Gaming "Culture"

Gaming culture is something that's been bothering me for a long time. It is so superficial and fake I can't stand it. I've never felt the need to identify as gamer. Playing video games is just something I do and I often obsess over them way more than I should. But I've never felt the need to justify my hobby to anyone nor have I ascribed my obsession as having more depth than it actually does. At the end of the day playing a video game is just something that I enjoy doing and it makes me happy. It's nothing more than that. It doesn't need to be. Ascribing something as having more depth than it actually does strikes me as a rather hipstery thing to do. The activity of playing video games for certain types of people makes them feel like special snowflakes and makes them feel inherently unique for whatever reason.

It's not just the hipsters that bug me it's the charlatans too. I can tell if someone is pretending to enjoy a game or pretending that they know about games from a mile away. It's so painfully obvious to me as to what they're doing. They aren't fooling no one.

Also what is with certain games being treated as gods to be followed without question? Sure they were important titles but that doesn't mean you follow their exact design to the letter. You're suppose evolve the medium you're working in. Not sit there and do nothing. Why would I play your game that behaves exactly like an older, much more seasoned game? I'll just go play the older game.

In summary culture is what grows behind my fridge and it should stay there.

In many ways a lot of what you say here mirrors music culture too. It generally applies to anything that could be considered a 'hobby'.

At the risk of sounding pretentious and such like, I'd say it's to do with self-identification in the sense of finding something that they can relate to - something that helps them express themselves. Taking a real-world example, the Emo movement of roughly 2004-2010. I had a friend in high-school who was *obsessed* with MCR. She had the clothes, the makeup, the attitude, she called herself Emo..it kinda pissed me off tbh as she became really hard to talk to, but that's beside the point.

In the eyes of someone else (e.g. me at the time), MCR were a bunch of whiny dudes who tried to have this gothic-esque edginess to them, but didn't seem substantial at all. But for my friend, and countless other people, they were an 'antidote' to the alienation they felt from the rest of the world, in a sense giving them 'purpose'. And when there seems to be only one thing that makes sense to you, you're quite likely to hold onto it and defend it passionately. They saw in them something that I couldn't see.

The same applies, I reckon, to many people who call themselves 'gamers'. I remember another high school friend of mine saying games "are my life" (or something along those lines). In much the same way, videogames like WoW were for him were the relatable medium that made sense when most other things in his life didn't seem to. So when you say "It doesn't need to be anything more than something to enjoy", for them, it does need to be.

Or they could simply be a bunch of bellends that need to grow up

For a more casual gamer like me, I'll rarely ever cream my pants over new releases or hype campaigns. I'm more likely to be automatically put off and resent games, movies, music etc that gets rabid hype and praise. In fact I've kind of been forced into a state of general apathy due to my own passions being trampled on by the very friends I mentioned (my love of videogames got shat on by the guy who later lived for WoW, and almost none of my friends got behind the idea that I loved Pink Floyd).

As for old games being godly, well I guess the reasons for that are the same again. A metal snob will criticise a fusion genre for the same reasons as a hardcore Stealth fan criticises a predominantly Sneak 'em up game for having driving sections, or something like that.

Culture is very important for the development of society, but the internet both helps and holds it back by simultaneously uniting and dividing people. I'm losing my train of thought here. This may or may not have provided any substantial answers, so I'll finish up now with a picture of a fish.

