By my interpretation of Deg's remarks, "hardcore gamers" are defined (beyond simply their taste in games) by their intolerance of others and a supremacist attitude. I agree that these unpleasant traits are all-too-often observable within those of us who frequent gaming message boards. I believe that people's personal taste in games are not up for debate, but their attitudes towards the preferences, opinions, and perspectives of others who may feel differently are another matter entirely.
Sadly, I have noticed Deguello personally exhibit the very same behaviour he condemns when it comes from the keyboards of those preoccupied with HD graphics. For instance, rather than being satisfied with registering his disagreements with Silks (regarding his "serious gamer" comments, PS3--areas where I have my own disagreements with Silks) and rebutting his arguments, Deg has deemed it necessary to repeatedly ridicule him in a thread that was only related to those debates insofar as it was started by Silks. This is an act of intolerance, an expression of the need to demean someone because they are "on the other side" of an issue, and it cannot be excused on the grounds of perceived transgressions committed by Silks.
When responding to Jonny's Mario Kart Wii review, Deg discussed those that concurred with certain criticisms of the game that he personally did not share, stating "I think more is being said about those people than about Mario Kart." The clear inference to be drawn from this statement is that Deg did not consider the disagreement to be in any sense legitimate, a product of differing points of view. Instead, it was apparently a mere function of deficiencies in the character of those with whom Deg disagreed. Such assurance in one's own superiority could just as easily be ascribed to "hardcore gamers" when they assert that only people of limited intellectual capacity can enjoy a so-called "casual" game.
I make these observations not to slam Deg, but to make the point that "hardcore gamers" do not have a monopoly on the supremacist sentiment that Jeff rightly decries in this context. The folly of the "hardcore gamer" is simply the folly of intolerance itself, and only demonstrates how vital it is to maintain respectful disagreements when we find ourselves at odds with one another over something.
I don't see why reviving past ghosts is necessary, however I don't see, other than the Tecmo Bowl thread, myself as being superior nor having a superior intolerant mindset. The Tecmo Bowl thread (Which, looking back, I accept as being wrong) was the result of weeks of frustration on these boards, watching good threads deteriorate into Definition Warz (where in you state you definition of hardcore and casual games) and List Warz (where in you list a bunch of games you like for a platform) by Lindy stating his thought on Wii-Only gamers and bringing up the PS3 is a Wii Castlevania thread and why it rocks and all that. Then I see Lindy having a thread about Tecmo Bowl and it just clicked. I actually started pacing my room a bit saying to myself "How dare he berate our readers, call them morons, make them feel terrible (I thought), derail threads and then start up a thread about something doesn't fit into the very rigid rule set he just laid down for others?!" And so I took on the role of a hardcore Madden fan and stated Tecmo Bowl as a game for casual babies (I have no opinion either way) and showed him what he'd been doing. I understand that fighting fire with fire leaves your hands burnt, but I had a little fire in my eyes when I was typing. I don't see it as "intolerant" mainly because it was just Lindy I had a beef with and not Tecmo Bowl fans. It endly poorly and I felt bad about it.
I also don't see my remarks regarding Mario Kart being intolerant either. I believe this remark, "I think more is being said about those people than about Mario Kart," was about Jonny stating that it was embarrassing to be defeated in a race by somebody using the Wii Wheel, which he has, in his review, deemed inferior. However, most players do use it, and a lot hold world records and have High VS. Scores, some even at the 9999 limit. It's not like the Wii Wheel is a joke character like Dan from Street Fighter Alpha or JigglyPuff. People have adapted to it and are using it to win. So Jonny, faced with the dilemma of "This control is inferior" and "people are beating me with it," elected to say he felt embarrassed to lose to somebody using it, as if someone just beat him with Dan or JigglyPuff. I didn't say his opinions on Mario Kart Wii didn't mean anything (although in the grand scheme of consumer sales, they apparently didn't), but I sort of felt that part DID speak more about the reviewer than the game. And I didn't see it as a "deficiency" of his character either. It's actually a process a lot of us go through.
And you are correct, Hardcore gamers don't have a monopoly of these feelings, but they do hold the overwhelming majority of opinion-making positions, be they journalists or longtime forum members. And can most assuredly state that they did "start it," and the result is the majority of gamers, be they non-gamers, lapsed-gamers, female games, etc. feel exactly the same way back. But they are more respectful back by not engaging in Label Warz and simply enjoying their Hannah Montanas or Wii Plays (Did you know that game sold 13 million worldwide?) and not giving a care what anybody else plays or who makes what (at least not yet). Hardcore feel slighted that Nintendogs is even successful, that this new audience, comprised of former gamers and non-gamers, gets advertised to and bones thrown their way and focus given to them for a while. It's dichotomous, really.
And as a remark to Pale, it's not that nobody finds fault with Nintendo's E3 show. I personally, thought they maybe shouldn't have had Shaun White Snowboarding there. In fact, they shouldn't have had any lack-of-effort third party games there and I daresay the only reason they had to showcase them is because they've been guilt-tripped into believing that the more Nintendo succeeds on their own platform with effortful, high-quality software, the less third parties can succeed with their effortless, afterthought software. According to behaviorism, Nintendo just reinforced bad behavior. But hopefully third parties will soon have to realize that they need to bring their A-games in order to compete. And just the same, what does an absolutely jawesome E3 show even mean anyway? A lot of people thought Sony won E3 2005, with PS3 movies and PSP games that were assuredly going to wipe the floor with the casual DS. What did that mean in the long run? Not much, apparently.
Topic: How to spot a Hardcore Gamer in the Wild. (Read 25643 times)
