gaming Why is gaming still so disrespected in 2018?

[KillerKingBakudan 702]

14 hours ago, Olly said:

Then aren't you really talking about youtube videos that involve games, rather than the games themselves

Both, actually. The main difference is when you watch someone else playing a game in person, it becomes a more social activity. But the same could be said with anything else we perceive as art, like judging paintings with others in a museum.

[Olly 1,008]

24 minutes ago, KillerKingBakudan said:

Both, actually. The main difference is when you watch someone else playing a game in person, it becomes a more social activity. But the same could be said with anything else we perceive as art, like judging paintings with others in a museum.

Alright so I'm assuming you're still operating under the belief video games are an art form.

I don't believe video games qualify as art. There is a school of thought (modernism) that stretches the definition of art to breaking point, but I'm not one of the people that subscribes to the "anything can be art" mantra. A work of art is a form of personal expression, almost always an individual's (the artist). A video game is created by a corporation or large team, almost always for the purpose of entertainment. And I make a clear distinction between entertainment (such as games) and art. But I did say that art can be embedded into video games- designing the characters and environments, the storytelling, those things. But as a general term and what it describes, I see a clean separation between video games and art. But I'm not sure we're still on topic going into that

Edited July 8, 2018 by Olly

[They call me Loyalty 1,941]

Different degrees or awareness, understanding and knowledge produce uneven perceptions of reality.

For example, people can sometimes simplify a subject, in order to avoid getting into details that may be sensitive for their particular understanding. Especially if we take into account that the gaming industry is not as widely known as other forms of art.

P.S. It took a first glance at absolution to realize its design philosophy had taken a different path. It isn't necessarily bad, but that which is unfamiliar can produce biases that actively avoid touching sensitive subjects. The subject in itself is you. meaning the answer lies within each one.

But, how to know so many different answers without being in conflict with oneself? Start by knowing yourself. Then it won't be a problem whether someone says "it's just a game" or otherwise.

[KillerKingBakudan 702]

2 hours ago, Olly said:

Alright so I'm assuming you're still operating under the belief video games are an art form.

I don't believe video games qualify as art. There is a school of thought (modernism) that stretches the definition of art to breaking point, but I'm not one of the people that subscribes to the "anything can be art" mantra. A work of art is a form of personal expression, almost always an individual's (the artist). A video game is created by a corporation or large team, almost always for the purpose of entertainment. And I make a clear distinction between entertainment (such as games) and art. But I did say that art can be embedded into video games- designing the characters and environments, the storytelling, those things. But as a general term and what it describes, I see a clean separation between video games and art. But I'm not sure we're still on topic going into that

Art isn't just about expression, it's also interpretation. Writers and art directors may have a specific vision in mind on where to take story, setting, and character development, but they can also leave the plot open ended, allowing for co-authorship between developers and players. The original Deus Ex is a prime example of an action game that does it right. Despite having a single objective to complete, there are still so many different variables and outcomes for you to explore; even ones that Warren Specter, the game's creator himself, never thought possible. No two individuals can play JC Denton like he was the same character. You may not have had a direct hand in the visuals or anything else that went into making the game what it is, but when you're the one in control over what the protagonist does, how he influences the coming events and his pending responses, that makes you part of the creative process. 
 
The only reason I mentioned outside fulfillment from watching games is because many of the ones we're getting now try to be like Deus Ex but fail at it. But even if you just looked at core mechanics as the separating factor between games and art, as in basic functions like moving, attacking, item management and whatnot, competitive play can still be approached in ways that are reflective of a player's thought process. Strategy is another form of interpretation, and that's what makes esports so engaging. Everyone is given the same tools, yet they're exploiting them in different ways. Sometimes in ways that nobody had ever thought of.