Well, I'm trying to beat Baldur's Gate 2 right now and, I'm just going to say it but... Baldur's gate 1 & 2 are flawed in many ways (especially RNG-esque dice roll stuff, I'm doing the Neera Red Wizard enclave quest right now and it's a big cluster fuck of spells and what-not, it's hard to tell what the hell is going on) but it's still a "famous" WRPG that a lot of people praise in similar ways to Gothic(which, ignoring compatibility issues, is bullshit in some-what subjective ways), System Shock (Only played 2 but it's not *perfect*) and the like. At some point, it's not even about whether not it's good these days, it's about the impact it made. Bad Rats is a joke of a game that made a huge impact on a lot of people so it has an ironic following, albeit one of the worst following that can exist. I've played Dragon Age Origins + Expansion and Dragon Age 2 so far. Was Dragon Age 2 bad? Not at all. The second half was noticeably rushed but the game was very good (and it had its obligatory relationship scenes, Isabella's being fucking hilarious by the way, Oh, you! Wench!) and the combat brings me to another game that is good and bad in different ways : Dungeon Siege 3. I'm finally playing through it and, honestly, it's good as a standalone game but, from what I've seen of Dungeon Siege 1&2 it's not good as a DUNGEON SIEGE game. The game, by itself, has a pretty good story and the combat is pretty fluid and quick. I love it. Now, there isn't a lot character building,(You might assume "Oh, so there's no romance sex scenes? What a boo hoo too bad so sad story!" but that's not all there is to it. Sure, it's a product of it but in video games, since it's interactive, it's easier to build characters when it's a peer-to-peer interaction, romance or no romance) in fact your own character's face isn't shown when talking to somebody or in cutscenes, unless my game is bugged or something. Regardless, Anjali is a pretty cool character and the only one who doesn't look really really weird (Lucas looks really off-putting for some reason). The game does seem to be relatively short in terms of locations but that's not a big con for me.

Point being that video games are taken WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. A perfect example, as I said, is Dragon Age 2. It's a very good and competent game but everybody is blinded by what it's not rather than what it is.

Blinky already summed up a lot of what I was going say, especially in regards to people over-identifying with a hobby, franchise or some general creative endevour. In the past I would of been fairly critical of gamers and "one genre" demographics, but I'm less certain if I'm in a justifiable position to complain about their conduct. I don't have a particularly hectic social life and I really hate the idea of defining myself by my job - I work in retail. So in a sense I am a sum of my collected interests. Whether its modern art, obscure literature, unusual music, my steady love of computer games or even Dungeons & Dragons, I guess aside from my love for my family foremost I am a creature of my geeky obsessions.

I guess what differentiates me (and other eclectica-heads) from the sort of people you are referring to is the kind of behaviour that makes outsiders dislike a particular subculture. Gaming and black metal music are two distinct subcultures that, in my opinion, suffer from lamentable reputations due to the conduct of an unpleasant and vocal minority diminishing the otherwise more moderate and open-minded aspects of each demographic. In general those who over-identify with a past-time or franchise tend to view others indifference and constructive criticism towards their chosen item of veneration as a personal and deliberate insult, instead of simply being a subjective opinion. Secondly, because they lack the confidence or desire to be more pluralistic in regards to new things, they go to excessive lengths to justify their intolerance due to the seemingly obvious "superiority" of their chosen vestige.

I probably should just say for the sake of balance, I'm generalizing people based on past experience. Not everyone who is exclusive to a particular thing is necessarily an arsehole. That's no more true than the implication that people with varied tastes are all lovely and enlightened. Gaming currently has the potential of reverting back into a reviled subculture, and this time gamers won't really have the excuse of others ignorance of their lifestyle to fall back on. Any casual trawl through the comments of any play-through or blog post regarding computer games will invariably dredge up the kind of politically suspicious, misogynistic, homophobic mental toss that one associates with the most base elements of society. When one witnesses Youtube users advocating po-faced holocaust denial on Cinemassacre's Angry Video Game Nerd videos, you know something has gone terribly wrong with a community.

It's a passion, and a culture has grown around it. I'm not against it.

It's a passion, and a culture has grown around it. I'm not against it.

Ok then, in your opinion what are some positive aspects of Gaming culture? I honestly don't see any and think that gaming culture should be purged with fire.

Well for one thing, Machinima (the medium, not the company). Second, local multiplayer. Third, advanced technology.

Well for one thing, Machinima (the medium, not the company). Second, local multiplayer. Third, advanced technology.

