No Right Answer: Are Gamers Dead?

[mmiki]

Just for the sake of argument, these are the games that I played the most for the last few months:

-X-Com Enemy Within with Long War Mod. The closest you will get to a AAA title on this list. The mod is simply brilliant and brings it closer to an authentic X-Com experience than the vanilla ever was.

-Wasteland 2. Old style RPG, the kind that big publishers told us isn't viable. Not perfect but I got what I wanted out of it.

-Endless Legend. Brilliant 4x game. If it wasn't for Civ: Beyond Earth coming out it would be the best strategy game of the year in my book. This way, I'll have to wait to see if the new Civ is any good.

-Europa Barbarorum 2 mod for Medieval 2: Kingdoms. A total remake of the ancient world around 270 bc made by actual historians (and not wikipedia like the Total War games). 7 years in the making, it's still in beta and missing a lot of stuff but early signs are very promising.

-Sunless Sea - still in Early Access. Impressed me enough that I dropped money on it even though I never did on something that's in early access before. I got into Fallen London, the browser game that is it's predecessor and it's awesome. They both are actually, although I would wait with purchasing Sunless Sea as it's missing too much story to be truly enjoyable.

-TOME (Tales of Maj'Eyal) - tactical rpg roguelike, game I invested 1200 hours in. It's always getting new stuff. There's DLC announced that I'm very excited about.

-DCSS (Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup) - recently got a new version, it got more streamlined which I approve of.

Behold, the horrible world of filthy consumerism. Where there's so much interesting non-AAA stuff to play our gaming backlogs now have an index page.

 

[Louzerman102]

I find sports fan(atic)s to be much more rabid when it comes to opinions than the average gamer but socially being a fan of sports is more acceptable than being a someone who enjoys and plays video games. Sports fan and gamer is the same thing for different mediums. It's a broad term that says this person enjoys this. Sports fans watch whatever sport is in season and has a favorite out of all the teams and gamers play many different games and has favorites. There is no difference except what they are fans of. And yet being called a gamer is used as an insult by people who do not play games and used as some badge of honor by many who do.

Saying "I am a gamer" should be the same as "I am a sports fan". It should mean I enjoy playing games for my entertainment just like the other says I enjoy watching sports for my entertainment. It should never be used to define who you are as a person and yet it is used that way.

How can you compare the two activities!? Fanatic sports fans riot after wins, they also kill under-performing player in after game mobs, while video-gamers say mean things to women on the internet occasionally! The menace of the video-gamer must be stopped! MORE EXCLAMATION POINTS!! Think of the children!

 

[Shjade]

I'm a gamer. To me a gamer is someone who plays games, and who plays games and is a BIT more interested in the medium than playing farmville once a month.

I dont think the term is dead, but I dont think the term is very meaningful either. Its about as meaningful as "swimmer". Whats a swimmer all about? Living in pools and only drinking water and wearing trunks all the time?

One has to divide a person from a term. You cant sum up a person with one word. Its even hard to sum up a culture with one word. When I say gamer I guess a lot of people think about raging xbox kiddies or frothing cod players. They exist, but thats barely a subculture. In fact its even just a small part of a subculture. Gamers are just people. As diverse in any direction as any people with a particular hobby.

This is more or less the conversation I tried to have with someone on Twitter the other day re: the Leigh Alexander article. I'm a gamer, and I knew almost immediately that she wasn't talking about me. "Gamer" is not a term that exists in a vacuum; it's a descriptor of one aspect, one interest a person has, and a wide variety of people have that tag attached to them.

Honestly if this thing had started out as #HaterGate instead it would've been a lot clearer for everyone involved, if you ask me. More direct, more on point and less confused by the issue of who/what constitutes gamers and their extremely disparate interests and opinions.

 

[Silence]

Look. All this wouldn't be a problem if these articles were written in a way that says

"We shouldn't let trolls take over gamer culture"

and

"Trolls need to die"

Nobody would have cared. But if you give up the term "gamer" without a fight at all? Well, the people who still think they are gamers (and don't find themselves in the "I give up" definition) will feel insulted. Especially because most of them had long, long fights against mainstream media. You really can't blame someone to get emotional then.