Edited July 8, 2018 by KillerKingBakudan

[Misty Shadow 7,084]

The two big main reasons I can think of are the bad reputation of the gaming community, which in all fairness, has a lot of undeserved bad rap from people painting a broad brush on them due to having bad experiences with a toxic minority of gamers or reacting immaturely to criticism from gamers, and a large amount of the older generation of people not understanding what they haven't grown up with. Factor in people from time periods before ours, and you see that more people have grown up with movies and music than video games. Gaming will one day be considered an integral part of our culture though, it's only a matter of time.

[Olly 1,008]

13 hours ago, KillerKingBakudan said:

Art isn't just about expression, it's also interpretation. Writers and art directors may have a specific vision in mind on where to take story, setting, and character development, but they can also leave the plot open ended, allowing for co-authorship between developers and players. The original Deus Ex is a prime example of an action game that does it right. Despite having a single objective to complete, there are still so many different variables and outcomes for you to explore; even ones that Warren Specter, the game's creator himself, never thought possible. No two individuals can play JC Denton like he was the same character. You may not have had a direct hand in the visuals or anything else that went into making the game what it is, but when you're the one in control over what the protagonist does, how he influences the coming events and his pending responses, that makes you part of the creative process. 
 
The only reason I mentioned outside fulfillment from watching games is because many of the ones we're getting now try to be like Deus Ex but fail at it. But even if you just looked at core mechanics as the separating factor between games and art, as in basic functions like moving, attacking, item management and whatnot, competitive play can still be approached in ways that are reflective of a player's thought process. Strategy is another form of interpretation, and that's what makes esports so engaging. Everyone is given the same tools, yet they're exploiting them in different ways. Sometimes in ways that nobody had ever thought of.

But that still doesn't make a point about them being art. Creating different objectives for a player is part of creating an entertaining game, crafting a story falls under writing/storytelling. You can make a really good game and it will still be a game. To put the label 'art' on something is an attempt some people make to elevate it, but I think that's misguided. Using a video game as vehicle for a story ends up crediting both, but the story is the art aspect, the gaming is gaming. Games are meant to entertain, otherwise, nobody would buy them- art isn't created for the purpose of entertaining. It may and often does entertain as an effect, but that's not the point. When you talk about the positive aspects of strategy, critical thinking, and participation, you're invoking sport.

Video games are close to sport, and close to art, too. But understand that they are neither, they are video games. We just aren't yet accustomed to defining them, because they're new. They present us with a hybrid of things and new experiences and people may be quick to define them as something that they resemble, but are separate from. Ultimately, I'd say they're closer to sport than art, which is why people had to come up with the term "esport" just to make sense of the phenomena of large competitive play.

[honk friend 1,972]

On 7/6/2018 at 2:55 AM, Yakamaru said:

Ye. Rise up, walk to the kitchen and fetch some soda and chips. :P

what kind of sad life are you living to not have a mini fridge next to your desk

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 40,272]

I disagree with the BFV example for a few reasons. One is that the devs themselves said that they are not aiming for total historical accuracy, as they want to tell a different story for WW2, mainly the Scandinavian side. That is something we never hear about so I think they have good grounds to go in a different direct. With that said I do think that one developer response about the issue is bullshit (Basically saying that he pushed for women in the game because of his daughter) and I will go against that but that leads to my second point: If the game is fun to play, then to me it just doesn't matter if the story is accurate or not. That is something a movie cannot fall back on. A game with a dumb plot can still be a fun GAME, which is why I really don't like Telltale Games anymore. A good example is the game Metal Gear Rising Revengance, which has a dumb as bricks story but the gameplay is super fun. That is where movies and games just aren't comparable in that regard.

I don't see that as a lack of respect though, I see it as an acknowledge of key differences within the mediums. If a game can have a fantastic story to go with its gameplay, I truly appreciate it because it isn't exactly the easiest thing to do since games tend to be a lot longer than your average movie as well. Just because a game doesn't get regarded in the same way as a film it is because people are probably focusing on a different aspect.

[Venomous 18,813]

@KillerKingBakudan

Moving to Media Discussion with the appropriate tag...

