Gamer - Defined

[Guest_Jim_*]

So where does someone like me belong on your list? According to your definitions, it sounds like I wouldn't be considered a gamer at all. I love to play games, but not for the challenge, I like to cheat most of the time.

I cheat in games too but cheating does not prevent one from experiencing the feeling of accomplishment from overcoming a challenge. The challenge is just of a different kind. For example, in Torchlight I've been able to use mods (only one have I changed at all) to get an extremely overpowered character, so to me the source of the accomplishment is to see how outrageously overpowered I could make that character. In Just Cause 2 I have a mod to make the grapple super long and fast, letting me explore more and faster, and that is the accomplishment. In Borderlands I use the Armory Glitch (I don't consider it a cheat because Gearbox has had the ability to fix it but have chosen not to) to get myself a ton of loot and then I will use a saved game editor to put them to the correct level they should be at (why do I pick up gear as much as ten levels below me?) and that is for the accomplishment of seeing what loot I can get and just how overpowered it is.

Cheating changes the challenge from the one the game designers intended to one of your choice, and for me that is overpowering myself, mostly. Still qualifies as being a gamer.

[VaporX]

i think people are getting too worked up on the definition of a "gamer".

 

I am not sure some of us are "worked up". When you do this for a living, that is reviews and computer journalism, it is important to have a set definition so that your audience can understand when you are making a point on something or describing something.

[Deathmineral]

i think people are getting too worked up on the definition of a "gamer". If you play mobile games and ignore core games then more power to you and vice versa. ever since the influx of iphone/droid games, core gamers feel like they are being invaded, its pretty much the same argument for pc/ console arguments. i like to play to escape life and live in a different world, some people play for competition, some play to kill time and its all fine.

 

but i also understand the frustration, its kind of like if your hobby was modeling cars, and then some company comes up with these new kits that are like 75% complete, then these "noobs" start to claiming they are on the same level as you.

 

all in all, these mobile games will at most be flavors of the month and be forgotten in a year, whereas a truly great game with depth and stuff will last decades or more

I like this whole statement and agree with it, the part I like most though is the last piece. You make a really good and important point about how games like Angry Birds are thought of as opposed to something like Diablo 2 or Half Life. I think there are some mobile games that really do make it into the list of games that will last, in my opinion Plants vs Zombies is one of those long lasting games, I'm sure not everyone thinks so but to me that game is really memorable and something I will go back to at a later point probably.

 

I cheat in games too but cheating does not prevent one from experiencing the feeling of accomplishment from overcoming a challenge. The challenge is just of a different kind. For example, in Torchlight I've been able to use mods (only one have I changed at all) to get an extremely overpowered character, so to me the source of the accomplishment is to see how outrageously overpowered I could make that character. In Just Cause 2 I have a mod to make the grapple super long and fast, letting me explore more and faster, and that is the accomplishment. In Borderlands I use the Armory Glitch (I don't consider it a cheat because Gearbox has had the ability to fix it but have chosen not to) to get myself a ton of loot and then I will use a saved game editor to put them to the correct level they should be at (why do I pick up gear as much as ten levels below me?) and that is for the accomplishment of seeing what loot I can get and just how overpowered it is.

Cheating changes the challenge from the one the game designers intended to one of your choice, and for me that is overpowering myself, mostly. Still qualifies as being a gamer.

Well I give you that you make it an interesting idea but I think cheating to the point that I do does in fact remove challenge, that's honestly my whole reason for doing after all. I don't really enjoy challenge in video games, mainly because when I do play games in a vanilla setting, I find myself nitpicking the games apart, very rarely do I ever find a game where I enjoy it naturally. I'm not saying it's actually the games fault necessarily either, but just that I'm really picky about the way a game presents challenge. For example, I played Demon's Souls without cheating and enjoyed it a great deal because that game just felt well done in every way, but then I could play Alice Madness Returns and absolutely hate that game because of unresponsive key presses, console porting, repetitive puzzles that killed you more than the enemies, or something like the lack of thought that goes into a certain mechanic, these are just a few of the complaints I had about that game and that with cheats, without cheats I wouldn't have even considered trying to play through the game really.

 

Also I'm glad you brought up the mods for Just Cause 2, I've been meaning to get some but can never seem to remember when I'm at my computer.

[Guest_Jim_*]

Death you are an anti-gamer (like antihero, as you're not against games). I'll think of a definition tomorrow when I'm not posting on my phone and less tired. Congratulations! You're forcing me to invent a new term.

[Deathmineral]

Death you are an anti-gamer (like antihero, as you're not against games). I'll think of a definition tomorrow when I'm not posting on my phone and less tired. Congratulations! You're forcing me to invent a new term.

All for the sake of science or something like that right?

[iskout]

I looked at this list and saw 3 things

 

1) It was made by IGN

 

2) Starcraft 2 didn't even make top 20

 

3) I have not played 6 out of the top 10 games.

