I consider myself a gamer, yet the last PC I bought was in 2008/9, the last console I bought was a PS2, and I haven’t really gamed more than a few hours a month on average in years. Legacy gamer here:p
They way I like to think of “core” and non “core” gamers is that a core gamer likes video games as a medium, even if he plays mostly within one or two genres, while the non core gamer generally only likes games on a case by case basis, and typically with a shallow criteria.
As a result, but not as a definition, most non-core gamers like games based off easy learning curves, good graphics/style, and, most importantly, bandwagon popularity. A core gamer will generally take more interest in researching and discussing games while a non-core gamer’s knowledge and research is much more shallow.
For example, I would not call the enormous and still growing community of people who play League of Legends obsessively and nothing else “core”. They’re only there for League, not for Video Games as a whole. Same with WoW, CoD/BF, etc.
pff, you people keep mentioning cod
i’m a cod-hipster, i played it before it was “cool”, it was still respectable back then
kinda died out with COD4
christ you guys
if you play games, you’re a gamer, period. There’s no hierarchy or class.
you’re not better than someone else just for playing more cognitive/obscure games unless you’re ironically being a piece of shit
a reader is a reader regardless of the book, a moviegoer is a moviegoer regardless of film.
There’s different degrees of interest but you can’t deny someone that title simply because they aren’t as into it as you are.
I guess it’s different for me, because in Dutch “gamer” has a specific connotation, which isn’t necessarily true in English.
I wouldn’t call someone who plays FarmVille or Zinga games a gamer, at least not in Dutch.
I guess you could say a gamer is someone who games regularly as a hobby. In the same way someone who plays golf once a year or plays WiiGolf or whatever isn’t a golfer, even though they golf.
It’s not a measure of superiority or hierarchy, it’s a measure of community. There is obviously significant overlap, but nonetheless “core” and non “core” gamers are separate communities with separate characteristics. It’s not a way to say one is better than the other, it’s a way to label and distinguish between the two communities. The argument has been what exactly defines each community, it’s much easier to suggest that the communities themselves exist and are at least independent enough to distinguish from each other. A large part of this division is shown simply by the division between the console and PC communities. Neither encompasses nor defines the core and non-core communities, but they are dominant components that are heavily divided by practical as well as social issues.
I do not necessarily have disdain for those in the non-core community. However, they are typically less knowledgeable than the core community (as a basic function of their interests) and I do feel disdain towards them when they interact with the core community ignorantly and arrogantly. Also, I do bear resentment towards them for their influence in the gaming market in a way that I feel has brought the quality of games down in recent years.
Also note, I’ve been talking about core and non core. I’m not even dealing with the farmville “gamer,” I’m taking non core to be the community between facebook gaming and core gaming.
It’s the difference between a moviegoer and a “movie buff”. For example, the typical moviegoer watches a lot of popular movies in the theaters when they come around with friends and watches stuff that catches his/her attention on netflix occasionally. While I do do this, I do so almost entirely as a social function, not an appreciation of the medium of film. I consider myself a movie buff because I frequently research, download, watch and critique movies without friends. I do this not because I do not have friends or because I am extremely antisocial, I do this because I value the medium in and of itself (not to say that the medium can’t be appreciated in a social setting). The moviegoer and movie buff, though there is a lot of overlap, form different communities based off of the differences in the nature of their interests in movies.
This argument reappears in just about ANY interest-centered community. One broad community within an interest labels another broad community within the interest as inferior and shallow. Their statements may be unnecessarily insulting and normative, but their identification of the separate community is still there: within an interest there will always be communities oriented around a casual pursuit of the interest and others oriented around a “core” pursuit of the interest. They’re distinct communities and as such deserve distinct titles.
just thefact that you wrote four paragraphs on the subject as a reply to that post makes me feel like its not worth reading
A fair assessment. Tl;DR: Gamers should be categorized because they are parts of fundamentally different communities within the overarching “gamer” label.
there’s different types of gamers, sure. But I’m talking about those who seek to deny others that title entirely IE those of you with the “no girls allowed” or “cod isn’t a game” and “console owners are subhuman” mind sets
[align=center][color=Magenta]™[color=Red]n[color=DarkOrange]e[color=Yellow]x[color=Lime]t [color=Blue]g[color=DarkOrchid]en[color=Magenta]™[/SIZE]
Also this[/align]
Eh, if that keeps shit kids out of games, then I’m all for it.
Shouldn’t Skype conversations be kept private, though?
“Because of your past behavior, you can’t Xbox Live Gold is required to use Skype for Xbox One.” Just in case you read over that a little too fast. I like the phrase “you can’t Xbox” though. I will totally start using Xbox as a verb.
It confused the shit out of me when I read that.
I read that as: “Because of your past behavior, you can’t [missing text string.] Xbox Live Gold is required to use Skype for Xbox One.”
Unless I’m misunderstanding, this person was banned from using Skype because of their past behaviour while a)playing a game or b)using Skype.
Option A: Why should your past behavior on a game make you unable to use Skype, which is a completely separate service?
Option B: Privacy infringed.
Either way it seems wrong and nonsensical to me.
I was just pointing out the humorous grammatical error is all. (I had actually switched to the wrong tab and thought I was in the YLYL thread.)
Here’s some clarifications. Evidently the screenshots like the one in this thread were from users who had received a full Xbox Live ban while in another app, which disables Skype because you need Gold for that. For some reason. An official Microsoft response presented in the article states, however, that Microsoft isn’t monitoring Skype communications. They are monitoring Upload Studio videos though, and too much profanity will result in a ban (for the Upload Studio app only). Odd though, seeing as how users can apparently post videos of M-Rated games containing profanity and not get banned. Seems like they should just tag videos with a content warning or something so that kids can’t access them without parental authorization. Would make more sense than just banning the video creators. I mean lots of game reviewers wouldn’t be even be able to post videos with rules like these.
The funny thing is, the page clearly listed that it was a photo you were buying and the guy still bought it.
dont forget that there was a BID on that, meaning others thought it was real too