You can't change the definition of a term while people identify with the term and expect no backlash. You just can't.

If someone would go out of their way and say "Metalheads is now a synonyme for Nazi, if you like Metal please use another term for yourself" they would get hate. Especially if it was written BY the people who write for metal magazines.

 

[Moosejaw]

The SJ approach to situations like these where you have a minority of people - individuals - engaging in terrible behavior is well documented and the result is the same. It appears to me that their idea is that we have some people who call themselves gamers being douchebags, so we will assign responsibility for the actions of individuals to this entire group. We will shame them via insulting the entire community and implying that it is the community's responsibility to police every single member that they have and that it will remain terrible until they do.

Here's the problem: this is the equivalent of punishing everybody in class when one kid breaks something and nobody will fess up to it. I guess the idea is that everybody will come down on the kid that did it and correct their behavior, but it's exactly as unfair and stupid when applied to adults in general society as it is in a classroom. If you attack an entire group, people will take it as an attack on them personally. Of course the SJs always have the caveat if you question them 'well if you aren't the person doing these things I'm not talking about you', but will continue to attack the 'gaming community' and never use phrases like 'some', 'a few', or even 'many'. Or they'll just mock you by responding with #notallgamers.

When you attack the 'gaming community' instead of the trolls, you will piss off some people that consider it an attack on them for something they didn't do and then they will attack you right back. That is the SJ operating procedure and they think it works, but all I think it'll do is make people really dislike SJ people. They are engaging in a messaging failure by refusing to quit generalizing the behavior of all gamers together or specifying they just mean the trolls, or they are engaging in collective punishment by attacking everybody and hoping they clamp down on the trolls.

 

[Elijah Newton]

"When you decline to create or to curate a culture in your spaces, you?re responsible for what spawns in the vacuum. That?s what?s been happening to games."

(http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224400/Gamers_dont_have_to_be_your_audience_Gamers_are_over.php)

I dug that article - that line jumped out at me when I read the article.

(I mean seriously, Leigh Alexander and inclusive in the same sentence?)

I don't believe her one minute when she says she's about being "inclusive". You only need to do a little digging to see why, if you even care. It has always been about pushing a political agenda. Games are no longer about fun. They should be judged on whether they have the right message rather than their merits. I can't imagine a worse gaming hell than one curated by people with these kinds of views.

Ugh. Dude or madam, discrediting like this "I don't believe...", "You only need to do a little digging..." is a lazy tactic. You're leaning on the trust of your readers because.. you're an anonymous source? C'mon. You or your stance has got to deserve better than this*. Cite your sources, please. Convince us she is not inclusive with quotes from the source (her).

For instance, I've liked quite a bit of what she's written and haven't found Ms. Alexander to not be inclusive. Her writeup about how she got into Netrunner ( http://www.shutupandsitdown.com/blog/post/test/ ) is one of my favorites and describes an kind of experience I wish more folks would have when starting new games. The arc goes from "it?s just a goddamn card game" to ?I want to learn not to freak out when I?m losing, and to work hard at things even if they grind me down? and ends with "It's a great feeling to have a hobby that looks so bizarre, yet to have so much fun that onlookers become jealous."

* FWIW, I've got no quarrel with you saying that's you "can't imagine a worse gaming hell." That's your opinion.

 

[Elijah Newton]

Hm. The flow of this thread seems to be to sweep this under the carpet - even me, by blaming trolls. While most of the gamers I know are good people, I would say the preconception of the gaming community as not being welcoming is valid. The environment in most multiplayer games is pretty toxic.

That probably has more to do with human nature and less to deal with 'being a gamer'. We like winning and we hate losing.

Sorry, but I can't accept that. Gamers play chess, monopoly, poker, and [insert various modern board games]. None of those gamers, in those games, accept toxic behavior which you're suggesting is just part of "human nature" when video games become the game medium.

