@forkboy: It is, but she ascribes to it multiple definitions, which is where my confusion lies.
LoginRejected's forum posts
It isn't so much the thought of being labelled, but more that there is an uncertainty to whether I am as open minded as I believe my self to be, and to a lesser degree, whom I can trust to make informed decisions. Whether Alexander is an extremist or part of a progressive collective, whether or not Giant Bomb pushes me to engage with the medium on a more profound level.
The article in question details the way in which the myriad communities of game culture have begun to drop the 'gamer' designation. While that in itself is a rather rote observation, and one I would concur with, it continues on to insinuate that the reason for that is its obsolescence in a more multifaceted environment, one that is more complex than the one Call of Duty seems to think it is. Again, I would agree that the line of reasoning is true, and further, that the article is articulating the change of trend well.
At some point though, the train of thought transitions into less that the culture is shifting, and more that a new set of people has come in and begun to rebuild it;
'It’s clear that most of the people who drove those revenues in the past have grown up -- either out of games, or into more fertile spaces, where small and diverse titles can flourish, where communities can quickly spring up around creativity, self-expression and mutual support, rather than consumerism. There are new audiences and new creators alike there. Traditional “gaming” is sloughing off, culturally and economically, like the carapace of a bug.
This is hard for people who’ve drank the kool aid about how their identity depends on the aging cultural signposts of a rapidly-evolving, increasingly broad and complex medium. It’s hard for them to hear they don’t own anything, anymore, that they aren’t the world’s most special-est consumer demographic, that they have to share.'
Here is where a recent internal conflict has risen personally; I would say that I have made the transition in to the more rounded game-scape as well as any other. I played and enjoyed Proteus and Gone Home, but mostly rely on websites such as Giant Bomb to keep me informed on such products, so am not thoroughly familiar with the independent scene, at least not to the degree that I could be and have come to accept that yes, I am not 'into' games as much as I thought I was. But I still like to maintain an awareness, so am familiar with the supposed issue with Quinn, with the recent Kotaku/Patreon issue, and find myself unanimously siding with people like Quinn, like the small independents and Alexander, but feel that in return a double standard is still being imposed upon me; that I both am trusted to be civil and approach a game's mechanics and themes with an open-mind, which I appreciate, but also that I am not trusted to maintain that state, or that it is merely a facade. I fear that I am perceived to embody both of the above personas, she regarding both as the 'young white male', whether or not that indifference to designation is purposeful. Further I feel that the new way with which we engage with the medium was not solely won by minority figures; writers like Nathan Grayson at RPS repeatedly raised the issue, deliberately incited their user bases to consider the ethics of their industry and weathered a lot of criticism. This is not to imply that minority writers did not suffer more; they did not have a support ring of supportive co-workers, they did not have the space to recede back into more muted topics nor that the severity of their abuse compared to that of writers who could not be threatened sexually. But surely this is a door without a handle, it must be cracked open by inches from the inside before it can be pulled off of its hinges.
Never mind that Alexander was hit by this single track marketing, who must have participated as a child to allow a passion with games to foster, or that her early career engaged with the mindless junket-play-review cycle. I am somewhat displeased to admit that I harbor some resentment with what I perceive to be the situation.
But then with the recent and rather unsavory business of #NotAllMen, I fear that I am falling into the same habits, and am beginning to questioning my true feelings. Perhaps there is an insolence to my thoughts that disregards Alexander's point, that I am twisting it around back to me. I was enjoying the article until the above passage, did a defensiveness kick in and muddy my perception of what is unequivocally a step forward and do I subconsciously resist this transition because of it?
The point then perhaps of this post is to ask if anyone else has tackled this dichotomy of thought? Is it possible to resolve more resoundingly than I thought I had, or is it necessary to search deeper than simply games?
I'd seriously consider encouraging someone to play a Call of Duty game. Knowing that control scheme is near tantamount to understanding the control scheme of every game that employs human movement through a 3D space; and playing through a cushy, on-rails single player mode to nail a fluency in that control scheme would be similarly helpful.
I want to buy a pay-pal membership, but the old email tied to my GB account has been de-activated and now I can't seem to alter it on the auth.giantbomb page. Do you have any ideas as to why? Is important that those link up?
Edit- NVM, just bought a gift code instead.
Edit 2- is it normal to need to wait to input the code?
What games do you decide go on the list? Seems like a mix of old and new; just what has acclaim, what holds a personal interest or is it more of an 'expansion of the mind' sort of deal?
From about 9:29 is where this video starts to discuss the more contesting points in this thread, talking about why it matters that we include games like Proteus inside the definition of game, but the rest of the video is interesting as well, and his channel has lots of interesting dissections.
I get bothered when the option of micro transactions is being shoved down my throat, particulaly in games like Dead Space where atmosphere is everything. Instead of being enraptured in the setting, I'm being encouraged to go to the in-game shop to buy materials, which itself is aggravating as it implies that I need those materials to match the pace of the game's difficulty curve. Assassin's Creed 4 did in right in this regard I feel. Instead of offering metal or wood packs, the likes of which are used to upgrade the ship, they offered an all or nothing proposition for all of the upgrades for the ship, which actually made it a time saving measure rather than simply saying that as an excuse to get me to accept them.