Are games inherently wussy?

[The Gnome King]

Interesting article from The Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/13/charlie-brooker-modern-warfare-3

A brief excerpt:
Well, for one thing, games are inherently wussy. The stereotype of the bespectacled dweeby gamer is an inaccurate cliche, but there's no denying games are far from a beefy pursuit. Which is why shooty-fighty games go out of their way to disguise that.

The article is well written and expresses some points you often won't hear gamers utter. Still, I think some good points are raised. One is the problem with the dialogue and "personality" of the soldiers in these games, who basically are made to "ooze machismo" - the article puts it like this:

Every soldier in every game I've ever played is a dick. A dick that sounds like a 14-year-old boy reading dialogue discarded from an old-school Schwarzenegger action movie for displaying too much swagger. They seem like a bunch of try-hard bell-ends, desperate to highlight their gruff masculinity. What, exactly, are they overcompensating for?

So, gamers... What are the game designers overcompensating for? I've known quite a few soldiers - real ones, actual military men - and none of them, not even the most hardened Marine, acted much like the "soldiers" in the average first person shooter.

I'll leave you with the last imagery I took from the article which made me, literally, laugh out loud:

Sometimes you'll be crawling so close, your viewpoint goes right up between Price's legs until his crawling, pumping backside takes up the entire screen, which is precisely the sort of cinematography that failed to occur in Delta Force starring Chuck Norris.

Self-deprecating? Simply self-aware? Missing some finer point?

What do you think?

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

I don't know about you, but I've heard some pretty immature soldiers. Many (though not all) people who join the army are there because they have no other options. Their tests scores are crap and mcdonalds doesn't exactly whip their ass in shape to flip burgers.

I thought this thread would be more about how games are so easy and the story tends to hold your hand through much of the more difficult parts. Games tend to baby us.

 

[Kiju]

I think...it's the idea that video game developers tend to not be made up of actual soldiers, and tend not to hire them either except for a brief run-down on weapons and tactics.

Then again, I suppose it's also true that John Smith (Just for a random example-name) isn't the same guy as Corporal John Smith of the 212st Infantry Division when they're under heavy fire, and two of their boys are out there, bleeding to death.

Otherwise? Um...I dunno, maybe the CEO of these companies had a machismo ex-marine for a dad that beat them constantly in a drunken rage?

 

[Fishyash]

Firstly...

Well, for one thing, games are inherently wussy. The stereotype of the bespectacled dweeby gamer is an inaccurate cliche, but there's no denying games are far from a beefy pursuit. Which is why shooty-fighty games go out of their way to disguise that.

Huh???? Hello??? Movies??????????????????????????????????????????????????? Extra quotation mark11

I wouldn't say inherently wussy. Books and movies are inherently wussy too according to him. Although, I don't think it would be a stretch to say that he believes that too.

The 'games are inherently wussy' point I don't think is something I wholly agree with, BUT I do think that the Modern Military Shooters are ridiculously over the top, and their annoying attitudes almost seem to ooze into your average xbox live gamer.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

Games are not "wussy". They are not self aware. They are not in between.

Games, like almost all of the entertainment industry in general, LOVE cliche.

If people like something, everyone will do it.

Also, after reading the article, I think the writer fails to grasp even the most basic concepts of what gaming is about.

 

[EternalFacepalm]

Stop playing MMS games.
I think I'll go back to Oblivion now.

 

[The Gnome King]

I don't know about you, but I've heard some pretty immature soldiers. Many (though not all) people who join the army are there because they have no other options. Their tests scores are crap and mcdonalds doesn't exactly whip their ass in shape to flip burgers.

I thought this thread would be more about how games are so easy and the story tends to hold your hand through much of the more difficult parts. Games tend to baby us.

Sure I've known immature soldiers. Nor am I one of those Americans who think servicemen can do no wrong.

I'm just wondering if the lack of any intelligent dialog and homoerotic themes in games are what they are going for, because as the article states - in all honesty we're taking an activity that is as inherently "manly" as darning winter mittens (which also requires manual dexterity and hand-eye coordination) - and trying to market it to insecure 18-25 year old males.

Does marketing to that target audience require every soldier to be an immature beefcake?

 

[The Gnome King]

I think...it's the idea that video game developers tend to not be made up of actual soldiers, and tend not to hire them either except for a brief run-down on weapons and tactics.

Then again, I suppose it's also true that John Smith (Just for a random example-name) isn't the same guy as Corporal John Smith of the 212st Infantry Division when they're under heavy fire, and two of their boys are out there, bleeding to death.

Otherwise? Um...I dunno, maybe the CEO of these companies had a machismo ex-marine for a dad that beat them constantly in a drunken rage?

