Why do gamers lash out against gamers so much?

[DugMachine]

Ugh the TF2 buying keys/hats thing. Pretty dumb how looked down upon you are for having a "dirty" hat or whatever. Sorry, my idea of fun in the game is shooting people and looking funny/cool. Not sitting in trade servers for hours haggling with people for prices/trading metal. Not much else to say on the topic. People are assholes because they can't accept someone might like something they don't, which is very childish and they're not worth your time.

 

[EyeReaper]

Hey. To be fair, I had a really really good reason to lash out at that guy. We had a different opinion and everything.

Anyways, like the others have said, it's the anonymity of the internet. It's much easier to say that all the people who play madden are retards behind an avatar than it is walking into the gathering hall at the local frat house and saying the same shit during their xbox party.

 

[BishopofAges]

I've always figured it's because we're like the Scottish.

It took be a bit to find this one, but I got you covered:

Spoiler

I hope my spoiler works, if not I will be editing.

I always like to keep a open mind to my fellow man and by extension, my fellow gamer-subtype people. Sure there are some things I might not do myself, such as buying keys in TF2 or grinding for hours in an MMO for a .01% drop chance item. I do respect people who make those decisions, because how else does one trade for a key in TF2 if no one bought them initially? How does one find out about special items, rare chances, or strange quests unless they hear about someone who made it their mission to do so.

Now as for life choices other gamers make, the only ones I cannot respect is on-mic/recording/chat racism/sexism/homophobia. To me, personally, those are three of the most useless things to be in today's world.

Other than that, go ahead use an weapon considered the "Noob tube", crash a Heavy sandvich picnic in TF2, Raid like no one is watching, and mailbox dance like you don't need the money!

 

[Ulquiorra4sama]

"Look at all you mindless sheeple! Why don't you have MY opinion? The RIGHT opinion!" That's how i imagine a lot of the mindset works.

Some people apparently haven't noticed that in the real world opinions are just a personal preference that you might share with some people, but definitely won't share with everyone. The same people apparently having missed the idea that different opinions can be very nice (cultural diversity and all) and so long as that opinion isn't causing anyone any distress or physical damage then there's definitely no need for open assault against it.

It's why i find the term console "wars" very accurate and very depressing. If "gamers" is the top of the umbrella then the branches stretching down will be the different consoles and the PC which are all at war with each other, only because they don't want to associate with each other in their own public eye anymore and it's all tearing the communities apart.

If anything's ruining gaming as an industry it's not the person buying a different console or game from you, but rather it's you for whining about it and making him whine right back at you until it's all been blown completely out of proportion.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I tease people who buy consoles at launch not because I don't like them. I tease (or sometimes mock) them because it's a rather terrible idea from a logical standpoint. I'm not even really mocking them, but more the choice itself.

I'd mock the guy who decided he wanted the first hovercar so badly that he bought the first one off the line. I mock him because he's most likely got a terribly running, shoddy hovercar that smashes into the ground on several occasions because they hadn't yet worked out the kinks with the hover technology. I mock his choice because he didn't have the wherewithal to exercise some self control and THINK.

People who buy consoles on the first day are basically PAYING to be beta testers, in my opinion, something that the companies should do THEMSELVES. They are willingly saying "I want to gamble my hard earned money on the chance that my system won't crap out within weeks of buying it, and I know that the chances of it doing so are SIGNIFICANTLY higher than if I wait a few weeks." Why would you WILLINGLY handicap your chances like that? To be the first person to own a certain game system? So what? It's not like it's a tray of deviled eggs at a dinner party and once they run out, there won't be any more.

Some people just want to get the new shiny, and there's nothing wrong with that. We all have things we know we shouldn't buy, but we do anyway because we simply want them. And it's okay to tease people about this behaviour -- I do it with my sister all the time when she buys another pair of shoes -- just don't act all smug and self satisfied about it.

And it was this smugness that I was sensing in the comments section of news articles about the PS4 launch. People acting all high and mighty that they weren't going to buy one at launch and that anyone who did was just a mindless sheep.

