Don't Use the Word "Gamer"
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
I wouldn't either, actually. I don't really think gaming is of any importance, it's important to me, as it's entertaining, but I don't think it's world, aside from producing jobs. Honestly I wouldn't be able to say the rebel part either in an average conversation. How do I think i'm above any of it? You have to remember it's fairly difficult to keep serious with this conversation as theres always the nagging suspicion you're a troll. I wrote 3 lines, The try it mann, it's cool thing was a reference to someone trying to get someone else to try drugs. Also, I've grown up believing that hipsters are well, artsy people. If that definition is wrong, my bad.derelix said:
...Pffft, naw. I'm Australian. I'm way too slack to say all THAT.Yahtzee Croshaw said:
Also, where I live "I'm a Gamer" is a very useful opening remark. I don't know any other 'game-players' in my area and so I like to seek out people with whom I can share my hobby.
If I were a bonsai fanatic, I would tell everyone I met just in case one of them is also, and will make the appropriately admiring remarks about my rows of carefully-chosen little cuttings that will, in twenty years, probably be dead.
'Girl gamer' as a title isn't something I hear often, but I do have the misfortune of hearing it from girls who love playing SMG on their boyfriend's machine.
If you don't even own your own console, don't talk to me. That is where I draw my 'snob line'.
Congrats on the success of your Pub! I hope you do get to expand.
I wonder if your roofie rate will be higher or lower - surely any place where you put your drink down and then focus intently on a screen/controller is just asking for trouble.
Upon finishing this article, what I saw was "Someone said something bad about my business, so you need to stop that."
There is a difference between a 'gamer' and 'a person who plays games'. My grandmother plays games on her computer to occupy herself. I play games for hours on end, then discuss them with people online and watch videos about snobs who do/don't like games. I attend conventions about games and I go to friends houses to play games.
A gamer might imply a negative context to the outside world, but to a person who is a gamer or describes themselves as a gamer, it has positive implications as well. It is like the terms Otaku, Trekkie, Ringer or a bunch of other terms. Most people hear them, roll their eyes and imagine the lame but to one of those people, they know there is a culture of people with similar interests.
Basically, a Gamer is someone who is part of the Gaming culture. Many people play games, but Gamers also research, discuss and sometimes even create their own games.
There is a difference between a 'gamer' and 'a person who plays games'. My grandmother plays games on her computer to occupy herself. I play games for hours on end, then discuss them with people online and watch videos about snobs who do/don't like games. I attend conventions about games and I go to friends houses to play games.
A gamer might imply a negative context to the outside world, but to a person who is a gamer or describes themselves as a gamer, it has positive implications as well. It is like the terms Otaku, Trekkie, Ringer or a bunch of other terms. Most people hear them, roll their eyes and imagine the lame but to one of those people, they know there is a culture of people with similar interests.
Basically, a Gamer is someone who is part of the Gaming culture. Many people play games, but Gamers also research, discuss and sometimes even create their own games.
But you do call them viewers because they are viewing them. For TV, too.hawk533 said:
"Gamer" is a term that reaches back to before even my 1st Edition AD&D Player's Handbook and its backpage ad for GenCon.
I have been playing video games since about 1976, and that was before I got into tabletop RPGs. I still play video games. That said, I think the term rightly belongs with the tabletop genre. I'm going to do something I hate now, and play the generational/age card - something I try never to do because I think it's usually BS.
But, frankly, "gamer" is a term stolen from hobbyists (of which I am one) by a generation of uber-cool little brats, and that those same brats would now reject it wholesale after wrecking it for the rest of us is exactly the sort of behavior I would expect from that generation. Chew it up, spit it out, shit on it, then leave it burning on the porches of the people you stole it from.
As to the stereotype of the fat stinky socially inept gamer in his mother's basement, I've met motherloads of gamers over the course of my life, and the percentage that could fit that stereotype has been about 1% or 2%, and none of those was somebody with whom I actually gamed. Everybody I ever gamed with was a person of good hygiene and usually with a good job, or if between jobs, was a student. All were socially capable people. And I've never played in a basement at all.
I agree with the argument since I do not think gamers are a group, just like "mountain climbers" aren't a group. Gamers today have next to nothing in common, and I do not feel like part of group with any other gamer. Primarily because it's a solitary endeavor that I pursue as a hobby because it interests me and I find it enjoyable. Like reading books, watching movies, fishing, drawing, painting miniatures, hunting, collecting stamps, whatever else people like. These things do not require a large social construct to function - I can experience them just fine by myself. And, due to the growing diversity of game genres, I have as much in common with other gamers as I have, as an avid horror-movie enthusiast, with the average Julia-Roberts-fan.
