Is everyone a gamer?

[someguy1231]

I don't know whether everyone is a "gamer", but I don't think someone who plays Candy Crush for 5 minutes should be lumped together with someone who plays 4 hours of WoW or BF4 or Halo everyday.

 

[Something Amyss]

I don't know whether everyone is a "gamer", but I don't think someone who plays Candy Crush for 5 minutes should be lumped together with someone who plays 4 hours of WoW or BF4 or Halo everyday.

They're only "lumped in" together in the same sense that a NASCAR "driver" is "lumped in" with a "driver" who spends 30 minutes on a freeway commute each day.

It appears someone even beat me to it.

But then other people believe them, for some reason.

I believe them. I can even tell you the reason:

The prevalence of both the behaviour and the defense of the behaviour in "gamer" culture.

Sure, you can argue "not all gamers," but I don't think anyone is saying "all gamers."

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

I think the colloquial definition among gamers would be something like this:

Gamer - Someone who plays games I respect, in the manner I respect, as often as I respect.

Although my personal definition would be more like this:

Gamer - Someone with enough of an affinity for games that they consider it part of their identity.

The only thing I'd be a bit of a stickler with is the plural for games. If you just have affinity for one game, then it seems really weird giving yourself an umbrella term instead of just saying "I play WoW"

 

[LostTrigger]

The question you should be asking isn't "Is everyone a gamer?" The question you should be asking is "Why the hell does it matter so much to me?"

its an identity that is important to me that alot of people would rather it cease to exist or stretch it so that it covers people who dont even identify as a gamer

 

[LostTrigger]

Okay, here's the deal: you can call everyone who's ever played a game once, a "gamer", if you're also consistent and call everyone who's ever swallowed a bacterium, a "killer".

Narrow definitions are more useful.

Definitely. A runner is someone who runs. A marathon runner is someone who runs marathons. A professional runner is someone who runs professionally.

That the term Gamer was useful once to identify traits was because it was a novelty in general. Pong would be defined as being pretty casual nowadays, some wouldn't describe those people who play it once in a while as a gamer. Now, "everybody" plays some games the one way or the other, and it has lost its novelty and usefulness.

From a descriptive perspective, it simply doesn't make any sense anymore. The industry itself even refered to those dedicated to gaming as "core audience". This audience itself has also grown, and as well is, I THINK, what people here simply describe as someone who is a gamer.

Also, there are these curious cases: Your dad who plays Football Manager or Anno like it's his second job. At least with a lot of passion. Now, these games aren't even that casual. Especially in the late 90s, there were a lot of simulations with extensive complexity. But these "dads" have mastered them, more or less. And also, they only play these games. Now, are these persons no gamers? Or are they gamers? Are they core gamers? Don't they count?

I have to deal with language professionally. And also, I have a passion for certain languages. In German, it most likely would be clear that (the equivalent of) Gamer would be insufficient to describe someone with a passion for gaming, besides that sometimes, the equivalent (Spieler, Zocker) is often connotated with the addiction itself. But that also gets less and less frequent, since it simply fails to deliver the information properly in a conversation, since video gaming is more and more on the rise into mainstream society.

So, if you want to be precise, everybody who plays games is a gamer. If you need to differenciate, you need to be precise by describing properly, like defining with adjectives/adverbs or coining new terms altogether. If you simply want to defend the term that is associated with an identity, then also you have to realize that there are now different identities as well, all also ill-described as the same with the term "Gamer", even though it is indeed appropriate but insufficient, imo.

I personally think that everybody who plays games is a gamer. Those, who play games with a passion are core gamers. Those, who play complex games, but these complex games only are niche gamers. Those, who play casually, are casual gamers. But all are gamers.

Language can be identified as a lot of things. But it always, always is an appointment, an agreement on what means what. So, I'm certainly not saying and not even believing that my personal method is the best. But language will be defined by the majority that uses it. Dictionaries, authorized by the gouvernment, come in if you *need* clearity. And if the majority (that should also be represented by the gouvernment) agrees to use the dictionary, it's fulfilling its purpouse. So, rape still means rape. But if "everybody" would disagree that gamer has the given definition, it would need to change.

but what does that do for the people who dont identify as a gamer who you want to make a gamer?

