Is it publicly and socially acceptable to be a gamer now?

by Blake Snow { Jan 26th 2007 at 5:15PM }

Video games aren't a success because of record-setting sales in 2006 ($13.5 billion). They're a hit because it's cool to be a gamer now says ABC News:

"Perhaps the biggest factor in the industry's success during 2006 wasn't the glossy hardware or the cutting-edge games but instead a subtle shift in the once-geeky public perception of the gamer persona. Consumers just don't feel so strange about buying or playing video games anymore."

Sure, gaming has made plenty of in-roads in the hip sector. But I doubt most gamers readily admit to being rabid fans as easily as they would admit to being a music or movie enthusiast. At least not yet.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

thejakeman @ Jan 26th 2007 5:27PM

you know what? its STILL noty socially acceptable to be a games enthusiast. its only just now acceptable to admit that you play videogames. people who are knowledgable and heavily into videogames, such as joystiq readers are still not accepted socially.

dis_guy @ Jan 26th 2007 5:29PM

WHere does that leave us casual gamers at then?

UserDoesNotExist @ Jan 26th 2007 5:33PM

Waaaaah.

Seriously, if you're afraid to admit that you play video games just because you're afraid of what people will think of you, well, you deserve whatever social stigma you get.

hilker @ Jan 26th 2007 5:37PM

You might as well ask if it's socially acceptable to be a crossword-puzzle enthusiast or a knitter. There are plenty of pastimes that just aren't interesting to people who don't find them interesting. I don't see why people who play video games have such a persecution complex about it.

Mooinakan @ Jan 26th 2007 5:37PM

It's not really a case of being afraid of the Stigma of being called a 'Video Gamer', but rather the lack of being able to discuss the hobby with normal people that gets to me. I would love to see gaming become mainstream enough to discuss my recent experiences in games with normal people, like you would talk about movies.

shivr @ Jan 26th 2007 5:37PM

well you know... we aren't nerds anymore, we're murderous criminals!

Mr Khan @ Jan 26th 2007 5:39PM

lol, no

(continues to laugh uncontrollably at that idea)

GabooN @ Jan 26th 2007 5:40PM

While I think gaming is generally more talked about now then it was 10 years ago I don’t think it’s because gaming today is the “brand new thing to do”. My generation (28) is one that grew up with games and now we are more of a social force then we were 10 years ago. Plus Gaming brings in 10+ billion dollars of revenue a year, no one cant be impressed by those numbers nothing in the entertainment area can rival it.

A True Gamer one that I am not anymore, lives by and has a certain lifestyle (When your best friend is named UGM, your a True Gamer) But now you have Pro Gamers, who would of thought 15 years ago you could make a living by beating people at online games. You have the Hardcore Gamer, the Family Gamer and the Casual Gamer, heck you have people that don’t even know what the word Gamer is and they themselves are Gamers.

I love my gaming heritage it’s what got me into computers and my love of electronics, it also has driven software and hardware to what it is today.

But I openly admit that I am a Gamer and I am proud of it.

Fernando Rocker @ Jan 26th 2007 5:41PM

Deep down in our hearts, we are, and we always be geeks.

And Im proud.

Sanchinos @ Jan 26th 2007 5:43PM

thejakeman (#1):

Says who? Perhaps people who are knowledgable and heavily into videogames (who don't do anything OTHER than playing videogames, who don't talk about anything OTHER than videogames) aren't accepted socially. But that's hardly because you enjoy gaming - that would be because you don't have a balanced lifestyle and, quite frankly, you're boring. Big difference.

Grunge @ Jan 26th 2007 5:44PM

"But I doubt most gamers readily admit to being rabid fans as easily as they would admit to being a music or movie enthusiast. At least not yet."

First of all, you're wrong. It is socially acceptable. But just like I don't want to hear a movie enthusiast talk about Jean-Luc Goddard, I don't want to hear a videogame enthusiast talk to me about the various reasons for the videogame crash of '83 (except that I am a videogame enthusiast, so I do want to hear it).

I think that's it's become almost vital to the hardcore that they think of themselves as on the outside of society - that way they have an excuse when they can't get a date, or when they aren't socially accepted. The thing is, this doesn't have anything to do with videogame; it has to do with self confidence and social graces.

Stop trying to cling to your outsider status. It's not there anymore.

natureboy46 @ Jan 26th 2007 5:44PM

More importantly, who gives a fuck about being accepted?