I personally do not take gaming lightly, since I think it has some strong artistic potential, and I'm very interested to see it develop. I sustain, however, that it's nothing to get religious about, and it's not significant on a global scale.
So no, I do not think gaming is like being Muslim, or gay, or a liberal, or an animal activist, or a physicist. It's like being a hobbyist - there is no "we"; all I need is a publication to cover events regarding the hobby and a community of reasonable adults to discuss and share opinions on their common interest. Our hobby happens to be enjoyable and beautiful, and these common interest may lead to lifelong friendships, as I've learned, but there is no reason I should "identify" with people halfway around the globe just because we both press buttons when something happens on the screen.
I personally do not take gaming lightly, since I think it has some strong artistic potential, and I'm very interested to see it develop. I sustain, however, that it's nothing to get religious about, and it's not significant on a global scale.
So no, I do not think gaming is like being Muslim, or gay, or a liberal, or an animal activist, or a physicist. It's like being a hobbyist - there is no "we"; all I need is a publication to cover events regarding the hobby and a community of reasonable adults to discuss and share opinions on their common interest. Our hobby happens to be enjoyable and beautiful, and these common interest may lead to lifelong friendships, as I've learned, but there is no reason I should "identify" with people halfway around the globe just because we both press buttons when something happens on the screen.
I'm afraid I must disagree with Mr. Croshaw. Every sub-group that attains a certain level of wider public awareness acquires a derogatory name from those people outside the group. This name is always intended to capture the most negative aspects of those labeled by it. But it is a sign of strength to take that name and embrace it. In America, "feminist" was originally meant to capture an image of butch lesbians who couldn't accept their proper role. Many races have accepted a "racist" label and taken it as their own, the most obvious case being the use of "the 'N' word" by Africans. Jock, Nerd and Punk are all labels that were applied to a group by outsiders. Trying to fight this label is at the same time futile and immature, especially when the argument is ?all labels are bad?. It is a name applied by "non-gamers" and they will continue to use it regardless of what we call ourselves, the only proven method to combat this label as a negative stereotype is to accept it and redefine it on our terms. Yes, I am a gamer. I start games in "hard" mode, I laugh at references to cakes and lies, or to the phrase "someone set us up the bomb" and I watch a British born Australian make jokes about triple cunted hookers.
Perhaps we could all just stop hate-mongering. This entire argument is about distinguishing ourselves from people we don't like. "Losers" crawl under the parasol BECAUSE of people like you calling them losers. Hate all you want. Keep it to yourself. You're as guilty of wanting to be special as the losers crawling under the parasol. You want to kick the losers out of your special club because you don't want to be associated with them. If you can't have a special club, no one can!! Destroy it! Don't call us gamers! Get over it. There are several different types of gamers, as there are several different types of fighters, miners, public speakers, teachers, fisherman, boaters, writers, artists, singers, etc. You get the point.Generic Gamer said:
No one ever said gamer was an illustrious title, but it can be something you're proud of. I am polish. Being polish doesn't make me part of an Elite Polack Association, though I am still proud of my heritage. I think there are many people out there proud of their heritage, and it's merely the nationality of the parents they happened to be conceived to.
I'm a Polish Gamer, and I am proud of it.
Well said my friend. I feel the same way, not only with the "gamer" title but "christian" too. I don't say I'm a gamer, nor do I say I'm christian. But I do play games and do believe in God.
I do both to show people that "we"(people who play games, or people who believe in God). can be "normal"(whatever that means).
I do both to show people that "we"(people who play games, or people who believe in God). can be "normal"(whatever that means).
Also, John ended up proving Yahtzee right. The irony. Yahtzee at least called someone doing exactly what John did.ilovemyLunchbox said:
Anyways, yeah gamer is the worst term, but we have nothing else unless we want to look like complete douches. But I do know someone who'd fit the bill of gamer, a friend of mine who ignored all of his friends and his girlfriend for 2 monthes. That is probably as close as I've seen anyone get to what Yahtzee says.
Hmm... Peculiar, Sir John was put on probation for a post that was obviously sarcastic (at least, I'd extremely assume).
Anyway.
I guess I agree with you on this one, Yatzee. Though, the term gamer is sort of losing that image sense almost everyone plays video games now. The only reason it's an actual term is because that originally wasn't the case.
