The barrier(s) to seeing games as more
- Thread starter Ted_Wolff
- Start date
schimmel
Rookie
Most parents (at least my parents' generation, the baby boomers) either played on an Atari or a Commodore and never really continued. Sure, there were hardcore gamers back then too, but they were few and far between. To them, Pong and Centipede were just moving a stick and pushing buttons, and they carry that impression from their childhoods for their whole lives. I played games extensively when I lived at home and they never saw them as anything more for over fifteen years. Sometimes adults just don't get things
Trippysmurf
Rookie
Older generations don't understand games as a hobby/source of entertainment. Many see them as obnoxious (both visually and audibly) wastes of time.
Most do not, and will not, acknowledge that many games are story driven, to the point where it feels more like you are playing the title character in a movie, rather than just "shootan!". While the Wii has helped bring gaming to the mainstream, said games are not a true sampling of the pinnacle of electronic entertainment. At most they are virtual board games or $40 mini games. These games, however, do not provide much crossover, as families prefer to stick with the "family friendly" games and continue to gloss over those that may be stimulating in other regards. A perfect example can be seen with the sales of the more "adult" Wii based games as opposed to their family-friendly peers.
One day we will have a crossover game or more likely, as we get older and become the dominant demographic, we'll change the outlook on modern entertainment that unfortunately the baby boomer generation currently dictates.
Most do not, and will not, acknowledge that many games are story driven, to the point where it feels more like you are playing the title character in a movie, rather than just "shootan!". While the Wii has helped bring gaming to the mainstream, said games are not a true sampling of the pinnacle of electronic entertainment. At most they are virtual board games or $40 mini games. These games, however, do not provide much crossover, as families prefer to stick with the "family friendly" games and continue to gloss over those that may be stimulating in other regards. A perfect example can be seen with the sales of the more "adult" Wii based games as opposed to their family-friendly peers.
One day we will have a crossover game or more likely, as we get older and become the dominant demographic, we'll change the outlook on modern entertainment that unfortunately the baby boomer generation currently dictates.
LinksOcarina
Rookie
Who do you want to blame first?
Politicans? Casual Gamers? Hardcore Gamers? Generation X, Y, or Z, or the Baby Boomers.
It's all about perception, so the barrier is basically what you perceive it to be.
Politicans? Casual Gamers? Hardcore Gamers? Generation X, Y, or Z, or the Baby Boomers.
It's all about perception, so the barrier is basically what you perceive it to be.
Ted_Wolff
Rookie
I'm not looking to assign blame.
I think there are legitimate barriers to seeing games as more that we can fix. If it's some perception, then we can fix the perception.
This is more difficult in some cases (e.g., video games being relatively new) than others (e.g., making games easier to use).
One barrier I think is unique to understanding games, as opposed to movies or books, is usability. You don't have to specifically learn how to read a book or watch a movie to enjoy them. But you do have to learn how to use and play a video game.
For all of the criticism Nintendo gets over its motion controls and how they are simplistically implemented (e.g., the "waggle"), the company has done a lot to make games easier to use and broaden their appeal.
I think there are legitimate barriers to seeing games as more that we can fix. If it's some perception, then we can fix the perception.
This is more difficult in some cases (e.g., video games being relatively new) than others (e.g., making games easier to use).
One barrier I think is unique to understanding games, as opposed to movies or books, is usability. You don't have to specifically learn how to read a book or watch a movie to enjoy them. But you do have to learn how to use and play a video game.
For all of the criticism Nintendo gets over its motion controls and how they are simplistically implemented (e.g., the "waggle"), the company has done a lot to make games easier to use and broaden their appeal.
malakian
Rookie
^I think they've simply reiterated the already overly simple misconceptions. For instance, my girlfriend played through fable 2 and thoroughly enjoyed it and began seeing a different side to games. That was a long process, however, and putting someone with a negative view of games through an experience of many hours is quite a task. How can i show someone mass effect's grandeur in a nutshell? I cant, but i can show them pong or Mario in a nutshell. Boing. Blip.
Unfortunately it requires an investment of time to see games as something more, and many wont give them that!
Unfortunately it requires an investment of time to see games as something more, and many wont give them that!
LinksOcarina
Rookie
Again though, accessibility is how one perceives it.
One thing that a lot of this boils down to is how people look at things, including gamers.
For example dude, what do you look for in a game when your playing it? Is it graphics, sound design, effects, story, controls, a neat idea, or a mix of it all?
One thing that a lot of this boils down to is how people look at things, including gamers.
For example dude, what do you look for in a game when your playing it? Is it graphics, sound design, effects, story, controls, a neat idea, or a mix of it all?
You wanna know bad perception of video games, watch TV. Most of the time games are button mashing, beeps and bloop effects, and other stuff like that. Even modern ones.
But one example was really bad. Prince of Persia on the show Life. It shows that even modern games are perceived as having distinct levels and a simple "save the princess" storyline, and nothing more.
But one example was really bad. Prince of Persia on the show Life. It shows that even modern games are perceived as having distinct levels and a simple "save the princess" storyline, and nothing more.
Ted_Wolff
Rookie
malakian said:
But I also have to invest a lot of time to read and appreciate a Dostoyevsky novel. Not a lot of people invest that time, but surely those same people don't think of books as simply reading words and turning pages.
Perhaps at one time they did, when text was an infant medium, so I'd say another barrier for video games is how short of a time they've been around.
Links, depends on the game what I'm look for, but above all what I look for in a game is the chance to create a memorable experience.
Longo, good point. I think public perception (through TV, movies, etc.) reinforces and perpetuates its own perception.
Ted_Wolff
Rookie
Well that's my point. I don't have to read Dickens, Dostoyevsky, Shakespeare, Cummings, and many others to know how capable text is.
But in your case, it took your girlfriend playing Fable II to understand games as a medium are capable of more than bloops and beeps.
There's a disconnect between the mediums, one that I think is a problem of time.
But thinking about your point of showing someone the grandeur of Mass Effect in a nutshell made me think of Braid. I'd think a simple, short game such as Braid could show someone what more games are capable of, and it's patterned after Mario, to boot!
But in your case, it took your girlfriend playing Fable II to understand games as a medium are capable of more than bloops and beeps.
There's a disconnect between the mediums, one that I think is a problem of time.
But thinking about your point of showing someone the grandeur of Mass Effect in a nutshell made me think of Braid. I'd think a simple, short game such as Braid could show someone what more games are capable of, and it's patterned after Mario, to boot!
Bretimus_v2
So tired.
At my college, there was a fairly big student group against video games. They were against them not only for violence, language, and thematic elements, but mostly for the waste of time. Their main areas of worry were the addictive nature of video game playing and the amount of "empty" hours that people place into them. Their argument was that we are hobbling our generation and future generations from accomplishing our full potential.
It lasted like two years then the main core graduated.
It lasted like two years then the main core graduated.
Studies have actually been done which show that games are actually a medium from which one can learn positively. And I'm not talking about those crappy edutation games, I'm talking about modern games, including those in negative light.
Even culturally accepted media such as comic books struggled to attain the status they hold now, and were subjected to the same scrutiny that we experience as video gamers. They were accused of causing violence and delinquency, et ceter
I believe that it's a matter of time before we have parity between the respect afforded to a medium such as video games and other older media.
Even culturally accepted media such as comic books struggled to attain the status they hold now, and were subjected to the same scrutiny that we experience as video gamers. They were accused of causing violence and delinquency, et ceter
I believe that it's a matter of time before we have parity between the respect afforded to a medium such as video games and other older media.