Or there's a lot of pent up homoerotic desire in these game designers? Or these gamers? Did you read the article? "Press X to kiss" - by the end they had me cracking up.

As I mentioned above, I'm just curious if it's the audience they're marketing to really requires this much overcompensation to make "gaming" OK for them.

 

[The Gnome King]

Firstly...

Well, for one thing, games are inherently wussy. The stereotype of the bespectacled dweeby gamer is an inaccurate cliche, but there's no denying games are far from a beefy pursuit. Which is why shooty-fighty games go out of their way to disguise that.

Huh???? Hello??? Movies??????????????????????????????????????????????????? Extra quotation mark11

I wouldn't say inherently wussy. Books and movies are inherently wussy too according to him. Although, I don't think it would be a stretch to say that he believes that too.

The 'games are inherently wussy' point I don't think is something I wholly agree with, BUT I do think that the Modern Military Shooters are ridiculously over the top, and their annoying attitudes almost seem to ooze into your average xbox live gamer.

1) Movies have neither a "wussy" or "machismo" stigma attached to them; neither do books. As activities, both men and women read books and watch movies in fairly equal numbers. It's possible there used to be a "nerdy" stigma attached to reading books but... really, "reader" never quite conjured up the same image as "gamer" - now did it?

2) For you to agree with his point about games being wussy might require a lot of self-confidence in your own lack of "wussy" if you are a gamer. It's not something many men admit to other men - "Ya dude, I totally knit on the weekends; I'm in a knitting club." How manly does that sound? Why is gaming more manly than knitting? Gaming is sitting in a chair pushing buttons while you control an on-screen image.

3) I think he was mainly speaking of military shooter games, as specified in the article - not games like "Tetris" which are, really, not really good at conjuring an image of any gender specific stereotypes of images.

 

[The Gnome King]

Also, after reading the article, I think the writer fails to grasp even the most basic concepts of what gaming is about.

Explain, please. What "basic concepts of gaming" is the writer, as a fellow gamer, failing to grasp?

 

[The Gnome King]

Stop playing MMS games.
I think I'll go back to Oblivion now.

I think he was mainly talking about military shooter games, yes. I don't play them, personally - but they are a huge market segment.

If you're trying to say you're somehow more secure in your masculinity because you play fantasy roleplaying games as opposed to military shooters, however, that's just... uh, that's an interesting point you're trying to make there.

 

[IndianaJonny]

Hmm, the article explicitly references towards shooting games thoughout, yet Brooker extends his general critisicm to include all games. I'm not convinced by that rationale.

Besides, when more 'realistic' shooting games (built from feedback by geniune combatants) are put together the media has a hissy fit over the issue of 'respect'. Take a look at the furore over Six Days in Fallujah, for instance.

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

I don't know about you, but I've heard some pretty immature soldiers. Many (though not all) people who join the army are there because they have no other options. Their tests scores are crap and mcdonalds doesn't exactly whip their ass in shape to flip burgers.

I thought this thread would be more about how games are so easy and the story tends to hold your hand through much of the more difficult parts. Games tend to baby us.

Sure I've known immature soldiers. Nor am I one of those Americans who think servicemen can do no wrong.

I'm just wondering if the lack of any intelligent dialog and homoerotic themes in games are what they are going for, because as the article states - in all honesty we're taking an activity that is as inherently "manly" as darning winter mittens (which also requires manual dexterity and hand-eye coordination) - and trying to market it to insecure 18-25 year old males.

Does marketing to that target audience require every soldier to be an immature beefcake?

With the target audience being 18-25 year olds I would have to say yes. At least by statistics. A intelligent, strategic, soldier with a heart for the innocent and burning hatred for the enemy just isn't as impressive as a soldier who breaks down the door with the minigun and shoots anything that moves.... while singing the national anthem... with heavy metal music in the background.

-shrugs- I'm a Mass Effect gamer. I never got into the army games. War among nations is rather boring to me.

 

[The Gnome King]

Hmm, the article explicitly references towards shooting games thoughout, yet Brooker extends his general critisicm to include all games. I'm not convinced by that rationale.

Besides, when more 'realistic' shooting games (built from feedback by geniune combatants) are put together the media has a hissy fit over the issue of 'respect'. Take a look at the furore over Six Days in Fallujah, for instance.

Two points:

I think his point(s) about gaming in general being "wussy" are twofold, and point a) is that military games are over-the-top overcompensating for this - however - b) that really, all games are basically a sitting activity where you use nimble fingers to push buttons quickly. Not exactly as manly as, say, pumping iron in the gym or running a marathon or even playing around with an old car in the garage. Not really manly in any sense of the word except that most gamers tend to BE men.