 

 

I immediately stopped caring about it.

 

 

I consider myself a gamer, on various platforms, and this list is an atrocity. A third of these games shouldn't even be on the list, let alone ranked so high (DJ Hero 55th? Really?). The list doesn't seem to have any real organization to it. It's got games that are varied in release date, genre, and they didn't include games that blow away these games on the list at all (Mass Effect 1? Where is it?).

 

All in all, "gamer" is such a diverse word that it's hard to put into a singular definition. I would certainly consider someone that plays Tetris on their phone for fun to be a casual gamer, but I'd also consider someone that plays Battlefield for hours on end to be a gamer.

[Guest_Jim_*]

All for the sake of science or something like that right?

Yes. You don't quite fit the definitions I came up with, at least all the time, so I must devise another definition to fit your example. And it's fun to call you the anti-gamer

[Fogel]

Wow I have to admit I sure wasn't expecting this many replies, especially over the holiday weekend, not only that but a lot of constructive conversation. I have to be honest in that the biggest reason I posted this topic is because posting here on the gaming forum has been a bit scarce lately. It is mostly just new trailers being posted and responses to those trailers. I was originally going to respond to everyone individually but wow …I think I will just have to say thanks for the great replies and I will try and respond to some of the reoccurring themes as well as points I saw that I would normally quote and respond to.

 

FIRST POINT – re: IGN’s Top 100

This topic isn’t about the list. I have many issues with the list, I simply used it as an example to get my point across. As I stated in my first post, IGN isn’t the only one in the industry blurring the lines on games and what it means to be a gamer. The E3 coverage and post E3 interviews uncovered this with multiple well known developers and CEOs making statements in regards how they see mobile phone gaming taking over the game market. Some are even predicting the handheld market to fall prey due to the advancement mobile phone horse power. I do not consider IGN a respectable leader in the industry but to completely ignore what they have to say isn’t exactly wise. People with the pocketbooks that control what games are made and for what platform do listen to IGN. Not to mention there are still IGN articles still referenced to this day, such as their Top 100 Games of All Time list. I don’t like EA as a gaming dev/publisher but that doesn’t mean I completely ignore them – BF3 is a game that I am looking forward to most of all the games on the horizon.

 

SECOND POINT – Angry Birds

Like I said in my first post, there is nothing with it and it is a fun game worthy of respect. Playing it doesn’t make anyone less of a gamer. If that is the message you got my post you clearly didn’t read it very well or with an open mind. I didn’t attack the game or the people who play it. I simply said that just because someplays a mobile game (or even facebook game as someone brought up) doesn't make them a gamer.

 

THIRD POINT – Primary Hobbies vs Everything Else

The main point of my post boils down to this very point and I see some people didn’t catch on despite me putting it into my dictionary friendly definition. I never stated a Gamer has no other hobbies outside of gaming, I said they consider it as one of their primary hobbies. Even if no one distinguishes their hobbies as primary hobbies vs secondary hobbies mentally we all prioritize them that way. For example, I snowboard but I wouldn’t label myself a snowboarder as I just don’t prioritize it that high. I don’t go out of my way to make sure I snowboard as much as I possible can even though I love it and find it extremely fun! I use to play basketball every day at school and even had my own hoop at home that I used constantly, but never did I consider myself a basketball player since I never played on a team. My 2 primary hobbies are Gaming and Martial Arts. I have other hobbies but those are the two I go out of my way for. Those are the two that define me.

 

As I stated in my definition, a gamer defines gaming as one of their primary hobbies.

 

FOURTH POINT – Popular/Current definition

Gamer – someone who plays games

 

That seems awfully over simplified to me. By that definition both my mom and aunt are gamers despite the fact they make fun of games and people who play games on a regular basis. So why would I consider them gamers?

 

I was really trying to avoid analogies, but let’s look at how other hobbies handle it. Just about everyone these days drives a car. Does that make them a car guy/gal? I spend a good deal of time here at OCC, most of the computers (granted not many) I have owned are ones I built myself. But I don’t consider myself a PC Enthusiast. I couldn’t even tell you what the current graphics cards are. When I build a PC I learn as much as possible about the hardware I am buying to the point I can talk about it and know the pros and cons, but that is just so I can make an informed decision. What makes someone a PC Enthusiast? What makes them a Car Guy/Gal?

 

FIFTH POINT – It’s not an Elitist Club

Anyone who read my post and my definition clearly saw I am leaving it up to each person to decide whether they are a gamer or not. That is the complete opposite of an Elitist.

 

What makes someone a Car Guy/Gal? Just because someone drives a car almost every day doesn’t mean they are magically a Car Guy/Gal/Enthusiast. There is no test. There are no milestones that must be accomplished. They decide that for themselves. It is all about interest level and priorities.

 

SIXTH POINT – Sub-Classification

I think it is great people are finding this topic interesting to also want to create sub-categories but I stayed away from that as I think the industry as already come with a good classification for the most part. It is the overall classification I think sucks and needs help.