I find sports fan(atic)s to be much more rabid when it comes to opinions than the average gamer but socially being a fan of sports is more acceptable than being a someone who enjoys and plays video games.

How can you compare the two activities!? Fanatic sports fans riot after wins, they also kill under-performing player in after game mobs, while video-gamers say mean things to women on the internet occasionally!

This is what I mean by gamers covering for trolls. When Louzerman102 writes "mean things to women on the internet" he or she is trivializing really egregious stuff. I hope I'm wrong - Louzerman102, please pipe up and clarify for me what you meant if I'm missing the point and "mean things to women on the internet" doesn't include rape and dismemberment threats, and all the etc etc that I'd like to move past as much as anyone else.

Except gamers keep covering for it.

_Gamers_ don't do these things. Trolls do these things.

Why are we (gamers) covering for trolls?

 

[VVThoughtBox]

Gamers are not dead: people are still choosing spend some money on a console and games to play for fun. They're just not choosing to purchase or play the indie games that critics love to gush about like "Gone Home" or "Depression Quest" because they're not interested in. I think game critics need to understand that people have different tastes in games just like they have different taste in food, clothing, and music.

 

[Louzerman102]

I find sports fan(atic)s to be much more rabid when it comes to opinions than the average gamer but socially being a fan of sports is more acceptable than being a someone who enjoys and plays video games.

How can you compare the two activities!? Fanatic sports fans riot after wins, they also kill under-performing player in after game mobs, while video-gamers say mean things to women on the internet occasionally!

This is what I mean by gamers covering for trolls. When Louzerman102 writes "mean things to women on the internet" he or she is trivializing really egregious stuff. I hope I'm wrong - Louzerman102, please pipe up and clarify for me what you meant if I'm missing the point and "mean things to women on the internet" doesn't include rape and dismemberment threats, and all the etc etc that I'd like to move past as much as anyone else.

Except gamers keep covering for it.

_Gamers_ don't do these things. Trolls do these things.

Why are we (gamers) covering for trolls?

At the time all I wanted to do is make a smart ass remark aka tongue in cheek remark on the internet. There wasn't that much of a point I was trying to get across, however there is an interesting topic to be had on spin and perspective here.

Personally I have always been interested by how a person skillful with words can twist tone and meaning into whatever they want, but that is a whole different conversation.

Anyway, I was comparing a pastime/activity/way of life called sports, something people have been killed over, to toxic behavior on the internet. Again I will stress, actually killed people to the threat of violence. Dead bodies to words. Words that are possible because the inherent structure and anonymity of the internet makes it the perfect environment to say hurtful words without follow-through. Gaming is in the middle of a moral panic, sexism on the internet existed before this and will exist after this. Most of the arguments I have seen focus entirely on gaming, ignoring that human sexuality is a massive issue in the film industry (along with racism), comics, and corporate business. My point is not to trivialize or cover for trolls it's to point out as a realist "how do I control the actions of people I don't even know?" is a really stupid question. I would also like to point out that you bit the bullet pretty hard on my smart ass comment, overlooking my point that people have died for sports to target the line about sexism, in a comment that joking trivialized death to focus on sexism.

Why are we (gamers) covering for trolls?

Why is it my duty to be a sword and shield for other people?

 

[Elijah Newton]

Louzerman102, please pipe up and clarify for me what you meant if I'm missing the point and "mean things to women on the internet" doesn't include rape and dismemberment threats, and all the etc etc that I'd like to move past as much as anyone else.

Except gamers keep covering for it.

_Gamers_ don't do these things. Trolls do these things.

Why are we (gamers) covering for trolls?

At the time all I wanted to do is make a smart ass remark aka tongue in cheek remark on the internet.

Personally I have always been interested by how a person skillful with words can twist tone and meaning into whatever they want, but that is a whole different conversation.

Before I go on, Louzerman102, I
a) dig that you were going after a tongue in cheek remark, a quick dig, and didn't mean anything by it.

and

b) that by reframing what you said I made it sound like you were saying something you hadn't meant. I've no doubt you're a good person who wouldn't tolerate rape and dismemberment threats in face to face conversation.

