I'm completely serious. I genuinely don't understand how you can pick some arbitrary rules and decide that the "other people" are not "true xyzers" and thus are invalid.
> As true gamer culture I describe people with a real appreciation for games (should be obvious). People who actually play and enjoy games (or create and mod them).
Great, I know lots of those people! I'm one of those people! Honestly, I don't really know anyone who doesn't enjoy games (who plays them that is).
> Not people who are faking it for money,
Great! Imagine if there were laws to make sure those people had to disclose when, why and how they were making money associated with games!
> not people who are trying to push agendas onto gamers
I'm trying really hard not to project the rest of the internet on to you, because I don't know you, and I'm sure you're a lovely person. It sounds though, like you're upset with certain "social" complaints that some people have had with games lately, i.e. being upset about women being over sexualised in games, or what not.
With that in mind: I agree with a reasonable amount of that commentary. Does that make me not a "true" gamer? What is your yardstick here? More importantly, why does your opinion on who a "true gamer" is matter?
> And trust me, these are surprisingly rare in game media
I don't see it. And I don't see how you can see it either honestly. I feel like if the entire games media scene was bought and paid for by game companies someone would have actually written about it. This stuff generally gets reported on pretty well when it happens (see: Jeff Gerstman being fired for giving a low score to Kayne & Lynch, the Warner Bros issue we're talking about right now, etc). There are always people looking to expose something to make a name for themselves, and if anything like this actually existed someone would have done just that. And no, I don't count KIA / whatever ramblings.
It sounds more like a bunch of people are saying things you don't agree with, and so you've decided they aren't "true gamers" so you can brush off what they're saying without having to really think about it.
> You can call it unhealthy, the truth is often unhealthy. You can choose to remain ignorant about it, and patronize people like me. The fact is: Go out and ask kids, go and ask the people who play the most. They don't give a damn about game media and they are not involved in it at all. They just play their games.
I'm not "choosing to remain ignorant", I'm disagreeing with you and what you're saying. Hopefully politely, apologies if it's not coming off that way.
It sounds though, like you're upset with certain "social" complaints that some people have had with games lately, i.e. being upset about women being over sexualised in games, or what not.
If you mean with "social" anti-social complaints like hating and bullying white males [0] and the like, then yes! I oppose everything that resembles stuff like that all day every day and do not consider anyone who does not condemn this a true gamer. Because what they do is no longer about games, they just use game media as a vessel to spread their poison into the fun-loving gamer community.
Great! Imagine if there were laws to make sure those people had to disclose when, why and how they were making money associated with games!
No, I don't want to solve everything with laws. I don't want to be babysat by the state. The community should just shun the the dishonest people, foster a positive culture of honesty and build proper review facilities. We don't need the state for that. In fact, I'd argue we need anything but the state for this.
It sounds more like a bunch of people are saying things you don't agree with, and so you've decided they aren't "true gamers" so you can brush off what they're saying without having to really think about it.
Oh, yeah, totally, how did you know? I have many tiny little boxes with labels in my brain, and every time someone says something I don't like, I put them into one and lock it firmly shut so I never have to think about it again. I have no shred of intellectual integrity inside me and thrive on ignorance. Me making a distinction between true gamers and those who have hijacked some of its media for hateful messages is a manifestation of my hate for reality.
I'm completely serious. I genuinely don't understand how you can pick some arbitrary rules and decide that the "other people" are not "true xyzers" and thus are invalid.
> As true gamer culture I describe people with a real appreciation for games (should be obvious). People who actually play and enjoy games (or create and mod them).
Great, I know lots of those people! I'm one of those people! Honestly, I don't really know anyone who doesn't enjoy games (who plays them that is).
> Not people who are faking it for money,
Great! Imagine if there were laws to make sure those people had to disclose when, why and how they were making money associated with games!
> not people who are trying to push agendas onto gamers
I'm trying really hard not to project the rest of the internet on to you, because I don't know you, and I'm sure you're a lovely person. It sounds though, like you're upset with certain "social" complaints that some people have had with games lately, i.e. being upset about women being over sexualised in games, or what not.
With that in mind: I agree with a reasonable amount of that commentary. Does that make me not a "true" gamer? What is your yardstick here? More importantly, why does your opinion on who a "true gamer" is matter?
> And trust me, these are surprisingly rare in game media
I don't see it. And I don't see how you can see it either honestly. I feel like if the entire games media scene was bought and paid for by game companies someone would have actually written about it. This stuff generally gets reported on pretty well when it happens (see: Jeff Gerstman being fired for giving a low score to Kayne & Lynch, the Warner Bros issue we're talking about right now, etc). There are always people looking to expose something to make a name for themselves, and if anything like this actually existed someone would have done just that. And no, I don't count KIA / whatever ramblings.
It sounds more like a bunch of people are saying things you don't agree with, and so you've decided they aren't "true gamers" so you can brush off what they're saying without having to really think about it.
> You can call it unhealthy, the truth is often unhealthy. You can choose to remain ignorant about it, and patronize people like me. The fact is: Go out and ask kids, go and ask the people who play the most. They don't give a damn about game media and they are not involved in it at all. They just play their games.
I'm not "choosing to remain ignorant", I'm disagreeing with you and what you're saying. Hopefully politely, apologies if it's not coming off that way.