 

[Naldan]

but what does that do for the people who dont identify as a gamer who you want to make a gamer?

What?

 

[Des-Esseintes]

Trying to discuss the term is generally useless as every old wanker seems to have a different view of what makes a 'gamer'.

I can see the arguments for being a core gamer, aficionado and all that. It just breaks down far too quickly as people always want to draw their own lines. Not only that, but liking certain games doesn't make you part of this nebulous 'gamer culture'. Does not circlejerking on the net make you less of a 'gamer', even if you love Persona 4? I mean, millions and millions of people own PS2s - does playing on that 'core' system make you a legit gamer even if you only play Madden? CoD? What if you only love Candy Crush and Persona? Does it make you less of a gamer if you circlejerk on gamefaqs but are only interested in Mario? Does circlejerking on gamefaqs mean you're a gamer if you only play dudebro shooters and dismiss everything else as nerdgames? Does playing hundreds of hours on mobile games make you less of a gamer than someone who's only really interested in VNs? What if you ignore the AAA games entirely but love walking simulators? Are you part of the gaming culture if you ignore wide swathes of games, have no idea what happened at E3, but spend hundreds of hours editing the Dark Souls wikia? What if you spend hours on gaming forums, obsess over Gamergate, but only ever pwn nubs in Halo?

It's a vague term that pretty much only tells you what games the person defining it enjoys.

No one argues about belonging to a film-viewing culture, or draws lines at which films make you a true film-viewer.

Gaming is at the point now where this discussion is worthless. We're at the point now where the only useful question is asking: 'Hey bud, what games are you into?' Like you would with any other medium.

If they say 'I just play Plants VS. Zombies on the train', you have free reign to be a judgey doucheberg and dismiss them for not being a proper gamer.

But here's the thing, trying to work out whether someone is a proper """""gamer""""" is only going to make you look like the dude who turns his nose up if you aren't a Fellini fan.

 

[Des-Esseintes]

Trying to discuss the term is generally useless as every old wanker seems to have a different view of what makes a 'gamer'.

I can see the arguments for being a core gamer, aficionado and all that. It just breaks down far too quickly as people always want to draw their own lines. Not only that, but liking certain games doesn't make you part of this nebulous 'gamer culture'. Does not circlejerking on the net make you less of a 'gamer', even if you love Persona 4? I mean, millions and millions of people own PS2s - does playing on that 'core' system make you a legit gamer even if you only play Madden? CoD? What if you only love Candy Crush and Persona? Does it make you less of a gamer if you circlejerk on gamefaqs but are only interested in Mario? Does circlejerking on gamefaqs mean you're a gamer if you only play dudebro shooters and dismiss everything else as nerdgames? Does playing hundreds of hours on mobile games make you less of a gamer than someone who's only really interested in VNs? What if you ignore the AAA games entirely but love walking simulators? Are you part of the gaming culture if you ignore wide swathes of games, have no idea what happened at E3, but spend hundreds of hours editing the Dark Souls wikia? What if you spend hours on gaming forums, obsess over Gamergate, but only ever pwn nubs in Halo?

It's a vague term that pretty much only tells you what games the person defining it enjoys.

No one argues about belonging to a film-viewing culture, or draws lines at which films make you a true film-viewer.

Gaming is at the point now where this discussion is worthless. We're at the point now where the only useful question is asking: 'Hey bud, what games are you into?' Like you would with any other medium.

If they say 'I just play Plants VS. Zombies on the train', you have free reign to be a judgey doucheberg and dismiss them for not being a proper gamer.

But here's the thing, trying to work out whether someone is a proper """""gamer""""" is only going to make you look like the dude who turns his nose up if you aren't a Fellini fan.

I dont disagree with your overall argument of "There is no litmus test for determining what is a gamer", I do disagree on your perception of "It is essentially douchberg tribalism".

You see I think that Gamer serves as a valid term, and thus a valid identifier. And while people do draw their own definitions (because like you said and I agreed the term is vague), there still seem to be overarching themes to it. If we meet each other and I go "So what are your hobbies?" and you go "Oh I am a gamer" that statement still relays information to me. It gives me ideas of what questions to ask. And if "Everyone is a gamer" then it wouldn't. Because you might as well have gone "Oh I am alive".