[Sherem 4,807]

oddly enough I wrote about a thesis about this matter XD maybe we can discuss this deeper in other ways?

[Rainbow Dash 1,471]

On 7/3/2018 at 4:50 AM, KillerKingBakudan said:

Let me just start by saying I'm a stern believer that replay value comes before anything else. Regardless of what platform- PS4, XBox One, Switch, PC, etc- we're paying $60 on average for games now, or $120 in the case of collector's editions, and we need to get our money's worth. No matter how advanced today's technology is, no matter how well-crafted in-game cinematics and storytelling are, they should not outprioritize giving players the incentive to keep coming back. That's why I rarely play anything that's not competitive. Most developers have become so fixated on storytelling in the last several generations that they don't know how to make their products fun anymore.

BUT, that being said, I do think that anything added to a game for artistic value should still be done well. While I don't think our games should be developed as "interactive movies" by any stretch, if they can be presented like movies, then I think they deserve to be treated with the same respect as actual movies.

Anyway, I'm sure most of us are aware of the controversy from the recent Battlefield V trailer, showcasing a female soldier with a prosthetic arm fighting in a WWII setting. I have no personal attachment to this franchise whatsoever, so I'm not going to debate for or against that creative direction EA took in this thread. I do have a position on this, but that's not what I want to talk about here. There's a certain argument being presented in this debate that irks me. While a lot of fans are against the idea of playing as females in this game because it's historically inaccurate, people in favor of it say that it doesn't matter for one of two reasons. The first is that it's inclusive and makes the experience more inviting to female gamers, and that they shouldn't feel alienated. Fair enough.

But the other argument? Apparently, it doesn't matter because "it's just a game". Details like that are trivial because we only play games for fun; if somebody wants historic accuracy, they could just watch a documentary or a biopic.


...... What in the actual FUCK is that supposed to mean? So because it's "just a game", the developers shouldn't give it the same artistic merit as other mediums? What if Battlefield V was a movie playing in theaters? If audiences came into it and they saw women on the big screen killing German soldiers on the coast of Norway, everybody would lose it and start bashing the final cut for feminist pandering and historical inaccuracy. And that would be considered an acceptable criticism. But because it's a game, EA can just dump whatever the hell they want into it, and I'm supposed to believe that ISN'T going to detract from my experience? Gee, if you're gonna put in female soldiers with prosthetic limbs, why not give me Zelda and Princess Peach? Hell, maybe some fucking Skylanders too while you're at it? Yeah, because games are never meant to be taken seriously; there's no WAY fans could get pissed off over something like that.

This dismissive labeling doesn't just pertain to Battlefield, but all games. It's ridiculous. There's a reason I traded in my copy of Hitman: Absolution. Not only were the series' most fundamental stealth mechanics horribly downplayed in favor of gunfights, but Square tried so hard to give it the flare of a Hollywood blockbuster that it just didn't feel like a real Hitman game. Not even David Bateson's voice acting could save it. The new characters were trite and cliched, the dialogue was laughably bad, the script was stupid and uninspired, and the music they chose to compensate for the lack of Jesper Kyd scores was generic to the point of being nauseating. It was the first sequel I genuinely hated in ANY game series I loved. And it's not because all the shooting I could do wasn't fun. It's because I didn't care for it. They just made some piss-poor action game and slapped the Hitman logo on it just to get me to buy it.

That was probably the worst buying decision I've ever made. A lot of the fun in a game doesn't JUST come from how we play it, but from what we see. And at no point am I going to appreciate someone telling me I should just accept Absolution for what it is because it's "just a game."

That stupid catchphrase would have made sense in the 16-bit era. You know, back when KIDS were still the main gaming demographic, and we were limited to playing platformers and side-scrolling shooters. But those same kids who played games on the Super Nintendo are adults now, many of whom have broken into the industry to develop their own projects, and as such, gaming as a whole grew WITH them. Now we can pick up a PS4, pop in a triple-A game like Grand Theft Auto V, and we don't have to feel embarrassed about it.