Yeah I got to remember that culture is a very broad term. When I say gaming culture that could very well encompass every aspect of gaming. I think what I'm angry towards are specific groups and not gaming culture because culture in of itself is a broad term. I'm angry towards the gaming hipsters, charlatans, hype machines and pretty much every negative aspect of gaming culture.

Well for one thing, Machinima (the medium, not the company). Second, local multiplayer. Third, advanced technology.

Yeah I got to remember that culture is a very broad term. When I say gaming culture that could very well encompass every aspect of gaming. I think what I'm angry towards are specific groups and not gaming culture because culture in of itself is a broad term. I'm angry towards the gaming hipsters, charlatans, hype machines and pretty much every negative aspect of gaming culture.

I mean, as I (tried to) point out in my post, there's always going to be people that are too critical and serious about everything. Whenever a game series changes its gameplay, there's always going to be one person who argues that it ruined the game to pieces.

I suppose a positive thing is variety, there's always going to be a place for you to share your opinions.

Thinking beyond gaming and including other communities, I think people make the mistake of assuming that the worst aspects of gaming subculture are somehow representative of everyone who broadly falls under the demographic. It's a case of blaming a medium itself instead of calling out the conduct of individuals.

It's a passion, and a culture has grown around it. I'm not against it.

Ok then, in your opinion what are some positive aspects of Gaming culture? I honestly don't see any and think that gaming culture should be purged with fire.

Conventions, people getting together, sharing experiences and sharing their passion, playing together and having fun.

True, if you only look at the negative stuff it's gonna seem bad but there is a positive side to it as well and always has been.

But in all honesty and truth, I don't see anything wrong with identifying as a gamer and admitting it's your hobby and your passion.

I don't see anything wrong with identifying as a gamer and admitting it's your hobby and your passion.

What do you get out of identifying as a gamer though? Identities like gamer largely ring hollow for me and therefore I have no desire to identify as such. What is the point of identifying in such a manner? IMO the difference between me saying that I play video games and you saying you're a gamer is that gamer is a status and playing video games is just an activity. The activity and the identifier who is involved with said activity are separate entities. Playing video games is just what I do and that's all it needs to be for me. I don't think gaming should define every aspect of my being as IMO I think that's what identifying as a gamer implies. Sure gaming has encompassed a large chunk of my life and still does to this day. But I don't feel the need to be defined by it or that gaming alone gives me purpose. Do you see what I'm getting at? I hope I'm not coming across as judgy as that was not my intention. This is just how I feel towards gamer as an identity.

I see what you're getting at. Fair play if you don't want to be considered a 'gamer' - I wouldn't exactly call myself one either. Gaming certainly doesn't define my life, however I think it's perfectly valid for others to be defined by it if that's their choice. I think the point you're trying to make is more directed at the in-fighting ("This game/platform is the best and you're a nub for thinking otherwise"), and the presumptions made by people not involved with games ("Y'all a bunch of sad nerds who need to get a life"). It's not fun being chucked in a box and being judged without an opportunity for rebuttal.

I don't see anything wrong with identifying as a gamer and admitting it's your hobby and your passion.

What do you get out of identifying as a gamer though? Identities like gamer largely ring hollow for me and therefore I have no desire to identify as such. What is the point of identifying in such a manner? IMO the difference between me saying that I play video games and you saying you're a gamer is that gamer is a status and playing video games is just an activity. The activity and the identifier who is involved with said activity are separate entities. Playing video games is just what I do and that's all it needs to be for me. I don't think gaming should define every aspect of my being as IMO I think that's what identifying as a gamer implies. Sure gaming has encompassed a large chunk of my life and still does to this day. But I don't feel the need to be defined by it or that gaming alone gives me purpose. Do you see what I'm getting at? I hope I'm not coming across as judgy as that was not my intention. This is just how I feel towards gamer as an identity.

How you define yourself is entirely up to you. I'm just saying it's not up to you how others should define themselves and what culture they should identify with. Gaming is a culture whether you like it or not and people are gonna have a relationship with it, positive or not. It's not necessarily a bad thing.

