Hacker News Reader

The following is a bit rambling btw!

I make games for a living and love the art form. I regard games as trivial and a waste of time/resources however I just happen to be genuinely passionate about them and can actually manage to eke out a living making them (Unlike with music, my other passion)

Anyway I have always found references to a 'gamer culture' or other such 'cultures' to be .. nonsensical? Or, like these 'fandoms', like the my little pony fandom etc. I think these kind of fandom people will imagine some kind of 'culture' around anything and its usually really bad quality stuff, eg terrible anime, terrible derivative multiplayer games, really bad juvenile comics, crappy collectible card games etc. Basically societies slightly less mainstream cultural crap. I have no idea why this seems to be the case.

As far as I'm concerned I have always just really liked playing games, I consider myself somewhat of a connoisseur of the art form (As I would for most other media, music, film,comics,cartoons,) that does not make me a member of any particlar culture or sect imo. I also like to watch films but I dont consider myseld a 'filmer'

I think you maybe have some points, about the fact that video games aren't simply passive consumption, but involve active creation on the part of the 'consumer', in several ways.

But. But. I want to draw attention to your assumption that all forms of culture are about 'consumption' -- there used to be forms of culture that did not involve money exchanging hands, and that were about shared creation, not about a presenter and an audience. Say, people getting together to play music and sing songs themselves. The fact that many of us can't anymore barely even conceive of 'culture' except as a purchased commodity is telling.

It may be true that in 21st century U.S, "the vast majority of people in any culture are consumers of the fruits of that culture," but it is simply not true that ALL culture MUST be that way. One can critisize that mode of culture without thinking 'culture' is a bad thing.

Consumption doesn't mean that they pay for it with money. You can easily consume mario cart with out ever owning the game or paying money into it. Yes someone bought it, but even those musicians had to get there instruments from somewhere.

It's true that it's not black and white, there are matters of degree, grey areas, and different aspects of consumption/participation.

I think the basic point still stands though, that 'culture' has largely become something where it's assumed a minority produces and a majority consumes -- but this is not in fact an intrinsic aspect of culture, and it's perhaps only in the past 100 years that 'consumption' has become the dominant mode of culture at all.

I also think you can make an argument that in some cases ad ways video games are a place where this mode of culture is actually challenged _more_ than currently typical (let's talk about minecraft).

Of course you're right. But especially these days even getting together and playing music and singing songs is full of "consumption" in the sense that you relate what you're doing to what you have consumed in the past. "Oh that riff sounds like Coldplay" or "What if we tried this vocal thing like Adele does in this song?" These kinds of influences are often unconscious. Even trying to avoid similarity to existing culture is tied up in the consumption of that culture, as has been the case with every revolution in art since the Renaissance.

I would love to hear more examples of culture that you would claim aren't tied up with consumption. The only examples I can think of are cultures that emerge from things like suffrage and oppression.

I don't think it's black and white, and I don't think there's a way for any of us in our present society to do anything that isn't in some way "tied up with consumption", it's the sea we swim in.

But there are matters of degree and quality, different aspects, etc., and the passive/consumptive/based-on-purchase aspects of culture are worth critical attention. There are also interesting arguments to be made that video games (at least some of the time for some participants) may challenge the consumptive mode of cultural participation _more_ than other forms of mass culture.

I don't think there's a way for any of us in our present society to do anything that isn't in some way "tied up with consumption", it's the sea we swim in.

What about doing something old-school like getting together with friends and playing music (folk or traditional) or telling stories around a campfire?

Co-created, shared, cultural experience without "consumption".

Look, the culture exists, maybe not for you. The true test is:

If a criticism of your favorite video game makes you angry, you have a problem. Hell criticize any game I play, any operating system I use, any hardware I use, its all good. But this is not true for all people.

Also the article rings very well with abuses seen in the video game industry. Why is it that working at a wall street firm making 200-300k a year while working ~ 10-12 hr shifts is seen as horrible, exploitative work, while working for a video game firm making 100-150k a year while working 12-14 hr shifts is seen as glorious work making stuff you love?

Hell, I can work at a "normal" development job (I do) working 8 hrs a day, and have the rest of my day dedicated to enjoying myself (which can include playing games, making games, making hardware, hacking hardware, human interaction, family life, you pick it).

What? I think you misread my comment. The article's central argument is, "Even if all gamers were tolerant and accepting, gamer culture is still inherently worthless because it's based on consumption." I take issue with this thesis on multiple levels, and your reply is addressing something entirely different.

>This isn't to defend misogynistic gamers (who I sincerely hope are an increasingly small fraction of gamers that just happen to be extremely vocal on the internet.

It's in the industry, too. It's not just a vocal minority.

That's true, although I think industry is getting better on the dev side (not as much on the corporate side), and at a faster rate than the consumer side of the culture. Developer events like GDC are worried about harassment and actively try to stop it, and a lot of developers in the current kerfuffle have actively distanced themselves from their less savory fans, e.g.: https://medium.com/@andreaszecher/open-letter-to-the-gaming-...

it must necessarily extend to almost all "culture," be it art, news, food, music, movies

It does extend to a large swath of culture that has become nothing more than means for signalling. Maybe it has always been like that and art is simply more accessible now so more people engage in this affiliation by taste.

You're right to say that this critique of culture should, logically, apply to all, but the writer goes back on his premise a few paragraphs in and instead says this:

> Gamer identity is tainted, root and branch, by its embrace of consumption as a way of life.