Susan Arendt said:
Gunner_Guardian said:
O really?
So your saying Gamers are more manly, gentlemanly, and attractive then our non-gaming counterparts?
Though then again I find female gamers more attractive then non-gamers so I guess it works both ways.
In my personal experience? For the most part, yeah. Though a big part of that is probably that they don't look at me like I'm crazy when I say I want to spend the weekend playing BioShock. My ex-boyfriend did get annoyed because I was playing too much D2 on the Dreamcast, but I think that was more because I was hogging the TV.
I'm skeptical, when you stated it in general terms instead of personal experience. Gaming is not something readily visible like ethnicity or gender. Among people we all interact with, knowing if someone plays games is not easy to discern.
In addition, there's a degree of self-selection on both sides going on here. If we're talking about interacting with people online only, then obviously certain people will identify themselves as male and bother to have a photo attached. If we're talking about face-to-face interaction, then obviously you're going to have a more favorable reaction to people who share your interests, or at least who identify that they share their interests with you.
Returning to the GameCrush service. I'm very ambivalent about it. On one hand, creating businesses and encouraging people to interact is a good thing. On the other hand, this is very expensive and the degree of interaction seems to be extremely limited. Regardless, I think GameCrush is just using the publicity to gain product awareness. I think after the service is more established and popular, they will probably start more active efforts at pruning its image and its contractors (this is what the playdates are essentailly) in order to convey a more professional and slick image. So, in other words, there are kinda nasty girls now, but when they get bigger, there will be classy ladies.