And I appreciate that you took the time to clarify your position. You didn't have to and you did, and that was really cool to have done.

Anyway, I was comparing a pastime/activity/way of life called sports, something people have been killed over, to toxic behavior on the internet. Again I will stress, actually killed people to the threat of violence.

I'm with you as far as the insanity of sports fans, by the way. Comparing violence in sports with civility in gaming seems a bit apples and oranges to me, though they are both game-related. I think it's possible to recognize both as undesireable behavior, but blah blah blah I'd be lying if I didn't see the humor in what you posted. Certainly I can't write a joke to save my life, so I'm not throwing stones about humor.

My point is not to trivialize or cover for trolls it's to point out as a realist "how do I control the actions of people I don't even know?" is a really stupid question.

Why are we (gamers) covering for trolls?

Why is it my duty to be a sword and shield for other people?

Whoa whoa whoa. You've got a couple assumptions going on there that I'm pretty sure I didn't say. I'm not trying to get you to control the actions of people. Nor am I exhorting you to protect others.

This is about us, you and me. Gamers.

If mass media rightly or wrongly equates gamers with trolls... shouldn't we, as gamers, stand up for ourselves and say, boldly! and with one voice, "Um, no."

And then shuffle our feet a little before clarifying, "You want the trolls, they're completely different. We think that shit's crazy out of line."

You could've said anything about gamers in your statement, but you specifically went to "say mean things to women on the internet." C'mon, man/ma'am, can't you see how that reads as specifically trivializing threatening and sexist behavior? Trivializing that stuff covers for trolls.

Which we, as gamers, really ought not be doing.

I would also like to point out that you bit the bullet pretty hard on my smart ass comment, overlooking my point that people have died for sports to target the line about sexism, in a comment that joking trivialized death to focus on sexism.

Touché, inasmuch as my response was an elaborate reaction to a small comment. I don't feel so badly about moving the discussion back towards sexism and away from death in sports as the 'gamergate' thing (which prompted the "Are Gamers Dead?" discussion) had more to do with the former than the latter.

Anyway, look. This is waaaay more than I write about anything almost ever. I appreciate you letting me get this off my chest and I apologize for singling you out - your quote just happened to catch my eye. At this point, for what it's worth, you're welcome to the last word on the topic. The floor is yours.

 

[Louzerman102]

Louzerman102, please pipe up and clarify for me what you meant if I'm missing the point and "mean things to women on the internet" doesn't include rape and dismemberment threats, and all the etc etc that I'd like to move past as much as anyone else.

Except gamers keep covering for it.

_Gamers_ don't do these things. Trolls do these things.

Why are we (gamers) covering for trolls?

At the time all I wanted to do is make a smart ass remark aka tongue in cheek remark on the internet.

Personally I have always been interested by how a person skillful with words can twist tone and meaning into whatever they want, but that is a whole different conversation.

Before I go on, Louzerman102, I
a) dig that you were going after a tongue in cheek remark, a quick dig, and didn't mean anything by it.

and

b) that by reframing what you said I made it sound like you were saying something you hadn't meant. I've no doubt you're a good person who wouldn't tolerate rape and dismemberment threats in face to face conversation.

And I appreciate that you took the time to clarify your position. You didn't have to and you did, and that was really cool to have done.

Anyway, I was comparing a pastime/activity/way of life called sports, something people have been killed over, to toxic behavior on the internet. Again I will stress, actually killed people to the threat of violence.

I'm with you as far as the insanity of sports fans, by the way. Comparing violence in sports with civility in gaming seems a bit apples and oranges to me, though they are both game-related. I think it's possible to recognize both as undesireable behavior, but blah blah blah I'd be lying if I didn't see the humor in what you posted. Certainly I can't write a joke to save my life, so I'm not throwing stones about humor.

My point is not to trivialize or cover for trolls it's to point out as a realist "how do I control the actions of people I don't even know?" is a really stupid question.

Why are we (gamers) covering for trolls?

Why is it my duty to be a sword and shield for other people?