I wish I lived anywhere close at all to that bar... and was of legal age in the country. Sounds mighty fun and interesting. People always find gimmicks as a bad term, but come on... Gimmicks are the only reason new things happen.
Anyway.
I guess I agree with you on this one, Yatzee. Though, the term gamer is sort of losing that image sense almost everyone plays video games now. The only reason it's an actual term is because that originally wasn't the case.
I wish I lived anywhere close at all to that bar... and was of legal age in the country. Sounds mighty fun and interesting. People always find gimmicks as a bad term, but come on... Gimmicks are the only reason new things happen.
A mack truck up the ass should cure that.Caligula_II said:
The "Christian" label derives itself from a set of commonly shared beliefs. If you're going to throw out the term "Christian," then you may as well throw out the terms "Democrat" and "Republican."Zero-Vash said:
Stereotypes are not inherently evil unless there isn't any truth to them at all, (i.e. Asians having webbed toes or something ridiculous like that). There are definitely racist ones that aren't completely false too, I'm sure we can all think of a bunch, (Black people being better at basketball than other races for example). The important thing is that even if one buys into these stereotypes somewhat they are generalizations and are never true in every instance, and as long as you keep this in mind you can recognize that every individual must be judged individually, to be prejudice, if we merely go by the definition of the word, is merely to have preconceived notions coming in to a situation, which is not racist as long as one realizes that those notions may be wrong, and the attributes in question must be verified by the particular situation of that person. Say, for instance you had an interview with an Asian candidate for an engineering job, and you think that Asians tend to be good at math. You can't verify that notion by looking at the candidate and saying to yourself, "Yup he's definitely Asian and therefore good at math," that would be begging the question; you have to actually look up his grades in math courses and his math scores on standardized tests. But you can't make a general claim about a group without it offending someone, even if you have proof. Even if you cited statistics that black people tend to be better on average than whites at athletic activities, you could still very well offend someone. But in the case where your claim is backed up with evidence, people cannot complain, even if they are offended. After all, if objective facts about the world offend you then that's tough cause the world ain't changing itself to make you happy.
But the label "Gamer" is different because you can change it. People cannot change their ethnicity or cultural background, but no one is inherently a gamer. There are two main connotations for the word. There is the economic label, which is equivalent to the term moviegoer, and is not about the lifestyle of those people but merely about what they buy. The second, however, is about lifestyle. There is a definite difference in the information conveyed between the statement "I play videogames" and "I am a gamer." Yahtzee claims that the only real difference between the two is some sort of negative connotation and stereotypic image is attached to the latter. However, I believe that the aforementioned image and connotation result from a piece of information that is only conveyed by the term gamer: level of interest. A gamer is different from a regular person who just plays videogames in as much as videogames occupy much of his interest beyond being an occasional pastime. It is comparable to the difference between a person who watches Star Trek occasionally and a Trekie. Trekie has negative images and connotations associated with it as well, but the defining characteristic of Trekies is that they would admit that they are Trekies and would only falsely deny it in order to avoid embarrassment. You see the difference between this type of label and racial stereotypes is that the label itself is applied through the behavior it predicts. A person can deny that they are a Trekie by listing all sorts of things; they haven't seen all the episodes, they don't have all the stuff on dvd, they can't tell you the names of the individual episodes, they don't have any Star Trek paraphernalia, they don't dress up as ST characters and go to ST conventions, etc, etc. The same with gamers, if someone wants to deny that they're a gamer they can likewise list all sorts of reasons; they only have one console, they play games for online matchmaking and don't care about story all that much, they have other interests outside of games that they value over games, they don't care about special edition boxes, they don't care about completing all the achievements in the game, they only care about difficultly level insofar as it makes the game challenging but still fun, they're willing to use cheats to get through parts they're stuck on, they don't go onto game chat-rooms, etc, etc, you get the point. Neither of the two lists above were meant to be exhaustive, and frankly both the terms are rather vague such that it may not be clear what the dividing line exactly is. But the general dividing line is the level of importance games/Trek plays in one's life. Despite its vagueness the term "gamer" does have meaning insomuch as it, at least in its positive attribution to someone, tells us that videogames play an important part in that person's life. The chances are that if someone is willing to label themselves as a gamer, it does at least convey that videogames are a very important pastime for that person. As with any other label it might not be properly applied (the person could just be lying to impress someone who they thought was a gamer), but in contrast to racial stereotypes, if one rejects that they have the qualities of the label then one rejects the label itself. An Asian could say that he sucks at math, and would obviously not be denying that he is Asian, whereas if someone denies the qualities of a gamer then they are not a gamer.
