell Nicole Kidman is endorsing.. I want my my obscure Japanese high school mecha zombie dating sims.

cornunderscore2x

prepare for the gaming inquisition!!

(俗・ ) Grey Gecko

excel_excel

madhotch

@ZetaCrossfire: Your wrote that onl to be first, don't even try.

IntelSilver

its a bad thing when you think about how damned exclusive they are.

William "Killer" Shatner

TOCATL

Allen750

excel_excel

Candlejack

TalKeaton: A Force to be Reckoned With

ZetaCrossfire

I tend to agree - a rose by any other name, etc.

evslin