Ritz @ Jan 26th 2007 5:47PM

Well, in class today at college, we are working on typesetting and designing annual reports. One of the companies we are allowed to base our design on is Nintendo. Our teacher was talking about Wii and its success and people spoke of WoW like we speak of any other normal topic. Its just something that is normal where I am.

Sanchinos @ Jan 26th 2007 5:49PM

Grunge: Well said. Looks like we were thinking the same thing at the same time, only I typed it out a little quicker and you put it a bit more eloquently. ;)

K @ Jan 26th 2007 5:55PM

No, I rather think it'll take quite a while for games to become socially acceptable, if ever. Sure, while you're in your swingin' 20's it's tolerated as a youthful indiscretion, but after that... you're some old guy in arrested development.

So even while the press momentarily salivates over the new crop of toys, that's all they'll ever be: toys. Just as comics will long be relegated to the kiddie section, so too will video games.

TrippleD @ Jan 26th 2007 6:00PM

Gaming nerds suck. Gaming nerds need to stfu and gtfo.

SuicideNInja @ Jan 26th 2007 6:03PM

"I would love to see gaming become mainstream enough to discuss my recent experiences in games with normal people, like you would talk about movies."

I don't see why this is. Games are a much more dynamic experience, whereas movies and recorded music are very static. Inherently, doesn't that make games infinitely more interesting than other forms of "common entertainment"?

Halo 2's popularity was semi-explained by CliffyB's proclaimed "water cooler moments" where people get to talk up some crazy Killtacular they got three days ago, and then whatever they did today. With TV/Movies, whether you saw it yesterday, or today...it's still the same old tv show/movie.

My parents still think gaming is for kids. Generations past formed the stigma...but their opinion becomes less valuable as the years go on as far as entertainment and trends are concerned. The same thing will happen to us.

dantebk @ Jan 26th 2007 6:06PM

Grunge is correct. If you're obsessed with any ONE topic, then you are +insert topic+ geek.

I know plenty of guys who like video games and read comics who no one thinks are geeks because they also play basketball and go to the bar and blah blah blah.

I also agree with those who've said who cares? Don't revel in our outsider status because that's a mental issue; but just be who want to be and be satisfied with that. I used to be ashamed to admit some of my geekier fields of interest but no longer.

Edge of Blade @ Jan 26th 2007 6:18PM

I have to give Microsoft a lot of cred for that. Call me a fanboy if you want, but I don't feel like we are being marketed to like stupid, geeky teenage boys or pre-schoolers, like Sony and Nintendo do, respectively. I think gaming got less nerdy and geeky because the market was simply opened to less nerdy and geeky people. (I acknowledge Nintendo's current dominance of young and old, but not a lot in between.)

I see this as the second great evolution of gaming. Sony saved a maturing gaming population from Nintendo, that more often let people grow out of their games instead of rising to meet them, out of some need to maintain a company image. Now, Sony is having trouble delivering to the older crowd with what could be considered low-brow, simplistic games. They are going through the same "Just Don't Get It" phase Nintendo did. And I'm sure Microsoft will reach the point that they just can't relate to the older gamer-generation demographic, but for now, Microsoft is on top in terms of matching their marketing, image, and games with the original gamer-generation.

So, games should become very mainstream during at least my lifetime.

Charron @ Jan 26th 2007 6:19PM

Is it acceptable to be a gamer? Sure. Is it acceptable to be the guy in that picture? Hell no.

Smithra @ Jan 26th 2007 6:21PM

Games are a much more dynamic experience, whereas movies and recorded music are very static. Inherently, doesn't that make games infinitely more interesting than other forms of "common entertainment"?
-------

While I do find interactive entertainment more interesting on average than non-interactive entertainment, I think you're getting a little ahead of yourself here. They're not infinitely better. They're at best better by some common factor. Mathematics aside, games are simply a medium and interactivity doesn't necessarily mean dynamic. I absolutely loved Myst, but you could hardly call it dynamic. Avid gamer that I am, your Halo 2 exploits are no more exciting to me than who did what on American Idol last night.

Some of the most lively conversations I have with coworkers are about those "same old" classic videogames. No matter how many times you play Legend of Zelda, the plot never changes. And the same way I don't care about your Halo exploits, you don't care that I can beat it in one sitting without dying.