 

SEVENTH POINT – Not trying to change the industry, this is simply conversation

I don’t recall promising what we decide here will forever change the industry or anyone else for that matter. This is merely a topic of conversation to have fun with. For the longest time it was socially unacceptable to be considered a gamer. I think the industry is over compensating for that by calling everyone a gamer who picks up a game and plays it. Its great devices like the Wii (yes, I own) and mobile phone games are making gaming more accessible to those who scoffed at it prior. It increases the revenue for these companies so they can continue making games.

 

But let’s not try and classify people who don’t want to be classified. You think that frat boy who only plays games is when he is taking a dump the next day after a hard night of drinking wants to be your friend and considers you a fellow gamer? Good luck with that. I have yet to meet anyone who feels they aren’t accepted into the elitist gamer group. People make up their own mind if they are a gamer or not. Artificially boosting numbers in the gamer group by calling anyone who has played a game in their life is kinda desperate.

 

When I lived in DC I had a difficult time getting people to break out of their protective barriers and talk. The only reliable group of people that would step out of their shells and talk with complete strangers was oddly enough, gamers. The only other groups were military and martial artists. I think the biggest reason for this is because like I said earlier, it is typically socially unacceptable to be a gamer. A person admitting they’re a gamer in public doesn’t really happen often so other gamers usually open up. I think we should be proud of our hobby and we don’t need to beg people to be one of us or artificially label people who don’t consider games anything more than a time waster.

 

 

Sorry for the wall of text (tl;dr) but there were a lot of good posts to reply to

[CowKing]

As a future game developer, defining what is and isn't a gamer is really futile and doesn't do much. People just need to stop caring about these things.

 

If you play games you are a gamer; if they're not than what are they?

[Guest_Jim_*]

As a future game developer, defining what is and isn't a gamer is really futile and doesn't do much. People just need to stop caring about these things.

 

If you play games you are a gamer; if they're not than what are they?

To a game developer, maybe that isn't the case, and of course you are entitle about you opinion. However saying that we, "just need to stop caring about these things," is somewhat insulting to me because you are choosing to disregard the thought processes of another simply because you do not care. The facts are that a concise and specific definition of a gamer, and subtypes, is needed in science (sociology and psychology are two obvious examples) and those sciences are increasing being used by game developers to make a better product. Just a few weeks ago I read an article about how some game developers were bringing in psychologists to help them design a new AI system that would better respond to the player. Then more recently I got an article about how gamers were being studied to figure out the play styles people have based on achievements. If someone gets these achievements, how likely are they to get these? That is an important question when you try to shape the missions and paths you put the players on. To create any kind of theory that would be useful to a game developer, current and future, requires classifying the gamer and only a foolish researcher would attempt that without clear and concise definitions.

Sure, in general a gamer may just be someone who plays games, but try to get a fifty year old woman who plays Farmville for half an hour a day on the computer her kids bought her, to buy Crysis for herself and play it for herself.

As a scientist definitions are never futile as they enable growth of knowledge.

[VaporX]

As a future game developer, defining what is and isn't a gamer is really futile and doesn't do much. People just need to stop caring about these things.

 

If you play games you are a gamer; if they're not than what are they?

 

As a future game devloper you need to leanr how the press works so you can get good coverage for your game. These kinds of definitio0ns help us get a point across by giving the audience a set baseline to work against. So if I say a keyboard for example is marketing to the hardcore gamer then the people I am reaching have some level of understanding of what I mean.

 

There is a place for this kind of discussion and not everyone will or for that matter should be a part of iot becuase it does not effect them. However for you to be so presumptious as to feel that this is not a worthy discussion is just wrong. If you do not like the discussion move along.

[CowKing]

To a game developer, maybe that isn't the case, and of course you are entitle about you opinion. However saying that we, "just need to stop caring about these things," is somewhat insulting to me because you are choosing to disregard the thought processes of another simply because you do not care. The facts are that a concise and specific definition of a gamer, and subtypes, is needed in science (sociology and psychology are two obvious examples) and those sciences are increasing being used by game developers to make a better product. Just a few weeks ago I read an article about how some game developers were bringing in psychologists to help them design a new AI system that would better respond to the player. Then more recently I got an article about how gamers were being studied to figure out the play styles people have based on achievements. If someone gets these achievements, how likely are they to get these? That is an important question when you try to shape the missions and paths you put the players on. To create any kind of theory that would be useful to a game developer, current and future, requires classifying the gamer and only a foolish researcher would attempt that without clear and concise definitions.

Sure, in general a gamer may just be someone who plays games, but try to get a fifty year old woman who plays Farmville for half an hour a day on the computer her kids bought her, to buy Crysis for herself and play it for herself.

As a scientist definitions are never futile as they enable growth of knowledge.

I meant why do you care if other people know your opinion.

 

That 50 year old *is* a gamer. She plays games.