a gamer is someone who has bought and played a game being it wii sports operation flashpoint or halo so in summary casual gamers are gamers butt people who only play facebook games are not
Yes, They're Gamers, Too
- Thread starter Susan Arendt
- Start date
I'm tempted to believe that this Jun-Kai Teoh isn't a gamer. I'm currently trying to view his article, but it sounds like gaming stopped being fun for him quite a while ago if he's this upset over "casual" gaming. Considering the stigma that videogames have had for so long, since when have we had something to prove to other people?
If gaming is not fun, you are not a gamer.
If gaming is not fun, you are not a gamer.
You know what? Thank you for the article Susan. You may have been preaching to the converted but you tried.
I love seeing everyone freaking out... "I can't beat Mega Man either BAWWWW SOMEONE REAFFIRM ME AS A GAMER!!"
I don't know how many of you guys play the facebook games and other casual titles in question. A friend of mine actually works in the casual games industry with a few facebook titles to his credit. The requirements sheets for stuff he has to design read like an insult to anyone who's ever enjoyed an actual videogame. There is an absolute ban on any kind of challenge, or win/lose situation. Simply put, Farmville and its imitators are not "games"... they're fun something-elses I guess for the right sort of person but BY DESIGN they take away the things that define the concept of a "game".
I don't think just sitting down with a console game is enough to make someone a gamer. Games have the thrill and spectacle of a good movie these days, I can see why anyone would want to sit down with one for a while. The difference is that gamers play games looking for a challenge, wanting to see the difficulty and complexity of those challenges start ratcheting up or even making up their own challenges as they go along. My disagreement with Teoh's article is that he emphasizes accomplishment, while I'd accept anyone who has the required motivation.
I don't know how many of you guys play the facebook games and other casual titles in question. A friend of mine actually works in the casual games industry with a few facebook titles to his credit. The requirements sheets for stuff he has to design read like an insult to anyone who's ever enjoyed an actual videogame. There is an absolute ban on any kind of challenge, or win/lose situation. Simply put, Farmville and its imitators are not "games"... they're fun something-elses I guess for the right sort of person but BY DESIGN they take away the things that define the concept of a "game".
I don't think just sitting down with a console game is enough to make someone a gamer. Games have the thrill and spectacle of a good movie these days, I can see why anyone would want to sit down with one for a while. The difference is that gamers play games looking for a challenge, wanting to see the difficulty and complexity of those challenges start ratcheting up or even making up their own challenges as they go along. My disagreement with Teoh's article is that he emphasizes accomplishment, while I'd accept anyone who has the required motivation.
If you have a passion for gaming, no matter what kind of game it is, you are a gamer. If you have a passion for any one hobby, then there should be no one to contradict you on it. Last I checked, there is no paperwork or certificate that gives you the right to be a gamer.
That's fine, but I really think the common usage of the term is closer to "moviegoer". Outside of msg boards and lan parties people just use it to describe someone that plays games.8-Bit_Jack said:
Believe me there are PLENTY of good games on the market. If you can't find any it's more a result of your prejudice against "casual" games than the imaginary decline of the industry.veloper said:
To be fair the concept of what makes a game is redefined every couple of years. Most games out today aren't games by the old 1980's definition.NamesAreHardToPick said:
A lot of people that are against the recent casual influx seem to be of the opinion that if it isn't challenging it's not a game. Never mind that not everyone plays games to "beat them". People play for a myriad of reasons nowadays, including story, socialization, and even art. Who is to say that these people aren't gamers too? I really think that dismissing these audiences is a lot more dangerous to the medium than the "dumbing down" that so many people are complaining about.
I know how to make few plunks. Does this make me a guitarist?
I know how to drive the car. Does this make me a race or a taxi driver?
I know how to lift weights. Does this make me a bodybuilder?
I know how to run and I do it often. Does this make me a runner?
Someone plays a game twice a week. Does this make him a gamer?
Those questions have the same answer.
I know how to drive the car. Does this make me a race or a taxi driver?
I know how to lift weights. Does this make me a bodybuilder?
I know how to run and I do it often. Does this make me a runner?
Someone plays a game twice a week. Does this make him a gamer?
Those questions have the same answer.
As someone who has been constantly reminded that "games are a waste of time" by my own mother ever since I took up the hobby/obsession/whatever you want to call it... I can safely say that the battle isn't over yet. Because while my mother does play casual games like Bejeweled (and she is much better at it than me, and I don't really care enough to improve), she has no idea who made the game, how much work went into it (okay, its Bejeweled, but still), and how much money was put into the project (oh shut up).
The point is, I know for a fact that my mother will never, ever try any non-casual game (I even had to explain to her what the difference between Casual, Mainstream, and Hardcore was) unless her life depended on it... hmm... no... bad idea. And she is still keeping up some bad habits when judging games... like say, assuming that simply watching someone else play a game for about 10 minutes gives you a full understanding of the game as a whole. For some games, okay, I'll grant you that this can be enough... but only if you have played a lot of other games that share at least some gameplay similarities.