So, where does this leave us? If you tell people you play videogames, they no longer assume that you have no friends and don't bathe, but that doesn't mean they care how many pieces of T2 you have or how far into Naxx your guild is progressing. Your best bet is still to have a wide variety of interests so that you can converse about movies, tv, music and books (yes they still make those..and not just game guides). I guess knowing a thing or two about news and current events wouldn't hurt either.

Grunge @ Jan 26th 2007 6:23PM

@ 18
"I don't see why this is. Games are a much more dynamic experience, whereas movies and recorded music are very static. Inherently, doesn't that make games infinitely more interesting than other forms of "common entertainment"?"

Alright, I'll bite. The fact that they're interactive makes them a lot harder to discuss. When two people watch The Matrix, you can be reasonably sure that they both saw (and likely interpreted) the same thing. When one person asks the other person, "Do you think that Neo was supposed to represent Jesus?", a reply will be able to be formed based on the fact that they both saw the same thing.

With videogames, this isn't really the case. Partly I blame time (the fact that The Matrix takes 136 minutes and Zelda:TP takes 50 hours). It's simply a lot easier to talk about media when you've both been through it all, and it's a lot more time consuming to finish a videogame than it is to finish a movie (or television show). This is compounded by the fact that videogames don't typically have strong story elements, since it's hard to make a game where the story is the focus (rather than the gameplay).

The other part of the blame lies with interactivity. While it's easy to talk about something specific (the bullet dodging scene), it's much harder to talk about something general (shooting a guy in an MP match). Because interactivity is the strength of the medium, it becomes much harder to relate with someone else's interactivity. Unless you're a rabid fan.

Edge of Blade @ Jan 26th 2007 6:25PM

Btw, everyone should read this. This should be the holy grail for anyone who enjoys video games and has to defend it's importance.

http://www.amazon.com/Everything-Bad-Good-You-Actually/dp/1573223077

you know @ Jan 26th 2007 6:38PM

But who said I was only into games and only talked about games? i like to read. i like politics. i like philosophy. and i like history. i don't like anything that is "mainstream" and as thus i am not socially acceptable. i just recently bought a $20.00 pay as you go phone because i felt that it would be more considerate of me to use my own money to call people and get rides than using theirs. the only people that i don't give at least a fair try in being friends with are those that flat out dismiss me for no major reason.

and I'm way out of the "normal" range. i get lumped with the geek/freak crowd, whom i happily hang out with to get a different perspective on life. that and they aren't assholes who judge you on the quality of your clothing or your cellphone or your iPod (i don't have one, i listen to music on the computer) playlist. please don't tell me that it is because my life is unbalanced is why I'm uncool.

Virtua Fanboy @ Jan 26th 2007 6:40PM

I think it's acceptable to be a gamer. Doesn't really matter what your age is (I'm 29, I'll play til I don't think it's fun anymore) as long as you wear deodorant, comb your hair or wear a ballcap, practice proper grooming, are acceptably fit and moderatly healthy, ect. It's when you play games, read comics, argue about them to perfect strangers in public none the less, and have man tits that rest on your fat ass stomach. That's when it's time to get a life because you sure as hell aren't going to get laid anytime soon.

If your at the store and say to your friend, "Hey that game is badass man!" then your fine. If your in the mall and start talkin about emotion engine, and most of the shit that people talk about on here than your just dumb.

There's a time and place for that kind of talk people. Right here.

Rolf @ Jan 26th 2007 6:49PM

Actually, I've found this to be 100% true, at least in my social circles. We've kind of entered a post-modern thing where it's not only cooler to be a rabid fanboy than to be a casual gamer, but we discuss the fact that we still remember all 150 pokemon and reminisce about the days when that was all there was. And no, this isn't just me and my nerd friend. This is me and my whole grade.

Also, the Wii does seem to have achieved Nintendo's "break into new markets" goal. Non-gamers, especially the ladies, are always asking me about it when I have it at parties.

Sammy D Kat @ Jan 26th 2007 6:54PM

I've been playing video games since the old 70's arcade times & it has gone through multiple cool/lame phases among the general public. If you dig something, who the f cares whether or not it's cool or popular? What's kind of sad though, is it seems like some people perceive them to be cool now just because of the graphic violence. Don't get me wrong, I love gratuitous carnage as much as the next guy, but I know it doesn't make me a badass in real life yet some idiots think it does.

you know @ Jan 26th 2007 6:55PM

they aint interested in you, they're just interested in your wii.

had to do it... sorry

blamecanada @ Jan 26th 2007 7:23PM

Most people know that the Wii is cool, and the PS3 is a joke.