So why is it that we still have people talking down on gaming like we should be? I'd expect that kind of talk from movie studio executives, but guys who claim to enjoy gaming as a hobby? This is unbelievable.

First off, addressing your Battlefield issue. Women did serve in combat as gunners in WWII. As you can see from this link, a lot of women fought alongside men.

Secondly, your using the worst examples. Last time EA was concerned about story, Star Wars was still a Lucas Arts property. You can argue Assassins Creed as being their best game series, but then again with all the graphics and compatibility issues, PC gamer will be quick to say otherwise.

Thirdly, you can claim its an art like movies. Sure, you dont like Hitman, you dont think it meets your standards. How that has anything to do with gaming being disrespected is beyond me. Not trying to be mean, but i see no relevance in you not enjoying Hitman and your actual topic.

Now, Why is gaming still disrespected? Easy. Lawmakers and stupidity in the government. No matter what video game designers do, their games are always marked as training tools for school shooters. We made the ESRB board and suprise suprise, video games arent controlled enough. Yet I can see a tv show from disney with heavily implies adult jokes made by people perpetuating the most adult lifestyle possible. Its gotten to the point where we as a society are saying "Hey, its ok to idolize a drug taking floozy, since shes on disney." where as a story of a drug addict who turned their life around is banned because it'll trigger some group, or its deemed harmful to society.

One of the problems is terrible parents. It always has been an issue. Terrible parents who let their kids play games not suited for them. They get defensive af when you out them, to which they pull out the oldest scape goat ever. "Well, how was i supposed to know?" Parents today, as well as the brainwashed to incompetence minority, think game makers should police kids and what they play. Growing up, i was told and showed it was the parents responsibility to ensure their kids arent stumbling on stuff they arent supposed to.

Now, there is a new reason to go after video games and thats political correctness. Games are talked down on because of the perceived levels of sexism. I say this knowing and believing their is no sexim in gaming. Starting out, gamers were mainly guys. Due to this demographic, game makers made their games based on who played it the most. Yes girls played games but it wasnt a 50:50 or even 30:70 ratio. It was literally a handful of females in all age demographics playing games.

As the world warmed up to video games, the demographics grew. Changes happened, but were slow. Nowadays, gaming can be a good form of income. Twitch and Youtuber Lets Play money is about the same as working in Mcdonalds except without the added stress of people. The past is always brought up with gaming, and its always the negatives. Whenever I see that ill mannered feminst say "This is what i hate about gaming, it appeals to the male fantasy.", i wanna ask her what she knows about gaming for real.

Barbie was mass marketed to girls, yet a guy who plays with them is gay, creepy, or gross. Gaming was seen as a nerd thing...even shunning people who identified as gamers. Nowadays its seen as a career, but still has the stigma for guys. Case in point, I went on 6 dates this last year. 5 of them kicked me to the curb when i said I was a gamer. One even clarified saying "if you play games all the time, then you arent that useful as a human.". YET a girl who is a gamer in todays world is 'awesome' and 'sexy'.

This is only going to offend those radical people, but the main reason political correctness is an issue in gaming is due to far left femnazis. We all know Anita Seerkisian(is that the louts name?) and how shes vocal about how sexist games were and are. You can notice several large holes in her entire argument.
Yes, there has been female heroes targeted towards female gamers
yes, some games objectify women just like some games make men look like monsters
Yes, there are female gamers however the majority was and still sort of is male gamers
Yes, game makers knew this and make games knowing girls would play it. However there are games for girls that guys have never played or have.

They are making an issue where there is none, which is common with the social....far left.

[KillerKingBakudan 702]

6 hours ago, Rainbow Dash said:

First off, addressing your Battlefield issue. Women did serve in combat as gunners in WWII. As you can see from this link, a lot of women fought alongside men.

