Defining the "Gamer"

[Brian Tams]

So, I'm sure this topic has been done before, but I'm going to start up a thread anyways (in my defense, I used the search function using the term "Defining Gamer" and the last topic I could see on this was from two years ago. So, either this hasn't been discussed in a while, or the search function and I are incompatible. Which is a good possiblity).

Anyways, for the most part hardcore gamers wouldn't term people who play Tablet/Smartphone games or browser games as true "gamers". Why is this? I'm honestly curious as to what someone has to do to meet the mental checklist gamers seem to have to include another person as one of their own, so to speak. Also, you. You personally. I want to know your own opinion or definition on the title "gamer", and what being a gamer means.

Here's mine. To me, being a gamer comes down to the passion, and how much money/time you sink into gaming. And, yes, if your main source of entertainment/enjoyment comes from playing mostly browser games like War Commander, then you are a gamer. How can I sit here and saying "No, not THAT game. You have to play THIS game in order to get into the gamer treehouse" when video gaming has become so big, so varied that at this point I've only been able to play a miniscule fraction of available games (especially now that I own a dedicated gaming PC).

So, if you love your video game, know the ins and outs of that game, and are so invested at that game that you could draw up a couple of strategy guides on how to most effectively play your favorite game/s, then you are a gamer in my book.

I do not, however, subscribe to the idea that you have to play a specific game or genre in order to be deemed a gamer in the eyes of the horde. It all smacks a bit of the He-Man Women Haters Club. I also don't like the term "gamer" in general because its a bit vague. It used to describe an athlete who had a serious drive to win at all costs (no, seriously).

So, what's your opinion/definition.

 

[TehCookie]

People who have an interest in games and/or game as a hobby. Someone who plays games to pass the time and doesn't care about the medium isn't a gamer. Doesn't matter what kind of games they play or how much, as long as they love games they're a gamer. My mom plays games more often than me but if you took away her DS and gave her a Sudoku or puzzle book she wouldn't care.

 

[Lilani]

-snip-

What is with this obsession with categorizing ourselves? You spend a good portion of your post saying you don't have to play specific games or genres to be a gamer, and at one point you even contradict yourself by saying being a gamer comes down to the time and money you put into it, and then in the very next sentence say that if you only play free games that's fine too. What is the value in all this? Do you feel better knowing there are some people who play games that don't fit in your definition of a gamer? Because that's the only value I can see anyone placing in the idea. A way to be exclusive, a way to put yourself on top of others in some fashion. I don't care how apparently "loose" or "inclusive" you think your standards are. If you're putting limits or "You must invest THIS much time in games for me to take you seriously" signs everywhere, then you're doing the exact same thing as the "You must play THIS game for me to take you seriously" people, and it's just as idiotic and unnecessary.

 

[MysticSlayer]

While I've never use the term "gamer" to describe someone who only plays the occasional game of Angry Birds or Farmville, I really have to ask: Why does this matter? Seriously, why? Most of the people I know classifying themselves as gamers do so because they play games outside of Angry Birds and Farmville, and most of the people who don't play games outside of those two don't even bother to classify themselves as a gamer. It really seems like people are just creating an issue to be angry about when the situation that makes them angry hardly exists in the first place, assuming it exists at all.

But let's assume for a moment that someone who does only play iPhone and browser-based games decides to classify themselves as a gamer (which I've come across maybe once in my life), then again, why does it matter? We're all interested in some sort of game, and the last I checked, there was no monarch who decided to establish a set of standards for the oh-so elite "Gamer's Club". It's really just a way to make some gamers feel proud about themselves for being more "in-the-loop" about the hobby than someone else, or other gamers to feel good about themselves because they stuck up for the "downtrodden casuals". In the end, it really just matters how the person cares to be classified. They definitely know more about who they are than we do. And as I've already said, I really don't think most people flooding your Facebook page with Farmville invites really care to be called a gamer in the first place unless they play games outside of Farmville.

 

[Anthony Corrigan]

If you self identify as a gamer, then your a gamer no matter what the games you play are

 

[Eve Charm]

Eh there's room for everyone under the term gamer if they like it or not ;p

It's not like other hobbies don't do the same thing with TC about categorizing inside the hobby and what not. Comic book people, star wars, car people movie people, tv people, anything so it's not like there are people that want to throw people out of the term but they still are the term.

 

[Zhukov]

"Someone who plays video games on a regular basis."

Anything more than that is just snobbery and I have no patience for it.

 

[SpaceRaptor From Space]

I would say there's a fine line between gamer and someone who plays games, the main differing factor being that being a gamer means you have passion in the medium, if you don't care and playing games is a passing thing to you, i would say you are not a gamer but a mere observer of the art.

