February 5, 2008
The first rule
Michael wrote this at 12:40 pm:
For a while now, I’ve been disillusioned with games. OK, that’s not strictly true, I’m as keen a gamer as I’ve ever been. What irks me is the bad press games get and the apathy that seems to receive
Since I grew aware of gamers beyond my shores, I’ve encountered a number of what I suppose are buzzwords - mainstream, casual, hardcore. We want to be accepted by non-gamers or casual players yet we also look upon them in derision for their ignorance; at least, some of us do. Virtually all the media coverage is about the perils of games - from the tragic to the ridiculous. In all that time, I’ve never once heard of people going out and trying to defend their hobby and I wonder why that is. Gamers, in my experience, are some of the most intelligent people around; you might think I’m biased there and you’re probably right. But it’s a curious thing when one of the staunchest anti-games campaigners there is says “You know what, this isn’t a herald of impending social collapse after all”; yep, it’s true! Do we not care enough to defend our hobby? Or even to show those new to games that they aren’t the root of all evil? Apparently so; we prefer to keep schtum and let Nintendo convert people through the simplicity of the Wii. And then we complain there’s nothing to play on it or that a deluge of new users is not a good thing anyway. Quit pissing and moaning about that!
And with that I’ll follow my own advice
Hi. You’re going to call off your rigorous investigation. You’re going to publicly state that there is no underground gaming club. Look, the people you are after are the people you depend on. We teach your children, we handle your money, we serve and protect you. Do NOT mess with us. OK, maybe a little
February 5th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
People defend the hobby all the time. Geoff Keighley was on Fox TV defending it. Letters are written. Book ratings are trashed.
I don’t defend my hobby to other people because I don’t see it as something I need to defend.
The more rabid anti-game zealots *should* be ignored. To react to them gives them oxygen. Ignore them and let them wither away back into insignificance.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Same with Simes on this one. I’m not one for chipping in when knowing that it won’t settle the dust.
February 6th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
OK, perhaps individual anti-game zealots should be ignored. But when you’re talking about national publications ie those read by non-gamers who most likely take “game(r)s are evil” articles as fact because they’re unchallenged… then it needs defending. Perhaps not the best word to use, but you know what I mean
I know about Geoff Keighley; I also know he couldn’t get a word in edgeways
February 8th, 2008 at 1:03 am
I just read the linked Daily Mail article which was worried that kids are spending too much time on games and not enough time falling out of trees.
Of course, more children would be out climbing trees if the Daily Mail hadn’t convinced all of their parents that the streets are awash with paedophiles and evil immigrants.
Bloody hypocrites.