The Gamer tag has with it some expectations and identifiers enabling humans to relate to each other (negative and positive. That is always the risk of wearing a label). Even if it also enables the "Thin red line tribalism".

I get you geezer.

The problem is that this issue arises with pretty much any hobby.

Answering your question with 'I like going to the movies.' could mean a million different things. If you assume someone loving movies means they're familiar with the French new wave and dogma movements then that's mostly on you. Which is why the 'Oh cool, what games you into?' is the useful question. Because being into games, music, movies, etc... is a widely massively broadly broad thing. And in all cases, trying to needle out of people whether they're a proper true film fan by judging whether they like the RIGHT movies, have the minimum level of understanding of Richard Linklater and Chaplin, is only going to make you look like a doucheberg. The internet's definition for what makes a movie fan seems to be loving Marvel, Tarrantino and Nolan while hating rom-coms. And I'm sure there are whole communities circlejerking over how they're not real movie fans and I'm sure that most people just like watching the odd movie and don't care about your classifications.

If someone says they're into Candy Crush and Halo, then just move on. Just like I'm not going to dismiss someone for loving 80's action films and not loving my choice of Lynch films - we'll just move onto common ground. And if either of us is silently judging the other for not having the correct, right, truthful knowledge of film, then we'd probably look like arses.

 

[JohnnyDelRay]

You could also just like...quantify the term. Like we have with other things. So you're an avid reader, a regular runner, a heavy smoker. Obsessive porn watcher. Whatever it is, if you just said any of the above -ers without an adjective preceding it, it could be a huge range of the activity (running once a day, or once a month, smoking only on weekends/chain smoking, and so on.)

 

[CannibalCorpses]

So how would you define me?

I play computer games, board games, table top games, card games, pen and paper rpgs...etc.

Hardcore gamer works for my computer gaming...casual gamer works for my card gaming...table top games are always hardcore gaming...

Also, it has nothing to do with money or anything like that. I don't spend much on any type of gaming...i haven't paid for a computer game for about 2 years...i haven't bought any new models for table top gaming for about 20 years.

 

[McMarbles]

The question you should be asking isn't "Is everyone a gamer?" The question you should be asking is "Why the hell does it matter so much to me?"

its an identity that is important to me that alot of people would rather it cease to exist or stretch it so that it covers people who dont even identify as a gamer

That sounds like a personal problem to me. You don't own the concept of gaming. You don't get to make the distinction.

 

[veloper]

Hey okay, I can't speak for the German Zuckers, as I haven't even heard of that word before this thread appeared.

But let's assume the german word for gamer is worthless nowadays, just like you say, then it shouldn't be a big deal to anyone for some other German to come along and re-appropriate the word. How many words can one need to indicate roughly the same group as the word "persons" afteral?

Some suggestions:

Core gamer (that one is already used by the industry), hardcore gamer, gaming enthusiast.

All have the word "game(r)" hidden somewhere.

That's not what meant, unless you mean to say that in German, it's a common to thing to, say, refer to a random person carrying a smartphone somewhere, as a Spieler or a Zucker, in which case I totally believe you! I so suck at speaking German.

Now, if you'd really wanted to preserve the term gamer for someone who is really enthusiastic about games, then you could call those who play games casually only differently. Like player. But from a descriptive point of view, and from a linguistic point of view as well, at least from my pov ( DDD ), it wouldn't make much sense to call them "Players". Also, as I said, probably your opinion will be overrun by the shared opinions of others, who most likely call everybody a gamer.

The majority has become casual. They are pretty new, since the Wii or mobile games. That in turn means that the former audience got a lot of new members with different point of views.

No actually, your first suggestion is a good one. The word player is fine (in English that is; maybe not in German).

A casual if anything, is not defined by strong gaming habits, so he or she is the player while playing a game and just something else when not playing.

The language is always dictated by those who use it, of course. But that means that it needs to have an agreement. Now, you could go to your friends and tell them, for example "Yo, Jimmy, your mother plays Pou like a pro, but she isn't a gamer." for whatever reason you'd say that, and all your friends might agree and everything is fine. I could do the same thing in my inner circle. We have agreed on what a gamer is and isn't. But, as I said, it has shifted _hard_.

