I think everything is getting blown out of proportion and we're letting minor wordchoices, assumptions, and emotions get in our way. The author is clearly not an educated gamer. He intends to buy a Wii, but he's still struggling through how to handle video games, how to think about them, and how to approach them as media and/or entertainment. Like I said before, no one is perfect,and with so many experts in the game industry proven wrong time and time again, it's hardly fair to expect a relative newbie to the field to not trip up on his first attempt.
There are definitely things he says that causes gamer's ears to pinprick, but these are most likely said because of ignorance and carelessness, not a real intent on malice. Similarly, the vehement internet response is probably being misinterpreted as a hive-like defense reaction, instead of as a people dismayed that their beloved pastime and hobby is being misconstrued and misinterpreted in a one-sided manner on a public forum.
I still stress tolerance and understanding. I don't expect 100% agreement, but there has to be common ground on which to move forward here. I like the fact that the author still intends to buy a Wii. Whether it's for his kids, or for Netflix, or both, convincing him to put a console in his house is the first step to changing his opinions and subconscious preconceptions about videogames. Sure, he's said some things now that sting, but the best way to correct the misconceptions he's perpetuating is to encourage him to work past his current misgivings, educate him on what the Wii and videogames in general has to offer him and his family, and see him become a part of our sector of the gaming industry.
The reason I want civil, and friendly, dialogue on this issue is because I want videogames to show the world, one consumer at a time, that everyone and anyone can be a gamer, no matter what their thoughts on the "Gaming Ghetto" was before.
He's already figured out how to handle games with his children, though, Kairon. We want a fair opportunity for video games to be experienced by everyone, too.
My issue is that his article doesn't support oppenness to gaming. It's written to inspire doubt in the mind of the reader who's already thought everything through. Everyone knows when you buy a DVD player, unless it says otherwise, it doesn't come with any movies to watch. They know you have to replace the batteries in the remote from time to time. At this point in time, it's a fact that we can take for granted is general knowledge. So why act surprised when this is the same for video games? Why misquote the price of the accessories you chose to buy, in the firstplace?
Beyond that, though, his response was certainly an underhanded attempt to "get the last word" against hundreds of anonymous commenters. There's just too many instances of occurrences that lead to this:
That sounded perfectly legit to me. But to those in the gaming community, well, let’s just say that it’s nothing short of pure heresy.
Fortunately, as the thread wore on, and I responded to some of the comments, the tone shifted and an interesting conversation emerged about the legitimate issues about how much exposure to video games and media is healthy.
In this perspective, we're lead to believe that every video gamer is prone to completely irrational outbursts, and thanks to Mr. O'brien here, gamers in general were able to get things back together and be reasonable, well-thought discussion makers.
The tone of the post is pretty neutral. The comments are not, most of which are from folks who naturally didn’t bother to read the column itself (surprise!).
Now, if you read his cited examples from the comments, yes, the commenters do insult the reporter, but it is certainly unclear that anyone he refers to did not read the column. He infers such a thing is true of one comment, but doesn't even allow the possibility that said commenter could doubt the truthfulness of the article, and dismiss certain parts of it, which isn't a great thing to do, but is clearly being recreated to the same extent in this response column.
Fortunately, there were some voices of sanity:
Luckily, he didn't have to intervene with the Kotaku comments for tranquility and logic to return. Still, his exaggerated remarks about gamers' reactions to his original story seem a bit less credible, since he's pointed out instances where his broad opening statement has been untrue.
Oddly enough, there is debate within the comments about the fact the many consoles do have hidden costs, and whether that’s to be expected or whether it’s a sneaky, price-gouging stunt.
Once again, he underestimates the commenters he's decided are completely against him, and shows his surprise that there was general interest in the gaming community about points he made in the article.
But beyond that, it’s clear most of these commenters can’t seem to conceive of a world where everyone doesn’t play video games all day long. Or that there might be any consequences to that lifestyle. Like I said in the column, I’m not anti-video games
Who's said anything, anything at all, about playing video games all day long? There are a few people saying that 30 minutes a week isn't very much, yes, but very few, or even none, have made any assertion here. This is another exaggeration meant to berate and demean "pro" video game commenters. Every gamer I talk to in person agrees moderation is needed. Many I speak to on forums also agree. I'm sure you do, too, Kairon. How do you feel being lumped in with the assumption and exaggeration Mr. O'brien has made?
Or, if you're the exception, and I'm the exception, and your friends are the exception, and my friends are the exception, and the people here we talk to are the exception, don't you wonder who the people are that exemplify the rule? Can they really be seen as any sort of majority?
Happily, I also got dozens of emails (and some comments) from readers who were sympathetic, from parents who took time to describe their own challenges in striking that balance. I even got a couple emails from parents who bought the Wii for Christmas and have been regretting it do the fights and stress it’s caused. One of my favorites:
Unfortunately, Mr. O'brien didn't receive anything sympathetic that was noteworthy from any gamers out there. It closes his column up implying that video gamers are inept at developing and displaying empathy and sympathy.
Wouldn't you say he has taken any shot he can to quietly subvert the opinions of those who play video games and comment on game-related articles as a hobby? He's attempting to play the victim role to gain support for his side, yes, but he's taken it a step forward, and decided to cement that there should be sides on this issue, and that the side opposite his is full off angry people with little logical function available.
I've already shown that there's a few loose ends to how he tells his story. I don't believe there's anything wrong with admitting the price of entry was too high, at all. But the costs are apparent, even if he gives out incorrect pricing information in his article. It's electronic media standard to sell hardware and software as separate items, and it's actually the video games industry that routinely bends that standard in Mr. O'brien's favor.
Given what we know, and the selection of methods used to convey the point of a man who is trained and paid to write well, I'd say if anything, the people who disagree with this article and are angry about how what is being said is being said are the ones who want a world where gaming is accessible to anyone and everyone. I happen to be a person who subscribes to the idea that perception is a major contributing factor to every opinion, and that usage of particular writing techniques can alter perception in a way that is favorable to whomever uses them. It's a practice that I'm sure he was taught when he became a journalist, and it's a practice that's in use to a greater extent as time passes. And it's this intent of deception he uses in his article that I'm angry about, because this is certainly something that will alienate people from picking up and playing games in the future. This journalist's reaction to the original controversy was unprofessional and immature, and I'm not happy about that.
On a more minor note, anyone else surprised that there hasn't been any comments to his blog post since about this time yesterday? I'm shocked not to see more any at all, aside from the four that were there yesterday when I read it the first time.
Topic: Journalist Returns Wii Due to "Hidden Costs" (Read 13712 times)