And no, nobody says that identifying yourself as a gamer implies that's all you do or that's how you define yourself. Gamers are people and like everyone have jobs, have lives and problems like everyone else. The only reason one would identify as a gamer is because they have a passion for it and enjoy it so much they want to find others who enjoy it too. It's like identifying as a raver/clubber. It's not everything you do, it's not your entire life, but it's the culture you have fun being with so you identify with it.

The people you are describing can be found in any culture. Music hipsters exist as well. But I don't see how such individuals define the culture. And like with music, some albums/artists/bands are considered "gold" even if a lot of people might not be into them, same happens with games, movies, books etc.

It's not just exclusive to games, it's just how it is and to me that's not what gaming culture is about either.

I began to wonder why I've been viewing gaming in such a negative light as of late. I think it may have to do with what I been watching. I often watch other Youtubers like Super Bunnyhop and Jim Sterling. Now don't get me wrong being well-informed is a great idea and they are very well-informed sources. But their coverage is so consistently negative that I think they've colored my views in general. It's not their fault that their coverage of the games industry is mostly negative The games industry does shitty things all the time. In fact if they went against what was shown to them at face value they wouldn't be honest. But I could imagine them wishing that they could say more good than bad about the games industry. When good things present themselves they relish at the opportunity to talk about them. But unfortunately more often than not this isn't the case. Super Bunnyhop in particular sounds so depressed now. I can't help but feel like they've left a jaded impression on me. I really should reconsider what I watch if it's affecting me this badly. To where I would I almost outright dismiss what should be a wonderful pastime for me. What a rather sad but nonetheless interesting predicament I find myself in. Trying to rebalance my cynical posture with positivity. But my mind is worth salvaging out of this depressing mire.

I'd rather make up my own opinion than let myself be colored by others. A lot of people have a very cynical and negative outlook on the games industry. Sure, it's doing some shitty things, but there's a lot of good things as well.

Besides, the industry doesn't necessarily reflect the culture.

I'd rather make up my own opinion than let myself be colored by others. A lot of people have a very cynical and negative outlook on the games industry. Sure, it's doing some shitty things, but there's a lot of good things as well.

Besides, the industry doesn't necessarily reflect the culture.

That's a similar conclusion I've reached as well. I used to watch/read a lot of reviews. But I've realized that they're entirely subjective and I keep finding myself disagreeing more and more with these critics. Even with reviews that have objectivity in mind. They're still 35% objective and 75% subjective and you can't change that. I mean what can I say about who's entertaining and who's not? Does it even matter? Anyway I find myself not enjoying these reviews/critics as I used to. There are some that I still watch like Zero punctuation. But that's because I still find Zero punctuation highly entertaining whereas with everyone else not so much.

Reviews are always gonna be subjective. There is no way you can write a 100% objective review.

My reviews are always more just relaying my experience with a game, how it feels to me from my point of view than trying to be objective about it. As a result I've actually given rather high scores to games commonly considered bad by the majority such as Daikatana and Duke Nukem Forever. I usually review games I have a personal interest in as a lot of games simply aren't my cup of tea and I wouldn't be able to give a fair review.

I think it's more important to focus on what you enjoy and what makes gaming fun than what makes it bad. Cause yes, there are a lot of bad things going on. But gaming culture is stronger than ever, the industry is not dying any time soon, and the reason is that there are still good games being made, people still love discussing games and that's never going to change.

Yeah, any culture that has resulted in a lasting marriage is a good one in my book. (gaming has done so many times, I even personally know a couple that got married in WoW, then got married IRL, and have been married almost a decade now with minimal issues to contend with)

Yeah, any culture that has resulted in a lasting marriage is a good one in my book. (gaming has done so many times, I even personally know a couple that got married in WoW, then got married IRL, and have been married almost a decade now with minimal issues to contend with)

Hehe, nice, I heard about that