Why is casual racism/sexism more accepted in video games than other forms of media (these days)?

i wanna make a free online game about flag-burning, anyone kno flash

one thing imo strongly identifying as a gamer is kinda frivolous and consumerist, like if thats yr thing in life u might not be doing that good

i don't necessarily think being a 'gamer' (at least how i've understood it) is frivolous and consumerist. yes, it can be, if you organize your identity around your game purchases. but you could be very active in, eg, the IF community, write your own games, play other ppl's games, write reviews + give feedback, and that's a totally different emphasis. or like hardcore board gamers or war gamers, i've never thought of them as particularly consumerist (even tho you do have to buy the games in those cases, but that's not what distinguishes the hobby).

yeah idk theres just something very indicative of contemporary dysfunction in strongly identifying with entertainment imo

more so than identifying w/ cinema, or literature?

pretty similar prob but im sure some differences cld be teased out

if you write your own games i give you a pass but im sure thats less than like .01% of gamers

its consumerist but also involves tech-condescension and virtual competition. its like a perfect storm for the alpha nerd supermen

i'm v. sympathetic to the idea that capitalism has basically totally subsumed/co-opted all these creative endeavors, but i still believe (and continue to identify as a music fan, film fan, lit fan, game fan, etc) and search out in these "entertainments" resistance or at least the opiate-void.

i've written my own games, tho not in many years. generally i believe that creation is the best way to resist the hegemony but also i'm very lazy

feel like the game aspect reduces the ability to convey profundity that movies and books sometimes have but still being a reader or a movie buff who cares

i mean im both of those things and i even love games tho not so much video ones but i dont build my identity around any of that

depends on the game. i've had profound experiences in games that are irreproducible in lit + film (in civ, in dwarf fortress), not to mention the kind of ludic expressivity that other mediums can't capture - the participatory/improv element.

what does a lag00n build his identity around?

*bro-hoof*

free spirit. lucid dreamer. citizen of the world. bacon fanatic. uncle.

video game lifestyle is kinda like the heroin lifestyle only fatter

i should clarify that 'gamer' is not at the top of my list of identifications. my social/relationship and religious affiliations take precedence. but considering how many hours i spend gaming in my life it would be silly i think to say that it had nothing to do w/ how i see myself.

depends on the game. i've had profound experiences in games that are irreproducible in lit + film (in civ, in dwarf fortress), not to mention the kind of ludic expressivity that other mediums can't capture - the participatory/improv element.

― Mordy, Monday, September 8, 2014 1:24 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah im open to the idea that games can convey profundity, its a p interesting question, def a different profundity than books or movies, tho i do think the losing/winning binary game aspect tends to hit a different part of the mind

like chess can be profound, right? i'm not a huge chess guy but i've played games that - if not profound - at least felt deeply immersive + enriching.

it can def be very compelling and satisfying but idk if it reveals deep truths

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnqj31VPNoE

mulling that over i'm not sure we cd agree on a version of deep truth that wd include other art-forms but exclude all games?

maybe the deepest game would be one you lose every time

in the rough mental schemata i've built gaming in general as associated w/ game theory as the kind of deep truth / philosophical deep structure. also there's a lot of writing about how games access 'playing' as like a fundamental, primordial human drive. this is stuff i used to think about a lot in undergrad (and read about a lot - there is some decent academic work in the field lately) but haven't really dealt w/ as of late.

maybe the deepest game would be one you lose every time

oh so Dark Souls or Ninja Gaiden

nethack

ha yeah, that or Tetris

sure there are indie games that deliberately do that kind of thing but feel like they fail as games

yup

in the same way that most people won't ride for clumsy didacticism in other artforms

i'm not sure what you're responding to now, NV, but like tetris + super hexagon are to me the purest distillation of video games and also the most personally satisfying. my proudest (llol) gaming accomplishment of the last year or so was "beating" super hexagon.

in the rough mental schemata i've built gaming in general as associated w/ game theory as the kind of deep truth / philosophical deep structure. also there's a lot of writing about how games access 'playing' as like a fundamental, primordial human drive. this is stuff i used to think about a lot in undergrad (and read about a lot - there is some decent academic work in the field lately) but haven't really dealt w/ as of late.

― Mordy, Monday, September 8, 2014 1:34 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

sure games activate deep human things but do they have anything to say about it or are they just pushing yr buttons over and over

spelunky

sorry for obscurity Mordy i was contemplating those kind of "art" games that deliberately subvert ludic pleasure to make some comment on something, maybe on play itself

like some feted but ultimately kinda shitty IF has done

we've definitely done some "games as art" threads elsewhere btw just in case anybody is unhappy about derail

i'd want to talk about specific IF (or other) games just bc i think some are tremendous works (galatea, slouching towards bedlam, varicella) and some even celebrated works (photopia, curses) are kinda meh.

but yeah, i find games that don't actually let you play very dissatisfying - whether they're Uncharted cut-scene on-rails games, or Gone Home

Photopia is def one i think is a tawdry thing that fails as game whereas yeah your a-list certainly is more successful as playable games that want to create an aesthetic experience

Conversation has suddenly sped up so I'm probably skipping a lot of other points here, but re: i do think the losing/winning binary game aspect tends to hit a different part of the mind - a lot of games don't use this binary. If you want examples try any sandbox game, and a bunch of IF only counts as having a win condition if you consider yourself as having "won" a book or film when you get to the end of it.

you can be an enthusiast (and even a creator) of something in a field without proclaiming an identity around it.
douglas adams probably didn't even have "IF pioneer" on his tombstone.

yeah but is it good as a game xp

douglas adams' IF games are nigh unplayable ime lol, but i'd be surprised if he didn't (and if ppl like adam cadre, emily short, etc don't) see their identities as being somewhat intertwined w/ the games that they design.

And yes, games with non-binary conditions can be fucking awesome as games. I don't even get how this is up for discussion, really.

When I think of depth in gaming what comes to mind are certain puzzlers and platformers where one needs to spend a lot of time (or a lot of deaths) experimenting within a geometrical structure and learning its complexities. That to me is when gaming feels deep, when it succeeds in facilitating deep immersion in something highly abstract. I don't know if this counts as 'deep truth' - it's truth as pertaining to some tiny pocket of the universe defined by fixed rules and starting conditions.

i'm reading this old interview about the hitchhiker's text game he co-wrote and he definitely comes across as more "#1 beatles fan" than "IF dude" even while being pretty excited about the medium
("this is the first game that lies to you!")

And yes, games with non-binary conditions can be fucking awesome as games. I don't even get how this is up for discussion, really.

― emil.y, Monday, September 8, 2014 1:55 PM (52 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

well no one seems to play them for one thing

oops! sorry, i thought for a second we were talking about scott adams. yes, i'm sure douglas adams mostly thought of himself as a fiction author, surely

its ok to identify as a 'gamer', but if your whole identity is based around being a 'gamer' and the subculture that goes around it then it becomes a problem, like a steady diet of pizza and nothing else. e.g. just reading about 'swatting', where live streamers are pranked by calling in a SWAT team on them. what other subculture would come up with such idiocy?