But has it really changed though?
Do you suppose that, for example, there was anyone who may have read the headline "Gamers are Dead", and thought: yeah, this is going to be an article about the end of casual gamers, or even an end of anyone-who's-ever-played-a-(video)game-ever kind of apocalypse?
Now "Zuckers are Tot," might be confusing, but I wouldn't know.

And frankly, the media did and still does a super bad job to help the community to create and evolve. All they do is to whine, rage and criticize. The latter isn't even bad, but if you have a huge audience, you have a huge potential. And most of them use it very, very negatively. That means in a destructive way, also by relying on the 3 former mentioned activities.

Instead, they could use their huge potentials to simply discuss problems and not taking a side right off the bat. They could use their journalistic connections, and even their education in something that is heavily intervowen with language and communities, to suggest alternatives. They could help the community evolve. They could be constructive instead of destructive. But they aren't, won't and don't even consider this. Well, I won't dive deeper into this.

Yeah we don't need the media for this. I once heard you Germans have official committees deciding on language, but we'll just have to say whatever we want to in this place.

So, what this community needs is a forum of truly diverse individuals. And none of those who want to inject other topics into this forum. YES, THEY CAN DO THIS, but in this forum, it has for this moment in time no place. It's just about the neutral discussion about the identity gamer, the term gamer, and the direction they would *suggest*. Again, ~just an example~, sexism in gaming, games, developement. Fine, talk about it, but at another time. It has its place, but this should be about where to go, not how shit it supposedly is.

For clarification: I mean an open forum, not a forum of the Escapist. Like a gathering of experts and moderators, who meet over a week or weekend to discuss a specific topic. I'm sorry to say this, bt since the media fails to do this, we would need other gathering points. And I don't even mean the Escapist. Frankly, I could even see the Escapist being a part of that forum.

I don't think we need anything like that at all. We're doing fine already.

If some posters want to say gamer, when they actually mean to say person (who played some game atleast once), then let there be confusion. This is fine by me.
Nobody's ever mistaken my use of "gamer" to mean anything other than someone who's an enthusiast of the hobby, so I'm good.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

The dictionary defines being a gamer as someone who plays games but to alot of people(including gamers) it means being a gaming enthusiast. So yes were all technically "gamers". Yet when were talking about gamers we never refer to just anybody who plays games. We mean(ofcourse this isnt for everyone im generalizing) the people who stay up all night playing wow, or the people who grind for 10 hours in final fantasy etc. Im not trying to exclude anyone from being a gamer but alot of people want "gamer" to be a label for anyone who games(regardless of there age, what they play, or even if they identify as a gamer) when for alot of people being a gamer is an identity, its more than just playing games and they dont really want to be grouped in with the same people who dont share that much of an interest in the hobby. Im mostly fine with anyone being a gamer as long as we still stick with the terms casual and hardcore gamer to differentiate the two groups.

Opinion?

Words are silly. Especially English words, because English is a silly language.

Adding -er to a simple verb does mean "one who does." So, by the literal definition, just about everyone is "gamer." At the same time, "-er" words are used by enthusiasts to describe enthusiasts. Not everyone who goes on one hiking or backpacking trip is automatically a "hiker" or a "backpacker," at least not as far as other hikers and backpackers are concerned; that descriptor is, among the enthusiasts who call themselves such, reserved for enthusiasts. If someone who was going on his first backpacking trip called himself a backpacker, he'd probably be corrected by other backpackers, re-dubbed a "novice backpacker" or "newbie backpacker." So, colloquially, not everyone is a "gamer;" that word is used by enthusiasts to describe enthusiasts.

So both sides are right and both sides are wrong; it just depends which paradigm you're using, and neither paradigm is definitively wrong... Isn't English fun?!

 

[LostTrigger]

The question you should be asking isn't "Is everyone a gamer?" The question you should be asking is "Why the hell does it matter so much to me?"

its an identity that is important to me that alot of people would rather it cease to exist or stretch it so that it covers people who dont even identify as a gamer

That sounds like a personal problem to me. You don't own the concept of gaming. You don't get to make the distinction.

