Should gamers have control over gaming culture?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Or is that problematic?

I suppose the free market should prevail, but that doesn't imply that corporate entities should get to decide that skimpy ladies are somehow destroying civilization and shouldn't be sold in the first place. Or does it?

HAve you ever heard of Extra Credits? They are a Youtube Channel that does philosophical topics such as this one. https://www.youtube.com/user/ExtraCreditz?&ytbChannel=null If you are interested.

Ultimately, gamers ARE in control of gaming culture. We vote with our wallets. If we don't like a game, don't buy it, and then it bombs less games in that style or with those mechanics will be made. The problem is that gamer culture has a lot more people in it now. It's no longer a culture for a bunch of nerds that really like their gaming hobby. And THAT'S something we don't have control over. And a lot of those...'newer' gamers I guess don't agree with you if they do buy a game you don't agree with.

As for the skimpy ladies you speak of, I think such issues in gaming will calm down over time. It'll just...take quite a few years in my opinion. Companies work with focus groups a lot, since they don't get the internet they listen to the people shouting the loudest a lot as well. (SJW's in this case) Which results in games incorporating what they've learned from them. But if people keep on voting with their wallets companies will realise that those focus groups and sjw's don't speak for the majority, and will try something different in the future.

Gaming culture is interaction and activity of Gamers.

It is basically impossible to control by anyone else. And attempst to lecture the collective gamerhood about how they shouls change tend to backfire strongly. Because humans don't like to be lectured about how to behave in their free time in their hobby by outsiders.

We do... thats kind of how it works.

We do. We just don't all agree on what that culture should be.

Who.. who else would be in control of "gaming culture", if not for the people who participate in it ("gamers")?

I don't really understand the question, to be honest. Gaming culture is just a broad term for how we as gamers behave, and how that behavior is perceived by those outside of it. Are you suggesting that an outside group be allowed to create a set of rules and codes that would have to then be enforced through social stigmatization or other pressures? I think my feelings on this can be best responded to by the following questions (meant only 25% sarcastically):

Should movie etiquette be controlled by movie goers? Or are we postulating a scenario where soccer fans would be?

Should French Culture be controlled by the French?

Should the culture of a forum be controlled by the forum users?

All of these things could conceivably be "improved" by the intervention of outside powers, but wouldn't that very intervention transform it into something else? Is "gaming culture" a strict and codified thing, or is it simply the interaction of gamers about and around games?

First you'll have to define gamers. Because if your idea of gamers is just the segment of the gaming community who duels in 4chan and gamefaqs forums, then no; not alone.

"Gaming culture" makes me cringe. Not trying to be glib, there's just something about the title gamer I've always had a distaste for. Even though I would consider myself someone who takes games semi-seriously (card carrying member of the 1440p 144hz PC Master Race over here) I do my best to distance myself from the "culture" surrounding gaming. Mostly because it comes across as immature at best and screeching intolerance at worst.

You don't have a culture. You're sold shit that convinces you you have a culture.

Yes, we do.

But gaming is a fairly popular global hobby, so there is nothing in common between members...

Luckily, we live in a capitalist society which means that, as long as there is a demand for sexual content in games, someone will provide it and the companies that won't do it will lose that portion of the market.

Also, what exactly is "gaming culture"?
I see this term being thrown around everywhere but I still don't know what it means.
There's a billion gamers in the world right now (maybe more) and a lot of them don't have anything in common aside from being human and playing video games.
Sure, some people who are into 1 IP or genre will form little communities but when it comes to gaming as a whole, there's no such thing.

The problem is that people think of "gamers" and "gamer culture" as a singular monolithic entity, that all gamers are the same. We're not. There are many genres, and genres that appeal to one person won't appeal to everyone. For example, I call myself a "thrill junkie gamer", and I gravitate towards racing games and shooters while avoiding things like simulators and hidden object games because they bore me to death.

There are groups that gravitate towards simulators, others that focus on role-playing and other story-driven games, and yet others that are like me and just want excitement. Yet when the media, and most other outsiders, look at us, they don't see the differences in what we like, they just see "gamers" without seeing the interests of the various different kinds of gamers that are out there.

