So, full disclosure: I'd never heard the word "gamer" until I was about 21. I'm currently 25 (26 here on the 23rd of October). I found it in the articles and comment sections of game review sites and YouTube videos, it almost functioning as a sot of banner people carried. Whether it was speaking on what "gamers wanted from their games" to "gamers being well represented in mainstream culture", gamers certainly seemed to be a very real thing. At least online. The thing is, I haven't met a single flesh-and-blood human who has verbally expressed this identification with the term "gamer". It's not that I think they don't exist (I'm more than certain that they do), but I say it to preface my next statement: despite having played video games for nearly 22 years, I could never call myself a "gamer."
What conditions make a "gamer" a "gamer?" Is it just the mere act of playing video games? What of tabletop games such as "Dungeons and Dragons", or "Magic: The Gathering?" Many would seriously argue yes. We could go further, though. What of poker, blackjack, roulette , or any other form of gambling? Those are, often, games of skill with large communities, much like the traditional definition of "gamer." What of people who play physical sports? Football, baseball, futbol, angling, archery, and many more sports are all games with rules and regulations, and all of the requisite communities. So, clearly, video games don't hold a monopoly over organized play with a large community following. So, if that's the case, certainly any person in any of the aforementioned activities could call themselves a "gamer."
Even with that, while I like all kinds of games, I never saw the need to identify with the activity as a form of identity. I don't see a need to be defined by my enjoyment of a hobby/artform. That isn't to talk down to those who do, and seek the communities therein. Humans are social, so you will likely find communities for any and all activities and interests. Even more, within gaming (henceforth we'll be referring to video games) there are communities for specific genres of game, even down to specific games and even characters.
With all that considered, what is it that keeps me from identifying as a "gamer?" I'm thinking that it has to do with how I consume media. For one, I don't do fandoms. I can't. Not one part of me engages in a sort of higher level, group consumption of media. Playing video games, watching movies, and general consumption of art was almost a solitary activity for me as a kid, so the idea of identifying as a member of a group dedicated to talking about and consuming any piece of media is a wholly alien concept to me. I see being a "gamer" as being a part of a fandom, this fandom obviously around games as a whole. I don't see that as a bad thing, necessarily, but it's something that just doesn't jive with me.
Perhaps, it's the fact that I apply a distance to myself and the art I consume. I really like art, otherwise this blog wouldn't exist, but I am far more concerned with its construction than consuming it. Not to mention there is such a broadness to fandom and the title of "gamer" that I'm not even certain I could apply it to myself. How many games do I play to "officially" be a "gamer?" How long do I have to play games? Hours? Weeks? Years? Do I have to like ALL games? Only twitchy, first-person-shooters? How about a labyrinthine real-time-strategy game against the top players in the world? I could continue this for hours.
There is one big thing that really seals the deal on my not identifying as a "gamer": there's the reality that we ALL are "gamers." Yes, every single one of us is a "gamer," top to bottom. Now, you may be sitting a bit slack jawed, incredulous to my nerve for saying such a thing. Yes, I do admit it's a bit of a "pet theory" but if you don't believe in your own ideas, then who will? Yeah? Yeah.
So, some areas that influenced this opinion are Game Studies and Play Studies, two areas of major importance if your looking to get into game design. I won't go into tons of detail about these two subjects (they have literally VOLUMES of text within them) but, essentially, humans use play at every life stage. Now, many things can be classified as play and there are many different thoughts on what play even is. Add to this the multiple definitions of what constitutes a game, and we can easily see how things can get quite complicated. Essentially, we can turn ANYTHING into a game. "How quickly can I wash these dishes?" "How soon can I make it to work?" "How many articles of clothing can I fit into this basket to wash?"
There is one major counterpoint: games tend to be outside of reality, as in their result has no major implications upon real life. Well, I'm inclined to think that's kinda bunk. People who are professional athletes, or play any game professionally, definitely see a major impact on their life from the results of each game. We don't then say "well, he makes his money from playing the game of soccer, so that can't be a game, now." So, with that in mind, I say we all are intimately concerned with games. Games and play are a major way for us to interact with each other and with the world around us. Even more, we tend to love structure and form, and games tend to be all about that in their structure. We are all "gamers", so I don't see a need to make a special group out of it. It just becomes redundant.
I'm certain there will be many who will have read this and would have vehemently disagreed with me. That's cool. I'm down with dissenting opinions on art and whatnot, as it stirs on discussion. When all is said and done, you won't see me ever standing up for "gamers" beyond just basic consumer advocacy. I do think the designation is a bit of a redundancy, but I don't begrudge you if you find yourself identifying with it. What matters is that we both have a major appreciation for the art form, and hopefully that appreciation spurns on more interesting conversation on what the medium is capable of.
No comments:
Post a Comment