I think this is the basic issue. Group identity is determined by a group, and the group of people playing video games now is huge. It happened pretty quickly too, so I understand why some who were left in the cold are upset.

As you say though, it's clearly a personal problem. Having a hard time or really wanting to control something doesn't make it so.

how is it a personal problem? its an identity for millions of people. making a gamer anyone who plays games isnt doing anything for the people who dont identify as a gamer. gamers are trying to stretch the word not none gamers.

 

[LostTrigger]

The question you should be asking isn't "Is everyone a gamer?" The question you should be asking is "Why the hell does it matter so much to me?"

its an identity that is important to me that alot of people would rather it cease to exist or stretch it so that it covers people who dont even identify as a gamer

That sounds like a personal problem to me. You don't own the concept of gaming. You don't get to make the distinction.

the distinction has been made already, people are trying to change it

 

[LostTrigger]

The dictionary defines being a gamer as someone who plays games but to alot of people(including gamers) it means being a gaming enthusiast. So yes were all technically "gamers". Yet when were talking about gamers we never refer to just anybody who plays games. We mean(ofcourse this isnt for everyone im generalizing) the people who stay up all night playing wow, or the people who grind for 10 hours in final fantasy etc. Im not trying to exclude anyone from being a gamer but alot of people want "gamer" to be a label for anyone who games(regardless of there age, what they play, or even if they identify as a gamer) when for alot of people being a gamer is an identity, its more than just playing games and they dont really want to be grouped in with the same people who dont share that much of an interest in the hobby. Im mostly fine with anyone being a gamer as long as we still stick with the terms casual and hardcore gamer to differentiate the two groups.

Opinion?

Words are silly. Especially English words, because English is a silly language.

Adding -er to a simple verb does mean "one who does." So, by the literal definition, just about everyone is "gamer." At the same time, "-er" words are used by enthusiasts to describe enthusiasts. Not everyone who goes on one hiking or backpacking trip is automatically a "hiker" or a "backpacker," at least not as far as other hikers and backpackers are concerned; that descriptor is, among the enthusiasts who call themselves such, reserved for enthusiasts. If someone who was going on his first backpacking trip called himself a backpacker, he'd probably be corrected by other backpackers, re-dubbed a "novice backpacker" or "newbie backpacker." So, colloquially, not everyone is a "gamer;" that word is used by enthusiasts to describe enthusiasts.

So both sides are right and both sides are wrong; it just depends which paradigm you're using, and neither paradigm is definitively wrong... Isn't English fun?!

this person gets it.

 

[LostTrigger]

but what does that do for the people who dont identify as a gamer who you want to make a gamer?

What?

what does making everyone a gamer do for the people who dont identify as a gamer? the same way if you didnt identify as a reader what would you gain from your teacher calling you a reader?

and you said a runner is someone who runs, so why is it that everyone runs but doesnt identify as a runner? when you add "er" to a word you (in alot of cases i wont say all) mean the act of doing something or someone who is enthusiastic about doing it like another user said. everyone who has hiked for any length of time is a hiker but only those who are enthusiast will identify as one. I dont have a problem with both definitions its just when you start trying to make both definitions one or change the identity to mean a general term.

 

[McMarbles]

The question you should be asking isn't "Is everyone a gamer?" The question you should be asking is "Why the hell does it matter so much to me?"

its an identity that is important to me that alot of people would rather it cease to exist or stretch it so that it covers people who dont even identify as a gamer

That sounds like a personal problem to me. You don't own the concept of gaming. You don't get to make the distinction.

the distinction has been made already, people are trying to change it

Who made the distinction, and who gave them authority to make it?

 

[McMarbles]

I don't think this is rocket science. If games are a significant part of your life then you might want to call yourself a gamer. If not, then I doubt you'd even use that term. This seems like an excuse to justify the shit said in GAD articles, which like it or not, was an attack on ALL gamers.

I didn't feel attacked.

 

[McMarbles]

I don't think this is rocket science. If games are a significant part of your life then you might want to call yourself a gamer. If not, then I doubt you'd even use that term. This seems like an excuse to justify the shit said in GAD articles, which like it or not, was an attack on ALL gamers.

I didn't feel attacked.

We're all entitled to our feelings.

Unless we're "not gamers", apparently.