There's a game for everyone, if they know where to look. And there's always the choice to play single-player rather than play online. You just need to look deeper than first impressions. Otherwise, you won't know what you're looking at or how individual gamers can be very different from each other.

We are the ones with the money buying the products, therefore we have it and shall always have it. It will have problems that comes with any humans in power as a group, being able to influence personal desire over any perceived sense of what might be the right thing to do.

We kinda do. It's just that "gamers" as a community are a disjointed collective of idiots who cannot agree on what "gaming culture" should be.

Canadamus Prime:
We kinda do. It's just that "gamers" as a community are a disjointed collective of idiots who cannot agree on what "gaming culture" should be.

Which is why I say that we shouldn't look at "gamer culture" as if it were just one thing.

There are many different kinds of gamers, so why do they all get lumped into one collective "gamer culture"? We're not all the same, so stop acting like it. Embrace our differences, and let the gaming communities form into separate subcultures rather than being seen as one monolithic entity.

American Tanker:

Canadamus Prime:
We kinda do. It's just that "gamers" as a community are a disjointed collective of idiots who cannot agree on what "gaming culture" should be.

Which is why I say that we shouldn't look at "gamer culture" as if it were just one thing.

There are many different kinds of gamers, so why do they all get lumped into one collective "gamer culture"? We're not all the same, so stop acting like it. Embrace our differences, and let the gaming communities form into separate subcultures rather than being seen as one monolithic entity.

Could we even get those subcultures to collectively agree on what they're supposed be be?

kitsunefather:
Who.. who else would be in control of "gaming culture", if not for the people who participate in it ("gamers")?

How about we give control over to the Juggalos, I think they could take gaming culture in an interesting direction

Define "gamer" and "gaming culture", please.

That's generally where the trouble starts.

Holythirteen:
I suppose the free market should prevail, but that doesn't imply that corporate entities should get to decide that skimpy ladies are somehow destroying civilization and shouldn't be sold in the first place. Or does it?

Are there no 'gamers' who think that skimpy ladies are [insert strawman here]?

Canadamus Prime:
Could we even get those subcultures to collectively agree on what they're supposed be be?

Each one will have to create its own identity, but each one needs to show how it's different from the others.

Don't know how effective it'll be at helping outsiders understand that gamers aren't all the same, but it's a start.

What makes a person a gamer anyway? Do I have to wear a "geeky" t-shirt that shows I play videogames? Do I have to like Halo? Am I allowed to say I'm not a fan of the Souls games, or is that an automatic ban from the gamer culture? Can I play games on the easiest difficulty and not be called a "casual" because omg, what a tragedy, I suck at videogames?

Also cultures change over time, so if there is such a thing as "gaming culture", you don't get to say "but you're not a part of it unless you can do this and this in that and that game, casual noob fake gamer girl!" if that's what you mean by "gamers" controlling "gamer culture", because things aren't the way they were years ago, there's a lot more people now and they probably want games that cater to them too. If half naked girls are getting new clothes in games now, that's just another thing that's changing, maybe they'll come back in 10 years or so wearing even skimpier outfits, who knows.

Saelune:
We do... thats kind of how it works.

I suppose the argument is similar to things like Comic cons, where the actual Comics and nerds have taken a back seat to lucrative gaming displays, advertising and whatnot. Your original comic book nerds no longer have much of a say in matters.

But it does depend on your definition of gamer.

Wintermute:
What makes a person a gamer anyway? Do I have to wear a "geeky" t-shirt that shows I play videogames? Do I have to like Halo? Am I allowed to say I'm not a fan of the Souls games, or is that an automatic ban from the gamer culture? Can I play games on the easiest difficulty and not be called a "casual" because omg, what a tragedy, I suck at videogames?

I'd say a 'gamer' is someone who's aware and interested in games beyond just picking up a controller and having fun, whether that be an interest in the industry as a whole or in the 'meta' of how games are constructed and how the mechanics of a game work. Much like I'd call someone who's interested in the NFL as a whole a Football enthusiast, while someone who just puts the game on during Thanksgiving is not. It has nothing to do with ones opinion on the matter, or what games they like - Just an awareness and interest in such things.

Which isn't a critique of 'casuals' or anything. Though it would be nice if everyone paid more attention to things beyond simply playing (Or in the case of Football, watching), it's perfectly fine not to.