You'd think that for every launch system sold an orphaned baby gets fed to the dogs.

 

[Compatriot Block]

Don't forget buying a console at launch.

You dare to do that and you might as well have a swastika tattooed on your forehead.

I tease people who buy consoles at launch not because I don't like them. I tease (or sometimes mock) them because it's a rather terrible idea from a logical standpoint. I'm not even really mocking them, but more the choice itself.

I'd mock the guy who decided he wanted the first hovercar so badly that he bought the first one off the line. I mock him because he's most likely got a terribly running, shoddy hovercar that smashes into the ground on several occasions because they hadn't yet worked out the kinks with the hover technology. I mock his choice because he didn't have the wherewithal to exercise some self control and THINK.

People who buy consoles on the first day are basically PAYING to be beta testers, in my opinion, something that the companies should do THEMSELVES. They are willingly saying "I want to gamble my hard earned money on the chance that my system won't crap out within weeks of buying it, and I know that the chances of it doing so are SIGNIFICANTLY higher than if I wait a few weeks." Why would you WILLINGLY handicap your chances like that? To be the first person to own a certain game system? So what? It's not like it's a tray of deviled eggs at a dinner party and once they run out, there won't be any more.

Well, if nobody eats the deviled eggs when they get put out, the chef is going to assume that nobody wants the eggs, so they will drop all future egg support and consider the deviled eggs a dead entree.

What I'm saying is, making fun of people who eat the first eggs isn't really fair when they're the ones who are making sure that more eggs are made in the future. Not everybody can wait until the second dinner, see?

 

[FalloutJack]

Because they're incredibly insecure about themselves.

.....

What? It didn't have to be a complex answer!

 

[RedRockRun]

In-group mentality. People love to be in groups, and hating people who one considers to be inferior instills a cheap sense of strength and camaraderie. When Jack Thompson is frothing at the mouth against Rockstar, gamers can be united against him and other similar-minded politicians, but in the meantime it's Sony vs Microsoft, Microsoft vs Everyone, Hardcore vs Nintendo casual, PC vs Console, Modern FPS vs Fast FPS, Modern vs Retro, Multiplayer Hardcore vs Single Player Hardcore, RPG vs JRPG, CoD vs Battlefield, Indie vs Mainstream, and just about anything else people can form a group over. People want to feel justified in their opinions/interests/affinities, and the easiest way to feel like you're right is to accuse someone holding the opposite opinion as being wrong. Why does this happen so much in gaming as opposed to TV though? Because gaming is in itself, a competitive environment. The player is immersed in conflict with AI, other players, puzzles, or themselves. It makes sense to me that these people would naturally be primed to fight.

 

[Yopaz]

People who buy consoles on the first day are basically PAYING to be beta testers, in my opinion, something that the companies should do THEMSELVES. They are willingly saying "I want to gamble my hard earned money on the chance that my system won't crap out within weeks of buying it, and I know that the chances of it doing so are SIGNIFICANTLY higher than if I wait a few weeks." Why would you WILLINGLY handicap your chances like that? To be the first person to own a certain game system? So what? It's not like it's a tray of deviled eggs at a dinner party and once they run out, there won't be any more.

People aren't really paying to be beta testers, if you've ever tried beta testing you would have known that the few glitches that are usually (there are exceptions) allowed to slip through is nothing compared to those that are there before the beta testing is done. What's funny is that contrary to your belief the failure rate of both GameCube and the Wii got higher a few years down the line while the first few batches that were made were actually the one that held the longest. There have been the red ring of death and a few reported incidents with the current gen consoles (some caused because someone didn't follow instructions) and that is what you call beta testing?

I also find your devilled egg analogy to be quite silly. I've been to several dinner parties and I often come across something that tastes really amazing. Obviously I would want to eat that while it's still there because others might also discover how amazing it tastes and it often runs out before the less tasty dishes. Now who knows if they are going to make more or not? Sometimes they won't and you can't be certain when you'll get the chance to taste that the next time or if it's going to be as good the next time. If a console sells out then that would make it quite successful and it will be produced to the same specs so it will be more or less identical.