Whoa whoa whoa. You've got a couple assumptions going on there that I'm pretty sure I didn't say. I'm not trying to get you to control the actions of people. Nor am I exhorting you to protect others.

This is about us, you and me. Gamers.

If mass media rightly or wrongly equates gamers with trolls... shouldn't we, as gamers, stand up for ourselves and say, boldly! and with one voice, "Um, no."

And then shuffle our feet a little before clarifying, "You want the trolls, they're completely different. We think that shit's crazy out of line."

I was did something I should not have done with this control line here. I used your response to talk about my opinion on the entire discussion instead of making a response to you specifically. I am also talking around your point a lot by driving at what I consider one of the main issues here. Louzerman102 is obviously not my real name, so what is the benefit of good behavior when it applies to a removable internet persona?

What you are suggesting is proper social etiquette which is good and would be used at all times in a proper world. The issue is the "gamers are dead" articles all had a specific bias, and gaming itself is struggling against an ingrained stereotype. A large amount of people are stating "the actions of the Trolls do not represent us" and have been saying that for years. Those people were deliberately ignored to spin the situation, and ties back into my spinning of words point earlier. To me the groups that want to argue Gamers are terrible people will continue that argument regardless of the actions of the whole group. To be fair, I personally dislike that those articles were written, however I also understand the authors believed they were stating "we are better than this" to a certain extent.

This part is rather off topic. I have always wanted but have never been able to use the question, Is Romeo and Juliet a timeless tale of tragic love or is it a horrible influence that promotes pre-martial sex, child endangerment and statutory rape? (Juliet is 14)

To get back on topic:

You could've said anything about gamers in your statement, but you specifically went to "say mean things to women on the internet." C'mon, man/ma'am, can't you see how that reads as specifically trivializing threatening and sexist behavior? Trivializing that stuff covers for trolls.

Which we, as gamers, really ought not be doing.

Trying to look at a topic from "the big picture" is very close to trivializing the topic. Talking specifically about a topic is very close to losing "the big picture." I was trying to make a joke about perspective not trivialize the act of internet threats or the hurtfulness of internet sexism. I also agree that gamers should not protect Trolls, however as Gaming increases in popularity the number of people who are toxic will increase along with the number of total people playing games.

I would also like to point out that you bit the bullet pretty hard on my smart ass comment, overlooking my point that people have died for sports to target the line about sexism, in a comment that joking trivialized death to focus on sexism.

Touché, inasmuch as my response was an elaborate reaction to a small comment. I don't feel so badly about moving the discussion back towards sexism and away from death in sports as the 'gamergate' thing (which prompted the "Are Gamers Dead?" discussion) had more to do with the former than the latter.

Anyway, look. This is waaaay more than I write about anything almost ever. I appreciate you letting me get this off my chest and I apologize for singling you out - your quote just happened to catch my eye. At this point, for what it's worth, you're welcome to the last word on the topic. The floor is yours.

I completely understand because I did the same thing, and I am not that vocal or active of a community member here, I wrote a lot more on this topic than what I expected. Also I don't really feel singled out considering the reply/quote system is kinda structured to single a post out. Lastly I just noticed I wrote joking instead of jokingly and that really bugs me.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

dose fedoras tho'

gamers, as in people who play and enjoy games, people who get really involved in the gaming industry, is not going away in the near future, i mean even assuming that all these people are meanies, there is going to be a bunch of nerds who want to know the lastest trend in games, and i knwo this because it happens in comics, it happens in film, this sort of people exist in every form of entertainment

which makes it all the more baffling when the people arguing gamers are dead, come from sites that PROVIDE information about the lastest trends in gaming

is like, if apple said people who boy iphones and ipads are a bunch of dirty hipsters

one thing that bothers me is the people who take... maybe too much pride about being a gamer, call everyone with tastes different from them non-gamers, etc. we could use a lil bit less of that

and yes im all for both sides being more inclusive, in essence i dont oppose the ideas of "diversity" of the other side, what i dont want is to see devs being shamed and insulted for their artistic decisions, and we shouldnt argue a game is bad because the character is a white straight male or something like that, instead, lets make more games, of all kinds, from the senran kaguras, to the gone homes, and the people in chargue of critizing games should be ALWAYS transparent while doing so

 

[Aesir23]

I have to admit that I find myself amused at the bit about gaming being in the basement. Primarily because I literally am a basement-dwelling gamer due to my living room being the worst place in the house to play games.