That being said, passion in gaming can be shown from your love of Iphone games to your insane skill with star craft, neither is better then the other, in any case there's a lot more gamers then observers because its just that east to be a gamer.

 

[Brian Tams]

-snip-

What is with this obsession with categorizing ourselves? You spend a good portion of your post saying you don't have to play specific games or genres to be a gamer, and at one point you even contradict yourself by saying being a gamer comes down to the time and money you put into it, and then in the very next sentence say that if you only play free games that's fine too. What is the value in all this? Do you feel better knowing there are some people who play games that don't fit in your definition of a gamer? Because that's the only value I can see anyone placing in the idea. A way to be exclusive, a way to put yourself on top of others in some fashion. I don't care how apparently "loose" or "inclusive" you think your standards are. If you're putting limits or "You must invest THIS much time in games for me to take you seriously" signs everywhere, then you're doing the exact same thing as the "You must play THIS game for me to take you seriously" people, and it's just as idiotic and unnecessary.

Well, for me at least, in order to understand something I first have to categorize it. I don't know why, I just function that way. A lot of other people function this way as well. It also helps me to understand which subject is relevant to a friend's interests, and which subjects not to talk about, as I probably would have a better time talking to a wall

Also, investing significant time into a hobby is usually a good way to tell how passionate someone is about that. If you spend five hours a day putting together a model train collection, you are clearly passionate about model trains. To use another example, people who are passionate about comic books invest serious amounts of time and money into things like understanding the universe which their favorite characters exist in.

What I mean about significant time, is that if you're playing your iPhone game just to pass the time in line, its hard to categorize you as a gamer versus someone who spends their evenings trying to ace every Angry Birds level in existence.

So, at the end of the day, the reason why I require a category for people is so I can understand them a little better.

As a foot note, you should work on not sounding so ass-holish when responding to someone's curiosity. It might help avoid misunderstandings in the future.

 

[shootthebandit]

Gamer nowadays probably refers to most of the population. Its a great hobby thats relatively inexpensive that you can enjoy from the comfort of your front room and offers a huge amount of variety to suit pretty much everyone and it can be a social aspect wether you play splitscreen, online multiplayer or even if you use it as a subject for you chats around the water cooler at the office

This article is over ten years old however BBC news had a thing this week where they sent a few stereotypical gamers to a care home for the elderly and they were playing games like HALO and forza and the old people where really engaged in it. The whole point was to try and show people that video games are a more stimulating and engaging alternative than simply watching TV. A good quote from the following article: "A lot of our generation had a misspent youth in snooker halls"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3287891.stm


Id say the overall opinion from this video is a fairly positive one too

 

[StriderShinryu]

I've always felt that being a gamer is about more than just how much time and/or money you sink into playing games, or even what games you play or don't play. To me, being a gamer is about having a deeper interest in gaming as an art/entertainment medium. It's when you actually know about and care about the medium and the industry.

Pretty much everyone watches movies, but relatively few are movie buffs that know about and care about what goes on behind the scenes. Being a gamer carries that same sort of distinction. It's not just someone who plays games or a game, it's someone to whom games actually matter.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

This thread has been done to death - by myself included - and the answer remains the same.

gam·er [gey-mer] Show IPA
noun
a person who plays games, especially computer or video games.

 

[romxxii]

-snip-

What is with this obsession with categorizing ourselves?

It's a very teenager thing, if you ask me. It's the need to belong, but also, the need to exclude. Because if everyone can be a gamer, then you're not speshul. At least, that's what I'm getting from these kids.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Here's an easy way for me to explain my definition.

Bookworm: a person devoted to reading.

Gamer: a person devoted to playing non-physically demanding games.

Sports Fan: a person devoted to sports.


Basically, I consider a gamer, someone that is devoted to keeping up with games in some way. It's someone that, if they no longer had their games, would feel a significant loss in terms of having something for a pastime. If you're someone that would just shrug off not being able to play games for an extended period of time, then you're likely (Key word. Likely.) not a gamer.

 

[Gatx]

-snip-

What is with this obsession with categorizing ourselves?

It's a very teenager thing, if you ask me. It's the need to belong, but also, the need to exclude. Because if everyone can be a gamer, then you're not speshul. At least, that's what I'm getting from these kids.

That's not it 100% I think. I mean it's not like other activities don't do it - athletes being the only one that I can come up with off the top of my head. At what point would anyone consider themselves an athlete - if you worked out sometimes, if you were a "weekend warrior," or maybe if you just like playing a sport?

