ToastiestZombie said:
Hyrist said:
... Why would we ever consider this a good thing?
Adaptation to accommodate new, civil members of the community should always be the goal, should it not?
It should be, but it isn't, especially in gaming. It's why so many kids are flocking to DOTA/LOL, COD, Twitch and Youtube. Gaming just isn't very inclusive at all, both its culture and the games themselves.
That's never been the case both historically and in the present - when you pay attention to the scope of Gaming verses any and all other artistic and entertainment mediums. Behind novels, we're actually one of the more progressive mediums. There is a problem with a certain genre and approach of modern Tripple A titles, but even those have been continually showing good forward examples of progress and exclusivity.
Culture wise, the issue with a subset of our communities is not one specific to only the gaming communities. Trolls and aggressive people exist at all levels of cyberspace and Cyberbullying is a medium-wide problem - and truly should be addressed as such. But as part of this problem 'gamers' have been stereotyped as the poster child of the cyber-bullying issue. But really this is a recent issue due to the advent and lack of proper oversight and control of online communities in general. Gaming has just been one of the driving forces of such networking, and, sadly, one of the more lax components in terms of policing.
You pair this off with the hypersensitivity of those who identify closely with video games as a hobby and the subset of geek culture that is still new and sore from the scrutiny it as a medium and its early adapting hobbyists during its infancy, and it comes as no surprise that it comes off as overly defensive when confronting any problem that tries label it as a source or cause.
That, of course, does not divorce it from the joint-responsibility- but it does explain why our community's reaction is so volatile verses harsh criticism, whether or not it is well placed.
This gets further compounded by the media's tendency to use sensationalism as a means of gathering attention (and through such attention, revenue). Well meaning or otherwise, saying something provocative in order garner attention. My biggest critsism of the "Gamers Are Dead" articles is that, as a group they attempted to separate themselves, and giving credit where it was due, make a call to their readership and the gaming community to divorce itself from the label 'gamers' as a means to separate the average hobbyist and core audience from the stereotype. This was a horrible narrative to take and should have been seen coming.
In no way would a column or organization in the 90's focused on an audience of Science fiction fans write an article called "Trekkies are Dead." In order to divorce Star Trek fans from the negative sterotypes of a subset of their genre, simply because Star Trek was becoming more widely accepted. The fact that was adopted was meant purely for shock value and to gather attention.
Understanding the history and context of the environment, the blow-back and resulting internal struggle (representative of the struggle between those that valued validation and protection from exploitation verse those who valued acceptance and progressive thinking - with the true problem egging both sides on) comes as no surprise, as there was already existing tensions boiling beneath the surface, most prominently between Consumers and major gaming Publishers who were (and continue to) exploit its customers for whatever dollars they can scarp together.
It was striking sparks to get attention, ignoring the fact that they were standing in a power-keg room with several barrels already spilled.
It's my speculation that collectively, we've approached all of these problems in a terrible way. Had certain gaming journalists written articles with the focus of trying to rally those who identified under the title of 'Gamer' in an effort to abolish the internet-wide problem of misbehavior and harassment commonly (and erroneously) associated with the title - the reaction could have been the opposite extreme.
Likewise, it behooves the communities themselves to not be baited in the negative cycle so easily. Gaming communities and games development have spearheaded Charities, community movements, assistance and emotional support for its members in times of loss and crisis, civil rights, and powerful consumer advocacy that are all ultimately healthy for humanity in general. And it would benefit itself to stand behind those accomplishments and let them speak louder than the nay-sayers and accusers.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
So in summary:
Trolls and Harassers - Exist as an element in the entire internet, not just gaming, and should be addressed as such.
Gamers and Game Culture - Inclusive but overly Gun-shy. They want validation, they want acceptance, they want belonging. They generally believe that the medium should be for everyone and specific subsections of each community at the same time, which causes internal conflicts to try to balances these naturally opposing values. They are highly sensitive of being exploited in any way, (for good reason) which leads to difficulties of adapting new concepts for fear of it being a Trojan Horse.
Game Development and Publishers: A mixed bag. Some are very forward thinking, others take little risks. Some are after a vision or motive, others are just out to make money. The industry itself right now is in a bloated, awkward phase that everyone keeps fearing or expecting to crash, but so far hasn't. It's difficult to keep in mind that many of the people in all levels of this field are passionate game fans as well.
Game Journalism: Passionate and opinionated. Often more diverse than given credit, has to balance the need for good relationship and validation from the publishers/developers and the consumers while at the same time turning enough of a profit to self-sustain and grow. Has the same failings of any news medium.
___________________________________________________________
I would highly recommend looking at "In Defense of Video Games" from the Game Overthinker series. In many ways it acknowledges our failings while looking at our blessings, and I join the call it makes to embrace our diverse, accepting roots as well as our current gems in our community to spearhead a more positive narrative and movement throughout the industry.
Believe me, I know that's a difficult struggle, especially seeming it is contrary to the narrative our world tends to take in terms of media coverage and conversational discourse. But out of any grouping, Games Media has a strong shot of archiving it. If we can agree to adapt it as mainstream.
This philosophy of mine is why I'm opposed to unilaterally pressing on new members of the community based on join date. We should be more inclusive and celebrating those we do keep.