My point is, only gamers should call themselves gamers. If you feel like just saying that you play videogames doesn't express the level of your interest in videogames then you should probably call yourself a gamer, although you still have the right to deny any of the accidental qualities associated with the term. But if videogames are just one of your many hobbies and do not take a special role in the hierarchy of your interests then calling yourself a gamer is rather dubious.
But the label "Gamer" is different because you can change it. People cannot change their ethnicity or cultural background, but no one is inherently a gamer. There are two main connotations for the word. There is the economic label, which is equivalent to the term moviegoer, and is not about the lifestyle of those people but merely about what they buy. The second, however, is about lifestyle. There is a definite difference in the information conveyed between the statement "I play videogames" and "I am a gamer." Yahtzee claims that the only real difference between the two is some sort of negative connotation and stereotypic image is attached to the latter. However, I believe that the aforementioned image and connotation result from a piece of information that is only conveyed by the term gamer: level of interest. A gamer is different from a regular person who just plays videogames in as much as videogames occupy much of his interest beyond being an occasional pastime. It is comparable to the difference between a person who watches Star Trek occasionally and a Trekie. Trekie has negative images and connotations associated with it as well, but the defining characteristic of Trekies is that they would admit that they are Trekies and would only falsely deny it in order to avoid embarrassment. You see the difference between this type of label and racial stereotypes is that the label itself is applied through the behavior it predicts. A person can deny that they are a Trekie by listing all sorts of things; they haven't seen all the episodes, they don't have all the stuff on dvd, they can't tell you the names of the individual episodes, they don't have any Star Trek paraphernalia, they don't dress up as ST characters and go to ST conventions, etc, etc. The same with gamers, if someone wants to deny that they're a gamer they can likewise list all sorts of reasons; they only have one console, they play games for online matchmaking and don't care about story all that much, they have other interests outside of games that they value over games, they don't care about special edition boxes, they don't care about completing all the achievements in the game, they only care about difficultly level insofar as it makes the game challenging but still fun, they're willing to use cheats to get through parts they're stuck on, they don't go onto game chat-rooms, etc, etc, you get the point. Neither of the two lists above were meant to be exhaustive, and frankly both the terms are rather vague such that it may not be clear what the dividing line exactly is. But the general dividing line is the level of importance games/Trek plays in one's life. Despite its vagueness the term "gamer" does have meaning insomuch as it, at least in its positive attribution to someone, tells us that videogames play an important part in that person's life. The chances are that if someone is willing to label themselves as a gamer, it does at least convey that videogames are a very important pastime for that person. As with any other label it might not be properly applied (the person could just be lying to impress someone who they thought was a gamer), but in contrast to racial stereotypes, if one rejects that they have the qualities of the label then one rejects the label itself. An Asian could say that he sucks at math, and would obviously not be denying that he is Asian, whereas if someone denies the qualities of a gamer then they are not a gamer.
My point is, only gamers should call themselves gamers. If you feel like just saying that you play videogames doesn't express the level of your interest in videogames then you should probably call yourself a gamer, although you still have the right to deny any of the accidental qualities associated with the term. But if videogames are just one of your many hobbies and do not take a special role in the hierarchy of your interests then calling yourself a gamer is rather dubious.
Well, if by the "One Rule" you mean the universal rule that everyone knows, I thought it was "Don't try this at home." or "Don't talk to strangers, unless they have candy."
I think at the end of the day, it's all about making something your own, so people can't use it against you. In high school, if I was called a nerd or a dork because I knew how to turn a computer on or could add numbers without bringing my fingers or toes in for help, than I embraced it. I'd call myself a dork before they did, and made it my own.
Bottom line is there's people in the world who get off on ruining another person's day, and when you don't give a damn about them, they get bored and move along. Or they hang around and continue, and their feeble attempts to get a rile out of people becomes amusing.
That's my 2 cents anyway
I think at the end of the day, it's all about making something your own, so people can't use it against you. In high school, if I was called a nerd or a dork because I knew how to turn a computer on or could add numbers without bringing my fingers or toes in for help, than I embraced it. I'd call myself a dork before they did, and made it my own.
Bottom line is there's people in the world who get off on ruining another person's day, and when you don't give a damn about them, they get bored and move along. Or they hang around and continue, and their feeble attempts to get a rile out of people becomes amusing.
That's my 2 cents anyway