Secondly, your using the worst examples. Last time EA was concerned about story, Star Wars was still a Lucas Arts property. You can argue Assassins Creed as being their best game series, but then again with all the graphics and compatibility issues, PC gamer will be quick to say otherwise.

Thirdly, you can claim its an art like movies. Sure, you dont like Hitman, you dont think it meets your standards. How that has anything to do with gaming being disrespected is beyond me. Not trying to be mean, but i see no relevance in you not enjoying Hitman and your actual topic.

- The women that fought in the war were from foreign nations like the Soviet Union. No women served in the US military. That link you just posted even says it explicitly. At best, women could join the war effort by working at factories and farms to support our troops. If they were drafted by the government to fight in the army, we would have had people rioting everywhere. This is a valid criticism if the US military is what Battlefield V is focusing on. But if it's not, and you're able to choose sides to better reflect the status quo in other parts of the world where women did fight? Oh well. Like I said, I don't even care about Battlefield. What I do care about is the constant, dismissive responses to anyone who even has some criticism towards it for the simple fact that it's a game.

- Am I? I've seen titles like Shenmue and Metal Gear Solid get the shit praised out of them, and I can't understand why. I've beaten them both, and sure enough, those were great experiences the first time around. When I look at them now, there's just nothing there to entice me to go back and play through either of them again. That's why my preferences have shifted more and more towards competitive gaming as I got older. When I boot up Street Fighter V on my PC, and I play against somebody online, I get a different experience with every match. It never gets old for me. I rarely get that satisfaction anymore with a single-player game. If I'm gonna spend $60 on something, I want it to go towards a product that doesn't get stale. Hitman 2016 and Deus Ex: Human Revolution are rare examples of that; when completing the main objectives aren't enough, I get to be a psychopath and kill everything that moves. There's always a challenge to it.

- You have to look over what I said after my complaints about Absolution to fully understand. Again, my point as it relates to the subject isn't the quality of the game itself, but that I'm somehow not allowed to criticize it on the basis of what it is. If it's a video game, people will see me as an idiot for wasting so much time and energy bashing it because all games are perceived as a stupid form of entertainment. If there's something about the gameplay or the aesthetics that I don't like, and it's enough to discourage me from buying it, I can't express why without someone talking down on me. I'm supposed to just keep my mouth shut and let the developers do whatever they please. That's the prevalent attitude I'm seeing in society. Not just from outsiders who have no interest in gaming, but people who actually DO play games, or even work on them. It's perfectly normal to criticize a book or a movie without getting flak for it. But try going in depth when judging a video game, and that makes you a loser. Even to other gamers, and it's just sickening.

[EpicEnergy 22,072]

Gaming isn't really widely disrespected, some people disrespect it but not the majority of people. Saying "it's just a game" means "calm down because it's something you shouldn't get frustrated about", not "gaming should have zero standards". That said, saying "it's just a game" is still something one shouldn't say. Just because you think gaming isn't important and means nothing doesn't mean that's the way gamers think. To gamers, games are very important, and that is why they get upset over them. So telling a gamer that "it's just a game" is offensive because it isn't "just a game" to them.

[Vefka 1,499]

The main issue is that games still have outdated image in mass media. For the MOST 30+ people I know, games are still seen in a state of the first Mario or arcades with primitive gameplay and have no value. People just refuse to see something more, nowadays games can compete with films and book in terms of story, storytelling and value. If you cry over a sad book or a film like Titanic, people usually understand and try to somewhat support you or just tolerate you sadness. But if you cry over a game, people think you're some weird weeb with no life

On 2021-02-21 at 8:46 AM, EpicEnergy said:

Just because you think gaming isn't important and means nothing doesn't mean that's the way gamers think. To gamers, games are very important, and that is why they get upset over them. So telling a gamer that "it's just a game" is offensive because it isn't "just a game" to them.

You reminded me of this (HEAVY SPOILERS):