As an example: after watching me play through the brief Ravenholm chapter, my mother came to the conclusion that HL2 is a shallow and vapid copy of House of the Dead... which we used to play together at arcades. (face-palm of epic proportions)
I'm not saying that you have to like HL2 to be a true gamer, but you have to be able to at least recognize that a lot of time, effort, work, and money went into most games that are made. And sadly, my mother (and people like her), can't really understand that... they just make the assumption that I used to make when I was 4 and started gaming: that the games came from an electronic smiles machine from a magical land far far away. (another epic face-palm)
The point is, I know for a fact that my mother will never, ever try any non-casual game (I even had to explain to her what the difference between Casual, Mainstream, and Hardcore was) unless her life depended on it... hmm... no... bad idea. And she is still keeping up some bad habits when judging games... like say, assuming that simply watching someone else play a game for about 10 minutes gives you a full understanding of the game as a whole. For some games, okay, I'll grant you that this can be enough... but only if you have played a lot of other games that share at least some gameplay similarities.
As an example: after watching me play through the brief Ravenholm chapter, my mother came to the conclusion that HL2 is a shallow and vapid copy of House of the Dead... which we used to play together at arcades. (face-palm of epic proportions)
I'm not saying that you have to like HL2 to be a true gamer, but you have to be able to at least recognize that a lot of time, effort, work, and money went into most games that are made. And sadly, my mother (and people like her), can't really understand that... they just make the assumption that I used to make when I was 4 and started gaming: that the games came from an electronic smiles machine from a magical land far far away. (another epic face-palm)
Believing doesn't figure into this. Last year has been a very poor year and 2008 wasn't much better.boholikeu said:
There were *some* games in 2009 worth buying, like dragon age and tropico3, but not enough.
A promising game like asscreed 2 turned out to be way too easy, while games like demons souls and dragon age actually got criticized for being "too difficult". Even game reviewers are becoming casual.
When the real gamers shut up, the only games the industry poops out will be simple enough for drooling idiots.
A gamer is a person who plays games. It does not matter what kind of game they play (be it one on Facebook or not), it is a very, very simple definition. I am amazed at the stupidity of people that liken their own terms to it. People who find eliteness in the term are very, very sad indeed.
Woah, hey now. Grab a dictionary. We're talking about a real word here, the videogame industry can't redefine it every couple of years... never mind the fact that we've been running, jumping, and shooting bad guys pretty solidly from like the release of Mega Man way back before most posters here were alive to Uncharted 2.boholikeu said:
If someone is motivated enough by the story or art of a game to encourage them to play it to completion, good on them and I hope they enjoy it, maybe they're a gamer and don't know it yet.
I've seen non-gamers play videogames...
In general, people who play videogames for some reason other than mastering the underlying game aren't gamers and it's not doing favors to anybody involved if we try and treat them as such... I'm not worried about ignoring people who really do care about games in favor of the much larger number of people that don't, we're well spoken for because this medium started off as ours exclusively. I've got a bunch of non-gamer folks in my family, like everyone besides me. They spend hours on the PS3 collecting stuff and role-playing and smashing cars and hugging chickens and making toys. They rarely-if-ever enjoy mastering the actual games contained in each piece of software... at best they put up with it in order to fulfill some other purpose.
Let's go to the toy store. Toy stores "get" the differences in entertanment needs in a way that videogame publishers should really get their heads around. There's a "games" section, look what's there besides me geeking out - alone, probably - over the back of absolutely every box and trying to pick just one. Separately, you'll find books, and puzzles, you'll get run over by my son as he's running around with action figures or toys or building kits, and my daughter's hugging all the stuffed animals and asking them which one wants to go home with her.
In comparison everything that goes on a console is called a "game" and HAS TO INCLUDE A GAME. That's where the divide is, it's not that the games are too hard and that they need to make it so even a potato has the wits and reflexes to succeed... it's that everyone has to play some stupid game to get to the part they actually want. If the videogame industry ran a toy store it would be one huge GAMES section and "screw you" to anyone who just wants a toy; they all come with a game board and a rulebook telling you how you have to play. Maybe models would come locked in a vending machine that spits out the next part you need only if you can successfully beat it in a round of Simon. That's how badly they're missing their untapped markets with "casual games". Suppose a kid that just wants to smash cars or blow things up in glorious high-def, he's gotta do all these frustrating races to unlock the good models and there's some goddamned announcer branding him as a LOSER every time he blows it. What monster decided that all the animals in a virtual petting zoo should have predators hanging around, or become miserable and sick whenever you're not doing a bunch of chores to support them? HELLO EA, YOU'RE JUST SUCCEEDING IN MAKING A LITTLE AUTISTIC GIRL CRY ABOUT HER DEAD MEERKATS.
She even remembers all their randomly-generated names.
Dammit now I've got something in my eye.