In this day and age, what the hell does the word "gamer" even mean anymore now that playing video games has become mainstream? The best way to describe it is by pointing to the people trying to exclude the newcomers, whose actions have turned gamer into a title with connotations about as pleasant as "Hooligan". How dedicated do you have to be to gaming to be a gamer? How many games do you have to play, how often, how many hours per week/month/year, how much knowledge of the history of games do you need. According to the aforementioned gatekeepers, certain political views are forbidden to express within the realm of gaming, certain aspects are forbidden to criticize or mention, and you are not a "true gamer" if you didn't join sufficiently long ago, don't play the right games and don't understand them sufficiently. Honestly, it seems easier to become grand master of the free masons than meet the minimum qualification for becoming a "gamer" as defined by "hardcore gamers"

They (we) are. Despite the attempts of the rabid gatekeepers on reddit and the chans, gaming is universal from everyone such as my mom playing a random mobile game occasionally on her commute to the hardcore WoW raiders to the people who enjoy "walking simulators" and visual novels. Everyone needs to get off whatever height horse they might be on and realize that we all shape the gaming ecosystem that gamers, developers, publishers, and journalists live in regardless of how much one relies on videogames to prop up their sense of identity.

Pro-tip: If your sense of identity revolves around you being a "gamer" to the point that you try to exclude others, you really need to seek professional help. It's not healthy. (generic you)

There is more than one kind of gamer and more than one culture. The idea of a singular, "Gamers," is a nice meme spread around by people who haven't played a game in their life that isn't on a phone

RedRockRun:
There is more than one kind of gamer and more than one culture. The idea of a singular, "Gamers," is a nice meme spread around by people who haven't played a game in their life that isn't on a phone.

Thank you for explaining what I was trying to say better than I ever could have.

Can anyone point out any point in history when someone having total undisputed control over anything ended well? Because this whole "gamers having control" thing smells a wee bit of No True Scotsman to me.

DrownedAmmet:

kitsunefather:
Who.. who else would be in control of "gaming culture", if not for the people who participate in it ("gamers")?

How about we give control over to the Juggalos, I think they could take gaming culture in an interesting direction

Hm.. this could lead to some potentially interesting ideas.

I'll agree to it if we can give control of college culture over to metal fans.

erttheking:
Can anyone point out any point in history when someone having total undisputed control over anything ended well? Because this whole "gamers having control" thing smells a wee bit of No True Scotsman to me.

That's a fair point.

In my mind, I think of it as a "every person is responsible for their own behavior" and the combined behaviors of members of a certain group is its "culture".

You're right though; it could easily be used to feed into the idea of the "not a gamer" mindset, on all sides.

Gamers do, a gamer does not.
We are not a monolith.

Somewhat.

The industry knows that most people want violence and shooting games.

Much like motorcycle clubs, bridge groups, and bowling leagues, "gamers" are a group of individuals bound loosely together by a shared hobby, no one more responsible than the rest.

However, like motorcycle clubs, bridge groups, and bowling leagues, gamers collectively can nudge their hobby's culture in interesting ways, and can make gains or loses in specific areas.

For some reason, a lot of gamers seem to miss that fact.

JUMBO PALACE:
"Gaming culture" makes me cringe. Not trying to be glib, there's just something about the title gamer I've always had a distaste for. Even though I would consider myself someone who takes games semi-seriously (card carrying member of the 1440p 144hz PC Master Race over here) I do my best to distance myself from the "culture" surrounding gaming. Mostly because it comes across as immature at best and screeching intolerance at worst.

This.

Also, to answer the OP, "no." In the sense that culture is an amorphous concept that is in a constant state of flux as ideas are added from within or without, and old ideas are removed when they become outdated. So, acting as gatekeepers isn't a good idea on any level.

McMarbles:
You don't have a culture. You're sold shit that convinces you you have a culture.

Culture is defined by what people do in their lives. This is a rather nebulous concept, and I can understand it being hard to narrow down or even undesirable at times, but the things people do with their money and media is part of cultural identity. Human beings created culture, ergo to buy entertaining things and play is human and a part of that.

That said, 'control' is a bit hard to do with something so ever-changing. 'Influence' is probably the better term.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here