OT: Gamers do what pretty much any other group does on the internet. We're anonymous, our words won't come back to haunt us so we can take out our aggression and annoyance by lashing out whenever someone buys a new console or likes a game we don't like.

 

[Guffe]

Because it's BIG!!!

Remember, games is one (if not) the biggest medium today with a lot of interaction between people.
People have different taste in things and some don't understand this = stupid argumentation.

Games have a lot to discuss and since it is so big people have a lot of arguments and thoughts about things and therefor we start to "flame" eachother. I mean just about games we have consoles, different genres, graphics, characters etc and all this can be discussed.
Then there is the feminism thing going on and a lot of other things games bring up that can be a center of discussion.

It's the same when you check out the music business. I mean we have everything from old school 60s Rock, classical music, Rap to the Pop/Disco/Techno thing that is popular today.
And as a Rock/Heavy fan, the discussions in just that one genre alone is too much for me to bear.

So, because the industry of games is so large it is, it brings all kinds of different people, and very seldom a big group of people get along well together. Especially since we are only connected by gaming, then we all have our own lives and thoughts about everything else.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

snip

It's one of the reasons I've learned to just not say anything without heavily clarifying it. I'll also add to the 'anomimity = dickhead theory', why else would people get really fucking angry if they ahd to use their real name on websites (aside from if you are a girl and are subject to unwanted attention of the pervy variety).

 

[Shymer]

Why are gamers so eager to tear each other apart the second someone says or does something that disagrees with how they see the world no matter how small or minor it is?

I believe it comes down to human nature. Although disputed, Maslow's hierarchy of needs suggests that once the basics of human needs (water, food, shelter etc.) are met, people need acceptance, belonging - a sense of being part of a group or community.

If we consider the mechanics of this natural 'tribalism' - it would involve the identification of people who are inside the group, and then reinforcement of the bonds of that tribe by repeated assertions of compliance with the group, and repeated denegration of those outside the group. We are not talking about one tribe here - each individual will identify with many nested and over-lapping communities.

Most of us here would consider ourselves part of the group "gamer". When there is a threat to the group, we band together in mutual support and denegration of non-gamers.

The scale and nature of the denegration is heavily dependent on the individual and the medium. Internet forums are both one-to-one, but with an audience - but it is also anonymous, remote and "safe". A bit like the nature of road rage - the distance from the target of a negative comment, and the presence of an audience which people wish to appeal to either positively or negatively, does create an environment where people feel at liberty to write things about others they would not likely say to their face - or in polite company.

Combine that with the written word's tendency to be misunderstood and mis-interpreted, and the nature of young people to respond more emotionally, than logically...

In short - it should be no surprise that forums end up like they are - boiling pots of emotion fueled by a desire to belong - and sort people into those in the same tribes, or other tribes. It's just human nature. Nothing to be depressed about.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

snip

real name on websites

Because people do not like being identifiable to a host of murderous fucks. Or scientologists. Or marketeers. Or people in general they never had any contact with.
Dude, i am not goign around a demo or the street yelling my name to everyone, so why would i want it to happen when i am on a forum?

Your thesis about anonymity breeding dickery is also patently false, there are plenty off dicks who are freely handing out personal information.

Just look at congress. Any congress.
Plenty dicks, all dangling in the open.
Or Tv. Or Life.


Anonymity on the internets serves the protection of personal data, data which easily can be missused in a number of ways starting from prank pizza calls to assault, rape, murder and all the other crimes. Oh and all sorts of online-business also. Your name is the easiest way to figure out more about you.
We had several killings over ingame items already, but that were peeople who knew each other. Now imagine EVE online not being fought by people on the internet with internet spaceships but by guys in a parking lot with knives. They found their victims because a real name rule was in place. Would you feel safe doing anything online if you were easily idetifiable by ANYONE?!