Going off that though, if we want to consider the difference between a professional athlete and an athlete the salary (as in their dedication and investment is more or less equal) then you can't call yourself a gamer until you're so completely dedicated to one particular, competitive multiplayer game to the point of exclusion of almost everything else.

 

[Strain42]

To me it's someone who in some way shape or form makes their living through playing video games. While this initially applies to professional gamers, I could understand it being used to describe critics or even testers.

I like to cook, it doesn't make me a chef.

My friend likes to sew, it doesn't make her a tailor.

I play the occasional video game, it doesn't make me a gamer.

It's a hobby for me, I don't let it give me a label. I don't consider myself a Reader, TV-Watcher, or Mini-Golfer, so why would I consider myself a gamer?

 

[romxxii]

-snip-

What is with this obsession with categorizing ourselves?

It's a very teenager thing, if you ask me. It's the need to belong, but also, the need to exclude. Because if everyone can be a gamer, then you're not speshul. At least, that's what I'm getting from these kids.

That's not it 100% I think. I mean it's not like other activities don't do it - athletes being the only one that I can come up with off the top of my head. At what point would anyone consider themselves an athlete - if you worked out sometimes, if you were a "weekend warrior," or maybe if you just like playing a sport?

Going off that though, if we want to consider the difference between a professional athlete and an athlete the salary (as in their dedication and investment is more or less equal) then you can't call yourself a gamer until you're so completely dedicated to one particular, competitive multiplayer game to the point of exclusion of almost everything else.

So what, we call people who play competitively gamers, and then everyone who follows the culture or who doesn't play competitively, we call "games fans"? It's awkward and unnecessary. In fact, this entire need to belong and exclude and divide is unnecessary. Sports is exclusionary by virtue of physical limitations; there will be athletes, and there will be spectators. Gaming, not so much. You don't have to be 250 pounds of muscle to be good at Street Fighter IV. Two of the best SSFIV players, Daigo Umehara, can't be any more different in terms of body type, background, and demeanor. Theoretically, anyone -- including your grandma if the arthritis hasn't set in -- can play and spend enough time on the game to be great.

So why the fuck, in this hobby that nearly anyone can pick up, do we act like those jocks in an 80's high school comedy?

 

[Brian Tams]

-snip-

What is with this obsession with categorizing ourselves?

It's a very teenager thing, if you ask me. It's the need to belong, but also, the need to exclude. Because if everyone can be a gamer, then you're not speshul. At least, that's what I'm getting from these kids.

I don't know where this phobia of categorization is coming from, I really, really don't. As I said before, categories are a necessary part of understanding and order. They only become a problem when people use them to discriminate, or, as so many people are mistaking my intent for, exclude. There are also times where people feel a need to self-categorize themselves because it helps them form their self identity.

The reason why I brought this topic up is because, whether we like it or not, the label gamer is here to stay, so I wanted to see if there was a basic consensus on what a gamer is so that the next time I'm asked "Hey Brian. When people call you a gamer, what are they talking about?" I can give them a slightly (very very slightly) educated answer, because so far there's been no decent form of consensus. To be honest, some of this stems from the media's mass branding, as ill-informed writers mash the word "gamer" to fit whatever stereo type fits the story they're currently doing at the time.

Now, if we can all understand that labels don't necessary mean instant seclusion, we can get on and have an educated discussion.

 

[Lilani]

As a foot note, you should work on not sounding so ass-holish when responding to someone's curiosity. It might help avoid misunderstandings in the future.

I apologize for coming off as hostile, but I'm afraid the very act of categorizing people as "gamers" and "non-gamers" and making exclusions based on those judgement is an of itself a bit of an ass-holish act. And the reason myself and the rest of us are so keen on expressing disgust for it is because, more often than not, this desire to categorize people as "gamers" comes from a desire to exclude them and to put yourself up on a pedestal above them. It's a sickening thing that's shown up on these forums many times in the past, and frankly it's getting old. While that may not be your intention in this particular case, I'm afraid your wording and desire to judge people based on arbitrary parameters is very reminiscent of those aforementioned assholes.

So perhaps you have your own parameters, but I don't really see the point in it. I have a friend at work who plays LoL and watches tournaments on his phone when he's on break, but to me he isn't a "gamer." He's just Alex, and Alex likes LoL. That's just an aspect of him. Alex also likes the bright yellow pants and suspenders he bought recently. And I have another friend who plays Touhou. I don't think of him as a gamer, either. He's Matthew. Matthew also likes hats. And my sister in law is addicted to playing Angry Birds on my brother's iPad. And she's Brittney.

So categorize people if you must, but just know the way that you use those categories is not the way most people do when they want to set absolute parameters on what a "gamer" is. Most people around here are just keen on deciding who is and isn't cool enough for our exclusive little club.