Billy OK @ Jan 26th 2007 7:24PM

I get paid to write about and review video games. And in six years of describing that endeavor to people, I rarely meet anybody -- hardcore gamer or not -- who doesn't tell me either (a) how cool that is or (b) how jealous they are.

It's perfectly acceptable. Just don't be one of those jags who "hates" a console and wears stupid-looking shirts.

Mr Khan @ Jan 26th 2007 7:43PM

But without stupid looking T-shirts, how will we tell ourselves from the rest of the populace?

matt in Oakland @ Jan 26th 2007 7:56PM

This is just another example of the mainstream media being behind the times. Gaming has been socially acceptable since the PS2. Of course, gaming culture is so massive that there is a cross section of people from different walks of life. Some may be more hardcore or geeky than others, but gaming is nothing to hide anymore.
Hell, I tell my boss when I get a new game because that way he knows I'll be late as I spend the first week geeking out over the game and sleeping like 2 hours a night.

enbob89 @ Jan 26th 2007 8:19PM

Actually, the other day I was talking with a few people about Zelda and Smash Bros. and I was surprised that nobody gave me the "oh, so you have no life" look.

chris @ Jan 26th 2007 8:59PM

wtf? I'm sorry, but if gamers were given any respect by mainstream culture, video game award shows wouldn't be hosted by well-endowed women telling their audiences how they'll never get "any of that" (see the most recent culprit from SpikeTV), Uwe Boll would be blacklisted from the world film industry and community, and G4 wouldn't suck.

Y'see, once we're seen as an audience by big business, they'll try and market things to us. And then mainstream thinks it's ok to do gaming stuff because the marketeers are making it look good. I'm sorry, but I'm very prejudiced against these kinds of articles or studies or statements. Especially after seeing this: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/view/

"Merchants of Cool" is a very intriguing article. It absolutely confirmed a lot of what I thought about pop culture and mainstream media, and then some.

TwilightKnight @ Jan 26th 2007 9:19PM

There are 'Gamers' and there are people who play nothing but madden and GTA and Halo over and over again. I don't know about you but I don't want to be grouped together with the low lives.

Stay out of my culture and heritage and I'll be happy.

tryton @ Jan 26th 2007 9:32PM

yeah, I'm 33 and LOVE playing my 360, and you know, a lot of people at my job does also..

Grunge @ Jan 26th 2007 11:58PM

"Stay out of my culture and heritage and I'll be happy."

Whoa ... what are you on? It's people like you that give gaming a bad name; you want everyone to stay out of your passion - in short, you're a snob. In this case it's even worse, because you're a geek snob about something that has just the bare minimum of cultural value. While it might be fine for a comic book geek to scoff when someone can't appreciate The Dark Knight Returns, what are you going to get all high and mighty about? Pac-man? Final Fantasy? Some generic Japanese RPG? Listen to yourself - you sound pathetic.

The real reason that "gamers" don't like to associate with the people who play Madden or Halo is that it leaves them without an excuse to be unpopular.

Ryan @ Jan 27th 2007 12:01AM

I think what's wrong with this idea is the label "gamer." Why do we have to label ourselves in such a way? Are people that cross-stitch labeled "cross-stitchers?" No, because that's not all they are. Get rid of the labels. Playing games is a hobby, like bicycling, rollerblading, collecting baseballs cards, etc, and therefore a separate label is not needed. If I meet a person who calls him- or herself as a "gamer," you better believe I will laugh at them and pity them. However, I meet someone that tells me "I play video games," then that's completely different and much more acceptable. Being labeled a "gamer" is just pathetic in my opinion. Everyone is so much more than "just" a "gamer."

GhaleonQ @ Jan 27th 2007 12:36AM

*points to post 1*

CW @ Jan 27th 2007 12:53AM

Gaming will be considered a nerd's hobby for a long ways to come. The key factor is this: it is one of the most useless hobbies out there.

You gain almost nothing out of gaming. If you knit, at least you can be creative and make something cool. But as for gaming, you get nothing out of it, even though you spend so much time doing it. Imagine trying to impress a girl with your awesome Guitar Hero skills versus playing her a song with a real guitar.

I won't tell people I play games unless I know they do. The reason? Nobody will know what you're talking about and nobody wants to know.