Second point - games are going to start being seriously treated as art when they stop caring about the media furor. Bioware having Anders be an "open bisexual" was a large step towards this. Games like "Six Days in Fallujah" - which I haven't played and can't comment on - are disrespectful to soldiers exactly how? By trying to form a game more realistic to the genre we're disrespecting actual soldiers? Bah. I say to Hell with what the "media" says.

 

[The Gnome King]

Eh, play Penumbra/Amnesia. If you manage to finish those games you're far braver than any ordinary person.

I could say the same about getting through watching the entire "Saw" series of horror flicks on the TV.

 

[The Gnome King]

With the target audience being 18-25 year olds I would have to say yes. At least by statistics. A intelligent, strategic, soldier with a heart for the innocent and burning hatred for the enemy just isn't as impressive as a soldier who breaks down the door with the minigun and shoots anything that moves.... while singing the national anthem... with heavy metal music in the background.

Kind of says something a little sad about the average 18-25 year old male, doesn't it?

*shrug*

I don't play these games. I just find the psychological reasons people DO play them (and why they come out so horrifically homoerotic and cliche) to be amusing. I'm not really "into" FPS games, but I *loved* Mass Effect because of the story and character elements; and it's not like Shepard wasn't a bit cliche himself. Or herself, if you went that route I suppose.

I enjoyed the first Bioshock because of the interesting storytelling and the fact that it was pretty different than the average FPS.

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

With the target audience being 18-25 year olds I would have to say yes. At least by statistics. A intelligent, strategic, soldier with a heart for the innocent and burning hatred for the enemy just isn't as impressive as a soldier who breaks down the door with the minigun and shoots anything that moves.... while singing the national anthem... with heavy metal music in the background.

Kind of says something a little sad about the average 18-25 year old male, doesn't it?

*shrug*

I don't play these games. I just find the psychological reasons people DO play them (and why they come out so horrifically homoerotic and cliche) to be amusing. I'm not really "into" FPS games, but I *loved* Mass Effect because of the story and character elements; and it's not like Shepard wasn't a bit cliche himself. Or herself, if you went that route I suppose.

I enjoyed the first Bioshock because of the interesting storytelling and the fact that it was pretty different than the average FPS.

Oh yes the homoeroticness of some video games I find very amusing. Lots of guys running around with guns shooting and knifing each other. Oh and lets not forget about Tbaging! lol

Yea I love ME for the same reasons you do. Now I do play BF3, but its a time killer and nothing more. I'm currently in a dead zone of video games. So a good online time waster is a nice way to go. I'm more into story driven video games I don't particularly care what they come in whether it be a fps or a rpg.

 

[The Gnome King]

Yea I love ME for the same reasons you do. Now I do play BF3, but its a time killer and nothing more. I'm currently in a dead zone of video games. So a good online time waster is a nice way to go. I'm more into story driven video games I don't particularly care what they come in whether it be a fps or a rpg.

Not a Skyrim fan, I take it? My "time killers" are Skyrim right now and my never-ending subscription to Dungeons and Dragons Online... played since 2006 and sometimes, not sure why I still do.

Looking forward to getting The Witcher 2 sometime soon. Love those games.

Looking forward to checking out some of the extra content on Dragon Age 2 though I am not sure how to patch my game with DLC since I got it originally from Steam and now EA doesn't play well with Steam... hmm.

As for upcoming MMOs, looking forward to Knights of the Old Republic and The Secret World - for different reasons.

 

[IndianaJonny]

Two points:

I think his point(s) about gaming in general being "wussy" are twofold, and point a) is that military games are over-the-top overcompensating for this - however - b) that really, all games are basically a sitting activity where you use nimble fingers to push buttons quickly. Not exactly as manly as, say, pumping iron in the gym or running a marathon or even playing around with an old car in the garage. Not really manly in any sense of the word except that most gamers tend to BE men.

Second point - games are going to start being seriously treated as art when they stop caring about the media furor. Bioware having Anders be an "open bisexual" was a large step towards this. Games like "Six Days in Fallujah" - which I haven't played and can't comment on - are disrespectful to soldiers exactly how? By trying to form a game more realistic to the genre we're disrespecting actual soldiers? Bah. I say to Hell with what the "media" says.

You make a lot of sense; I like that.

I couldn't agree more with your second point; video game companies need to lose their inhibitions about treading on some toes.

As to the first, maybe military shooters do overcompensate. I would have liked to come back with the "well the films do it too" comment but films don't have difficulty settings and we don't really have games that match the emotional level of war films such as The Bridge On The River Kwai or Platoon and that's our fault for not making (and supporting/buying) video game projects prepared to go down that route.

With point (b) though, *shrugs* that's just too generic. If Charlton "Charlie" Brooker thinks that world-class pianists and the people who keep The Guardian website up and running aren't 'blokes', then that's no world cataclysm.