Trying to make every product appeal to everybody who might possibly step into that toy store is just a recipe for failure, just ask all the games gathering dust after buying them for my non-gamers out of some superficial appeal until they hit a brick wall of "oh I have to play some stupid game here too" hidden beneath some accessible surface and lost a kid's attention to something that *doesn't* smack them in the face for trying to play with it. We are hurting both ourselves and our non-gamer friends by encouraging this trend of painting everyone who's got a controller in their hands with the same brush.
tl;dr - nobody wants "dumbed down" games. Gamers don't want their intelligence insulted, and nobody else wants to be forced into some kind of game just to "unlock" all the chapters in a story they want to see, all the legos in the kit they bought, or to keep a virtual pet from suffering some horrible fate.
A lot of people I know enjoy Farmville and the use it to pass the time and of course they enjoy it. My wife used to play a game Chinese game like Farmville all the time but hasn't played it since. Is she a gamer? No. This is a unnecessary argument that just sound like people wanting to label. Its defining that anyone who gets their hands on a game is automatically a gamer when there will always be something that will interest someone at some point. I'm sorry but I disagree and the people I know that plays these games would too. Hell my wife would laugh at the thought of being a gamer.
When they don't play Farmville anymore, are they suddenly not gamers?
When they don't play Farmville anymore, are they suddenly not gamers?
Why do half the people in here sound like angry old men who've just had a complete stranger walk into their favorite bar? Sheesh.
Am I thus as you say, -not- a gamer because I don't play purely to be challenged? Admittedly, I have finished most the games I've played, but I'm rarely rushing to do so, and it's not uncommon for me to leave a game for a week or two, even months before completing them.
Further, while I agree that it's not ideal to make a product that appeals to everybody, I don't really think this is much of a problem, as while yes, the casual market seems to have overtaken more traditional games, there's still enough of a varied platter of genres and styles that everyone can find a game that suits them.
In the end, this all seems like a lot of selfish posturing by angry people who don't like the idea that other people are interested and enjoying in something they perceive as theirs alone, and feel that anyone who wants to be a gamer needs either to join em' or get lost. And indeed, feel the rise of casual games is a major threat to that interest. (Not against you specifically NamesAreHardToPick, your points were very well put out
)
Err. No, I vehemently disagree. I play games purely to experience the story and setting, and while yes I do find myself getting caught up in the grind and gameplay, this is rarely the reason I'll buy anything the the first place. Who here can claim the likes of Fallout and Fallout 2, or Baldur's Gate and Planescape Torment were the pinnacle of -gameplay- of their day? And, keep in mind, apart from the numerous RTSes and a smattering of FPSes, my rather largish collection consists mainly of RPGs and Adventure games.NamesAreHardToPick said:
Am I thus as you say, -not- a gamer because I don't play purely to be challenged? Admittedly, I have finished most the games I've played, but I'm rarely rushing to do so, and it's not uncommon for me to leave a game for a week or two, even months before completing them.
Further, while I agree that it's not ideal to make a product that appeals to everybody, I don't really think this is much of a problem, as while yes, the casual market seems to have overtaken more traditional games, there's still enough of a varied platter of genres and styles that everyone can find a game that suits them.
In the end, this all seems like a lot of selfish posturing by angry people who don't like the idea that other people are interested and enjoying in something they perceive as theirs alone, and feel that anyone who wants to be a gamer needs either to join em' or get lost. And indeed, feel the rise of casual games is a major threat to that interest. (Not against you specifically NamesAreHardToPick, your points were very well put out
)
So your lot, the bros all on MW2, everyone playing Farmville, suppose we call everyone who sometimes plays videogames "gamers" even if they have other hobbies... what new word to you call people who play games for the sake of finding all the secrets, beating all of the seemingly-impossible bits, posting lap records or high scores, min/maxing characters, etc, until it looks to any reasonable person like a bunch of work?GothmogII said:
Je suis joueur de les jeux! Not sure if that translates to what i want it to say. anyone?
Yeah it doesn't really matter what they play if the do it semi-regularly then they can be a gamer, i dont care really. I play farmville, pretty decent at it. figured how to easily grind levels.. I also play BFBC and SCreed 2 very regularly. and if my computer would straighten out i could play any of the multiiple games on there. So Je suis joueur de les jeux et je jour Farmville. also if anyone check the first sentence, is this one right too?
Yeah it doesn't really matter what they play if the do it semi-regularly then they can be a gamer, i dont care really. I play farmville, pretty decent at it. figured how to easily grind levels.. I also play BFBC and SCreed 2 very regularly. and if my computer would straighten out i could play any of the multiiple games on there. So Je suis joueur de les jeux et je jour Farmville. also if anyone check the first sentence, is this one right too?
I completely agree with this, it doesnt matter how good you are at gaming or what type of games you play, if you feel that gaming is a hobby of yours, then you can probably call yourself a 'gamer', but i seriously doubt that all those farmvillers seriously condsider it as this, rather than just a way to avoid workingOneBig Man said: