Curse

Shyft the Pyro · Feb 09, 2007, 08:01 PM // 20:01

This post is a bit long, but it does have a point. I'll get to it in a minute.

From the official website:

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuildWars.com

PC Gamer Magazine awarded Guild Wars Nightfall its 2006 Awards for Best MMO and Best Value. They cited "gorgeous, engaging environments populated by some of the coolest- and most creative-looking monsters and characters out there." The editors also gave a nod to their favorite game element—the low-level quests—and to the "near-unlimited gameplay for the one-time price of the boxed copy."

The awards reception for the 2006 1UP Awards erupted into chants of “Guild Wars!” just prior to announcement of Guild Wars Nightfall as the Best Online/Multiplayer Game of 2006. 1UP said, “Fans of Guild Wars Nightfall love the multiplayer experience of the game and helped vote it the winner in the Online/Multiplayer category.”

In my journalism class yesterday, we were discussing how different media outlets (news channels, newspapers, blogs) report the same news based on their bias, and I brought up video games. It seems that whenever our hobby makes it into mainstream media, all we get are either kneejerk reactions like "Video games teach our children to kill!" (think back to Diablo & Quake being blamed for murders) or Biden-esque praise like "Wow, I never thought video games could actually be good for you!" (a-la Dance Dance Revolution machines in schools, video games to keep the minds of the elderly sharp, or pretty much any reporting on the Wii).

The fact is, however, that video games enjoy immense popularity, though perhaps not on the same level in the US as in some East Asian countries. With that popularity come profits - profits which could be spent on "advertising" or "popularizing" video games in the mainstream media. Even global warming has its vocal deniers, arguably financed by the companies which stand to lose a lot of profits if the public becomes too concerned with the issue. But instead of seeing "pro-video games" articles, whether voluntary or "influenced" by all those video game profits, what we get are things like the recent article in the New York Times which explicitly talks down video games in favor of toys that use the real world.

Why do you think this is happening? Is it that video games are too firmly linked in the public consciousness with childhood obesity and other disorders? Is it because gaming news is like industry news: only the things relevant to the general public or the most sensational ones ever make it out of "industry magazines" - like the above magazine reference, which will almost certainly never be reproduced in mainstream media? Is it because of general bias in the mainstream media that relegates video games into the fringes of society, much as it did with pen-and-paper RPGs? Or is it because few if any of the industry profits come from advertising, and video games are doomed to stay out of the public eye much like the "extreme" sports used to before X-Games and ads plastered on every participant's gear?

I'd really like to know what you, as video gamers, think of the above

Coridan · Feb 09, 2007, 08:28 PM // 20:28

In the US i would definetly say that video gamers are just now coming into thier own. the average age is probably 13-35 or so ....since we don't have alot of power and we are still dominated in size by the baby boomer generation i would say that we just don't have the "pull" that they do. So you won't see stuff like this in main stream news until WE gamerz are in the majority.

Also I think there is still some linkage between game=geeky teenage male = disfunctional adult sorta like how the D&D guys were "classified" back in the day...its cuz the baby boomers just don't understand us! (generally speaking)

beanerman_99 · Feb 09, 2007, 08:40 PM // 20:40

Most gamers are too busy actually playing video games to come out of their basements to write great articles about gaming in order to gain acceptance and respectability with the general populace

Just teasin.

There is bias in absolutely every single media outlet that exists today. It doesn't matter what the subject is either, one outlet will be for it and another will be 100% against it.

Only people who actually play games knows that all the "hype" about the violence, sex, language, etc. actually doesn't entice people to go out in the real world and act the same way. If gamers actually did confuse real life with games we would see a lot more paladins running around trying to heal people and serve justice. We would see more people trying to cast spells like Fireball and Slow on the general public. I don't know about you, but in my town not to many people carry longswords on their backs and discuss the most comely wenches over a mug of Mead. I mean, why would gamers only replay GTA in real life? Why not some role playing too?

So for sure a gaming mag will be biased FOR games while a teacher would most likely be biased AGAINST games.

OP-

Quote:

Is it that video games are too firmly linked in the public consciousness with childhood obesity and other disorders? Is it because gaming news is like industry news: only the things relevant to the general public or the most sensational ones ever make it out of "industry magazines" - like the above magazine reference, which will almost certainly never be reproduced in mainstream media?

Both of these statements are true and most likely the reasons.

wsmcasey · Feb 09, 2007, 09:05 PM // 21:05

President Bush is how old? I'm guessing around age 60-65. So he probably hit puberty at 13 in the late 50s/early 60s and missed out on video games all together.

So what about our future president in 40 or 50 years from now? Is he some 13 year old kid playing video games at this very moment? I'll bet he is.

Our future president within the next 50 years could be a hardcore gamer. Its possible!

My point is..............The kids that started with video games since the 80s are now grown-ups in their 30s (I'm 36), The kids that grew up in the 90's are now in Their 20s. Video games and online games become more and more accepted within our culture with each passing generation. When the pre-video game generation dies off then mass acceptance of gaming will be socially acceptable by most adult standards. Thats my opinion.

KESKI · Feb 09, 2007, 09:08 PM // 21:08

I realy like this topic, but I am no where near to have the answer I just dont have the dates to prove what ever "wild guess" I may come up...so I will just put up my opinion from my experiance.

I think a very large part of the reason Gameing is hiting large in marketing, but doesnt earn their share of credit is because that is how we had been educated.
I personaly see RPG games as novels, one by read one by play. However the fact we are trying to understand a world that was create by the author does not change.(I also play action games, but I only pull all nighter for RPG)
Now..my sister, an anti-game...not even wii can change her. She has no problem with me reading and buying a lot of novels, she oftenly ask me to read for her. But she will say something like "If you dont get off that computer you will never get a relationship!!" whenever I play TV or PC games. YA~~~like reading novels going to make me the next Hefner.
We are educated to view book in a higher stander(generaly). I even putted a reasonly read section on my resume. When I got my interviews, my future boss asked what book I read, and spark a communication even with the book have nothing relate to the work. However I will never dare to put a reasonly played rpg on resume.
Human's perspective change, and with the Gameing Industry on full speed these years...laws to regulate them should come very soon, and mybe then, human society will see gaming as normal as reading a novel in ones spare time.

GrendelScout1 · Feb 09, 2007, 09:22 PM // 21:22

I would imagine that another reason why we don't see a lot of coverage on video gaming in general is because the "news" doesn't find it sensational enough.

You watch the local or national news, or read the headlines of any newspaper, and you'll typically see things involving death, corruption, the war, crazed astronauts, missing white women, crime, terrorism, child molesters, and all kinds of other sorts of uplifting things we enjoy hearing about. Oh, I almost forgot, all the really important things that our celebrities do, that stuff is newsworthy as well. I think my local stations cover all the above first, then sports, and then maybe some 15 second bit about a cutest kitten contest, or some other obligatory/mandatory, dumbass, feelgood, who cares segment.

Unless there is a story involving games being responsible for some whack job running out and knife raping a busload of retarded nuns, we just aren't going to see much of video games in the news. Besides, its hard enough getting my facts about all the important stories going on in the world as it is. Fortunately, if I miss the 4 o'clock news, hopefully I'll be able to hear about the latest on Anna Nicole Smith at 5, or at 6, or at 7, or at 10, or at 11, or online, or etc...

wynoski · Feb 09, 2007, 09:30 PM // 21:30

I'mm 33 and my wife does not like me gamin when she or our kids are awake...

wsmcasey · Feb 09, 2007, 09:41 PM // 21:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by wynoski

I'mm 33 and my wife does not like me gamin when she or our kids are awake...

I dont think most girls got into video games till the mid to late 90s. I think thats when I started to hear the term "gamer girl". My wife doesn't get into games either (except for tetris, i have no idea why), shes 37.

bamm bamm bamm · Feb 09, 2007, 10:01 PM // 22:01

A fear of the unknown combined with a sense of kinship; it's what makes us human.

Hell, it's an ethological observation that separates most animals from bacteria. Most journalists are parents too. Ask your parents what their parents used to frown upon. Rock 'n' roll? Political activism? Give it another 10, 20 years until our 30 year olds are running the news. I'm sure we'll all find something for ourselves to be concerned about.

Richard Dawkins would probably argue that it's a genetically emergent survivalist behavior 'contributing' in a million different ways in modern society, from the reason a news reporter has another story on violence in video games, to the reason we only count our own dead in a time of war.

Of course if you were cynical you could argue that the number one priority of modern media is not to inform, but to make money, and fear sells.

LifeInfusion · Feb 10, 2007, 02:41 AM // 02:41

If you look at asian societies, videogames are as popular as sports are in the U.S.

It is more of a deal about location that the news comes from and public acceptance than media. In Europe/U.S. if someone steals a sword from another player it doesn't get mentioned in the news.

Shyft the Pyro · Feb 10, 2007, 03:05 AM // 03:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by LifeInfusion

If you look at asian societies, videogames are as popular as sports are in the U.S.

It is more of a deal about location that the news comes from and public acceptance than media.

But you have to agree that public acceptance hinges on public perception, and that, in turn, depends greatly on the media. At least it is perceived that this is the case: the TRUTH anti-smoking campaign is trying to use "advertising" to spread its message, for example. With video games, however, there doesn't seem to be any such effort, which is even more surprising considering how much industry profits have grown. With greater public acceptance, these profits would only increase. So why doesn't there seem to be any drive to bring video games into focus in the mainstream media?

Just_ A_Nightmare · Feb 10, 2007, 08:13 AM // 08:13

maybe media wouldnt be the great way to advertise video games...maybe something simpler like on my bagel packaging it says BUY GW