Rubang B @ Jan 27th 2007 4:01AM

#34, I've actually seen the whole piece "Merchants of Cool" and it was very informative about the whole ridiculous loop of market research and MTV spitting it back out and researching it forever. I highly recommend it to everybody else.

#37, so you're saying that comics are cooler and/or more culturally significant than video games. Why is that? Why would nerding off about comics be more acceptable than nerding off about video games? I get into those kinds of arguments with my friends all the time, and they can go back and forth between films, bands, books, video games, and anything else, especially since video games are now hiring authors to write the plots, hiring film directors to produce the cutscenes, and licensing real music; they're becoming a little bit of everything.

P.S. You definitely don't want to hear me talk about Godard.

Rubang B @ Jan 27th 2007 4:04AM

#40, by this logic you gain nothing out of other non-creative hobbies such as watching films, listening to music, reading, or strolling through a museum. However, I think these are all TOTALLY AWESOME THINGS TO DO.

Grunge @ Jan 27th 2007 5:08AM

"#37, so you're saying that comics are cooler and/or more culturally significant than video games. Why is that? Why would nerding off about comics be more acceptable than nerding off about video games? I get into those kinds of arguments with my friends all the time, and they can go back and forth between films, bands, books, video games, and anything else, especially since video games are now hiring authors to write the plots, hiring film directors to produce the cutscenes, and licensing real music; they're becoming a little bit of everything."

No, I never said that comics are more culturally significant or cooler than games; I was just trying to point out that videogames don't have a magnum opus yet. Part of this is because the technology is still progressing at a breakneck speed, part of it is the fault of the industry, and part of it is the refusal of the player to accept those sorts of games (witness the failure of Grim Fandango).

Sorry, I'm losing my point; the point I'm trying to make is that there's no reason for someone who plays 30 hours a week to look down on someone who plays 5 hours a week. There's also no reason for someone who plays Ico, Grim Fandango, Myst, etc. to look down on someone who only plays the latest version of Madden. That's elitism, and it's part of the reason that some gamers don't feel "socially accepted" - it's because they're assholes.

And for the record, I do feel that comic books (the graphic novel portion anyway) do offer more cultural value than videogames. Gamers do not have a DKR, Kingdom Come, Watchmen, or Maus.

CW @ Jan 27th 2007 5:22AM

#42

I was going to write about that, but #22 already explained it. All the activities you brought up are non-creative, but they are easy to get into. It only requires 2 hours and a couple of bucks to watch a movie. You can listen to music while you do almost anything. And strolling through a museum is similarly easy.

To appreciate a game, you're going to spend at least $40 dollars on a game, and a few hundred on a console. Also, you're going to need to spend at least 10 hours on average (RPGs are more) to complete the game.

Hard as it may be for gamers to comprehend, the majority of people aren't willing to devote so much time and money to enjoy games. This 'hardcore' nature of the hobby lends itself to its nerdiness, similar to D&D and Warhammer RPGs and tabletop games, although considerably less so.

Willis @ Jan 27th 2007 6:42AM

Video gamers will always be seen as geeks and nerds to the rest of the world. Get over it.

Rubang B @ Jan 27th 2007 9:09AM

Word up Grunge. Now I completely understand your comments and agree with you about 70-80%.

Green_Ogre @ Jan 27th 2007 11:02AM

Wow, I guess we're allowed to play videogames now guys. ABC News says it's now socially acceptable to play videogames. And since it's ABC, they obviously must be correct.

Give me a fucking break people, it's always been ok to be a gamer, not because some news agency tells you it's suddenly acceptable.

Lee1733 @ Jan 27th 2007 11:42AM

No, No, No. It IS very socially acceptable to be a gamer, but only depending upon which games you play. If you play sports games, racing games, fighting games, etc. you will be considered quite normal. Everyone loves these, namely the sports games. However, if you are a hardcore Final Fantasy, Elder Scrolls, World of Warcraft, or really any fantasy-based game enthusiast, you probably won't be considered normal.

SMERSH @ Jan 27th 2007 12:01PM

@48: Yes! I think you've hit the nail right on the head. Until videogames manage to find a unique method of expression, it seems kind of pointless to debate their worth as art, or consider our position as 'gamers' (man, inverted commas are obnoxious. But not as obnoxious as the word 'gamer'). We're really just rehashing old ground; Is it cooler to like sport and cars than it is to like fantasy and science-fiction?