"Nerd Militant" is my new favorite title. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

*rubs eyes* Jeebus please-us, I thought I'd never see the day when I'd say this but man I wish gamers had half the social grace of goths and punks when it comes to the phrase, "[our subculture] is dead." The former saw the humor in it and laughed it off, and the latter didn't care. Both subcultures are fine (for varying values of fine). As is ours.

Everywhere I see gamers pissing and moaning. Because I self-identify as a gamer, so here's my two cents : it's not the media that I see abusing the term, it's the trolls who appropriate it that get to me. The gamers I know don't need defending. The behavior of trolls doesn't warrant defending. But for reasons which are opaque to me I keep seeing gamers defend trolls.

For me, that is the line on which 'gamer' as a word and something with which I identify. When my hobby gets linked with /4chan and not Child's Play, I don't want to be know for it.

The wailing that games might start self-censoring because the target audience widens is scarcely less off-putting. All my life I've been trying to get people to play games because I've wanted to spread the happiness they've given me. But I know not everyone's got the same taste so yeah, as more folks come to the market designers are going to shift what they're making. Some of that won't be to my taste. Fine. There will still be something for everyone.

The popularization of vampires lead to Meyers writing Twilight for the masses, but Lindqvist wrote Let the Right One In. I don't care about (or for) the former, but I'm glad the genre got big enough to give me a chance to read the latter.

As for my feelings regarding the whole matter, I'd say this sums it up much more clearly and far more eloquently than I could ever manage.

 

[Wulfram77]

For one, the article does not make any kind of distinction.

Sure it does.

The distinction made is between bad old (gamer) audience and good new audience. No distinction between good gamer and bad gamer, they all go joyfully onto the trash keep. And Ms Alexander makes it pretty clear how she defines a gamer, and it's got absolutely nothing to do with misogyny, sexism, harassment or any of that.

 

[Spyre2k]

I see Gamer as being synonymous with fan. This is much the same way sports fans identify themselves. Someone can occasionally watch a football game with friends or family but they don't really pay attention to all the stats, roosters, and match up details. Those people wouldn't really consider themselves fans it's just something they enjoy with others from time to time.


For a comparison to another media such as movies I don't think there is an appropriate term other than maybe Movie Aficionado. Where someone who goes nearly every week to see the latest films of the sheer enjoyment (as oppose to a critic who does it for work) vs someone who may only go every other month or so to see the few titles they are interested in. So for games I think Gamer is pretty much taken to mean Gaming Aficionado.


For those who many not know the term:

afi·cio·na·do
noun \ə-ˌfi-sh(ē-)ə-ˈnä-(&#716dō, -fē-, -sē-ə-\

: a person who likes, knows about, and appreciates a usually fervently pursued interest or activity : devotee


This I think is how many gamers see themselves and if you don't have the passion like a true aficionado then you are not a gamer. But that doesn't mean you can't enjoy a game now and then, just like you don't have to be a movie aficionado to enjoy a good movie from time to time.

And if you look at the use of the term it has pretty much always been focused around that core meaning. The negative stereotypes got added on as a way to denigrate the past time as it was viewed in a negative light by the main stream. And I even recall growing up some people who may like a game or two when they played it but they didn't identify as gamers because it was a casual thing they only did on occasion with friends and knew very little about the overall gaming culture.

But now that nerd culture has become cool a lot of people want to wear the badge of gamer to appear "cool" without actually learning about it and diving into it to understanding the culture. This is what turns off a lot of people as you would get a similar reaction from any fandom if you did that. Try saying your a huge fan of some sports team without knowing most of the players names or positions and then striking up a conversation with someone who does. Your fraud will be seen as such and it will speak volumes on your character which will put people off.