I will pick a million pricks going off the rails in a rant post over the chance of getting seriously fucked by being forced to display my real name.

Its bad enough companys and government agencys more and more turn us into glass citizens, having that extended to being transparent to the average joe is flat out disgusting.

My mistake. I forgot that some pleople are insane. I've personally never come across death threats and the like, so I suppose I'm in the minority.
Also I live very remotley, so I don't think any psycho's would be that possesed to kill me, but then they're psycho and their actions lack realitic consequences.

Personally it all sort of reeks of some paranoia, that I've personally never had much investment in myself to care. I tend to go through life giving zero fucks... but that's just me.

 

[DanielBrown]

Because they're incredibly insecure about themselves.

.....

What? It didn't have to be a complex answer!

Yep, that would be my answer as well. Extreme insecurity + anonomity of the internet = major douchebags. They can finally vent their frustration with no consequenses.

 

[Reduced_Silver]

Anonymity and no consequences for your actions.

Plus, the written word is not great for dynamic discussions.

 

[blackrave]

Of course arguing and verbally attacking someone over the internet is pointless
I think everyone understands this (or so I thought)
For me discussions and arguments over the internet serves only as mental sparring
Whenever I write something snarky or insensitive, I expect someone going against me and stating why my jokes aren't funny or why am I wrong/stupid
Sadly I often receive warnings without any form of response prior to that
It seems there are plenty of sensitive flowers who abuse report button, by reporting anything they don't like
And that is something I don't understand
For me "Flag for review" button is something reserved only for the most severe cases, not bad jokes and insensitive/insulting opinions
Even when my opposition receives warning I don't like it, especially when reporting was unnecessary
So please feel free to wipe the forum floor with my sorry ass, whenever I write some BS you don't like
And please, for a love of non-existing god, don't act like JD (imaginary Cox represents moderators in this scene)
.
.
.
Em, what were we talking about?
Ah, yes. Gamers vs. gamers.
I think it is because we are human beings and humans like a little occasional infighting
I think that is the way how to keep ourselves at peek condition and ready whenever real threat appears

 

[MrHide-Patten]

snip

real name on websites

Because people do not like being identifiable to a host of murderous fucks. Or scientologists. Or marketeers. Or people in general they never had any contact with.
Dude, i am not goign around a demo or the street yelling my name to everyone, so why would i want it to happen when i am on a forum?

Your thesis about anonymity breeding dickery is also patently false, there are plenty off dicks who are freely handing out personal information.

Just look at congress. Any congress.
Plenty dicks, all dangling in the open.
Or Tv. Or Life.


Anonymity on the internets serves the protection of personal data, data which easily can be missused in a number of ways starting from prank pizza calls to assault, rape, murder and all the other crimes. Oh and all sorts of online-business also. Your name is the easiest way to figure out more about you.
We had several killings over ingame items already, but that were peeople who knew each other. Now imagine EVE online not being fought by people on the internet with internet spaceships but by guys in a parking lot with knives. They found their victims because a real name rule was in place. Would you feel safe doing anything online if you were easily idetifiable by ANYONE?!

I will pick a million pricks going off the rails in a rant post over the chance of getting seriously fucked by being forced to display my real name.

Its bad enough companys and government agencys more and more turn us into glass citizens, having that extended to being transparent to the average joe is flat out disgusting.

My mistake. I forgot that some pleople are insane. I've personally never come across death threats and the like, so I suppose I'm in the minority.
Also I live very remotley, so I don't think any psycho's would be that possesed to kill me, but then they're psycho and their actions lack realitic consequences.

Personally it all sort of reeks of some paranoia, that I've personally never had much investment in myself to care. I tend to go through life giving zero fucks... but that's just me.

Yes. That is just you. And since you give no fucks, why exactly are you here arguing?

I wasn't arguing, my original point is that being anonymous is a greater incentive for dickish behavour. To which, I never act under the assumption that I'm anonymous, to the point that I use the exact same username for every site (despite the obvious spelling error).

My final statemnet was a bit broad, zero fucks to my personal well being.