The problem in gaming culture though is you do have some sexist jerks and general assholes out there who like to spew their hate speech and the Media is all to happy to capitalize on these incidents to continue to perpetuate the negative stereotypes of the anti-social Gamer.

 

[sleekie]

I think pertinent question is less "are gamers dead" and more "is gaming journalism dead"?

 

[JET1971]

I find sports fan(atic)s to be much more rabid when it comes to opinions than the average gamer but socially being a fan of sports is more acceptable than being a someone who enjoys and plays video games.

How can you compare the two activities!? Fanatic sports fans riot after wins, they also kill under-performing player in after game mobs, while video-gamers say mean things to women on the internet occasionally!

This is what I mean by gamers covering for trolls. When Louzerman102 writes "mean things to women on the internet" he or she is trivializing really egregious stuff. I hope I'm wrong - Louzerman102, please pipe up and clarify for me what you meant if I'm missing the point and "mean things to women on the internet" doesn't include rape and dismemberment threats, and all the etc etc that I'd like to move past as much as anyone else.

Except gamers keep covering for it.

_Gamers_ don't do these things. Trolls do these things.

Why are we (gamers) covering for trolls?

At the time all I wanted to do is make a smart ass remark aka tongue in cheek remark on the internet. There wasn't that much of a point I was trying to get across, however there is an interesting topic to be had on spin and perspective here.

Personally I have always been interested by how a person skillful with words can twist tone and meaning into whatever they want, but that is a whole different conversation.

Anyway, I was comparing a pastime/activity/way of life called sports, something people have been killed over, to toxic behavior on the internet. Again I will stress, actually killed people to the threat of violence. Dead bodies to words. Words that are possible because the inherent structure and anonymity of the internet makes it the perfect environment to say hurtful words without follow-through. Gaming is in the middle of a moral panic, sexism on the internet existed before this and will exist after this. Most of the arguments I have seen focus entirely on gaming, ignoring that human sexuality is a massive issue in the film industry (along with racism), comics, and corporate business. My point is not to trivialize or cover for trolls it's to point out as a realist "how do I control the actions of people I don't even know?" is a really stupid question. I would also like to point out that you bit the bullet pretty hard on my smart ass comment, overlooking my point that people have died for sports to target the line about sexism, in a comment that joking trivialized death to focus on sexism.

Why are we (gamers) covering for trolls?

Why is it my duty to be a sword and shield for other people?

My point was that being a sports fan is socially acceptable and calling yourself a gamer is not and it should be. I wasn't making a connection between violence from sports and sexism from gamer trolls, you added that.

My other point being sports fans are more rabid than gamers. Yes there have been riots and murder over who won what game or being a fan of a particular team amongst fans of another. I got to see a guy get his nose broke because he was wearing a team hat that the other person hated. being a sports fan is socially acceptable and often if you are not you are socially outcast.

There is also plenty of sexism in sports, nobody bothers talking about that. Super Bowl, World cup, World series... What about a female version of those getting the same coverage? Will never happen, sports are male dominated and female athletes, teams, leagues are second class compared to the male counterparts. But being a sports fan is socially acceptable and the blatant sexism is as well.

I think pertinent question is less "are gamers dead" and more "is gaming journalism dead"?

No more than movie, music, sports, TV, whatever is. Rave reviews for a game surrounded by ads for that game might be a thing of the past, and If I see ads for that game on the same site as the review then I wont read the review because to me it is a paid advertisement.

 

[Reasonable Atheist]

I cannot think of a single rational reason to care about this. The words "dance puppets dance" keep coming to mind.

 

[nightazday]

Really the end result is that game journalism is kinda, garbage. Stemming from the fact that journalist keep trying to present themselves as the representatives of gamers yet always seeking for vilify them in some form.

The redefinitions they give are just stereotypes, treat them as you would any stereotype. There have been many times when people regarded media portrayals of my race as the definition of said race, but everyone knows it's just a stereotype and that not all or even most of my race as like that. Same with gamers and the stereotypes brought to them.