frat boy mentality-a plague on the gaming industry?

[GenericPCUser]

I would agree to a change in the diversity of games, and a main character with more personality that his cardboard cut-out.

Yes, it is true that games are more diverse than ever before, and characters have more depth than ever before. But thats supremely obvious - only someone who knowss literally nothing about gaming and has pusposefully ignored every game to have been made for the last 10 years could disagree with that

I never said games were more diverse in the past, but I think most would agree that games are still pretty stagnant when it comes to diversity. The small changes aren't enough and the games that do include "diversity" tend to market it as if these "diverse" characters are little more than freak shows for the "normal" people to ogle at.

So far, Skyrim may have had the most respectable way of including homosexuality, but I digress.

RPG's are generally more open to something different than something like a First-Person shooter, and the only time I've seen a possibly gay character in a shooter that was done well was (I'm not kidding) Bulletstorm. (And maybe Heavy in TF2)

I fully expected it to be bland and muscle headed, but at least it was fun. However, there was one, miniscule, almost insignificant part that showed they at least tried. Ishi, the cyborg teammate of the main character, mentions that he may be attracted to the main character on some level. The main character, who I would have to assume was heterosexual, merely states that he is not there one judge.

It's never brought up again, but the mere fact that I remembered it and not all of the bland story and all the other bland characters must mean something.

Diversity is just supposed to be there, it's not supposed to be the direct focus of the story.

That's what separates Star Trek from The Help.

Kanji Tatsumi, Persona 4. And I will remind you, the height of older gamings appraoch to difference in sexuality was when Final Fight had you go beat the crap out of transvestites.

Oh, and - Veronica Santangelo and Arcade Gannon from Fallout New Vegas - the most sane, levelheaded and pleasent people you will come across in the entire damn game, easily two of the most dependeable and interesting companions each having numerous chances to kick ass, and a lesbian and a gay man, respectively.

I never knew Persona 4 and Fallout: NV were shooters.

Also, Kanji being gay is still fairly debatable in the American version of the game (The Japanese version they were a little more blunt about it, but with the changes they made to the American release Kanji seems more like a heterosexual man with feminine tendencies.)

You're debating whether New Vegas, is a shooter.

Point stands on it, Veronica and Arcade. Matter of fact, Veronicas lover, Christina, is the only bright spot left in the entire dismal hell that is Dead Money.

New Vegas is an RPG with guns. The same way shooters with RPG elements don't become RPG's, RPG's with shooter elements don't become shooters.

My argument was never that RPG's handle diversity poorly, but that shooters specifically handle it poorly and you pointed to an RPG instead.

 

[GenericPCUser]

I would agree to a change in the diversity of games, and a main character with more personality that his cardboard cut-out.

Yes, it is true that games are more diverse than ever before, and characters have more depth than ever before. But thats supremely obvious - only someone who knowss literally nothing about gaming and has pusposefully ignored every game to have been made for the last 10 years could disagree with that

I never said games were more diverse in the past, but I think most would agree that games are still pretty stagnant when it comes to diversity. The small changes aren't enough and the games that do include "diversity" tend to market it as if these "diverse" characters are little more than freak shows for the "normal" people to ogle at.

So far, Skyrim may have had the most respectable way of including homosexuality, but I digress.

RPG's are generally more open to something different than something like a First-Person shooter, and the only time I've seen a possibly gay character in a shooter that was done well was (I'm not kidding) Bulletstorm. (And maybe Heavy in TF2)

I fully expected it to be bland and muscle headed, but at least it was fun. However, there was one, miniscule, almost insignificant part that showed they at least tried. Ishi, the cyborg teammate of the main character, mentions that he may be attracted to the main character on some level. The main character, who I would have to assume was heterosexual, merely states that he is not there one judge.

It's never brought up again, but the mere fact that I remembered it and not all of the bland story and all the other bland characters must mean something.

Diversity is just supposed to be there, it's not supposed to be the direct focus of the story.

That's what separates Star Trek from The Help.

Kanji Tatsumi, Persona 4. And I will remind you, the height of older gamings appraoch to difference in sexuality was when Final Fight had you go beat the crap out of transvestites.

Oh, and - Veronica Santangelo and Arcade Gannon from Fallout New Vegas - the most sane, levelheaded and pleasent people you will come across in the entire damn game, easily two of the most dependeable and interesting companions each having numerous chances to kick ass, and a lesbian and a gay man, respectively.

I never knew Persona 4 and Fallout: NV were shooters.

Also, Kanji being gay is still fairly debatable in the American version of the game (The Japanese version they were a little more blunt about it, but with the changes they made to the American release Kanji seems more like a heterosexual man with feminine tendencies.)

You're debating whether New Vegas, is a shooter.

Point stands on it, Veronica and Arcade. Matter of fact, Veronicas lover, Christina, is the only bright spot left in the entire dismal hell that is Dead Money.

New Vegas is an RPG with guns. The same way shooters with RPG elements don't become RPG's, RPG's with shooter elements don't become shooters.

My argument was never that RPG's handle diversity poorly, but that shooters specifically handle it poorly and you pointed to an RPG instead.

An RPG with guns makes it sound like the guns are optional. There is a difference between a shooter with rpg elements and a shooter RPG. If it is impossible to go through the game without firing a shot, then the game is a shooter rpg. You cannot complete New Vegas without shooting a gun, therefore its a shooter RPG.

Call it what you want but the point is I'm excluding it when I use the word "shooters." As far as I'm concerned, my point remains valid and the only progress made was that we discovered we disagree what the definition of a shooter is.

 

[Kingjackl]

While I despise the 'graphics-first' mentality as much as the next man, I don't like how everyone stereotypes the sort of person who goes for that as beer-drinking frat-boys who only ever play CoD and Halo while popping Ritalin pills. I know gamers like to think of themselves as some kind of oppressed minority striving for artistic perfection while surrounded on all sides by evil publishers who only cater to the guys who gave us wedgies in middle school, but that whole attitude just seems incredibly childish nowadays.

I actually think we should be blaming pedantic, cashed up wankers who buy expensive graphics cards, talk earnestly about things like 'frame-rates' and 'antialiasing' and believe that if you don't have an HD TV then "ohmigod, WHY would you play games at all? Don't you know HD is like, a standard now?"

I've met quite a few so-called 'frat-boy' gamers ands most of them have been pretty cool guys. Whereas I can't listen to a cashed-up inner city trendy going on about how "why would you play games on anything but the PC" without wanting to punch them in the face.

 

[GenericPCUser]

I would agree to a change in the diversity of games, and a main character with more personality that his cardboard cut-out.

Yes, it is true that games are more diverse than ever before, and characters have more depth than ever before. But thats supremely obvious - only someone who knowss literally nothing about gaming and has pusposefully ignored every game to have been made for the last 10 years could disagree with that

I never said games were more diverse in the past, but I think most would agree that games are still pretty stagnant when it comes to diversity. The small changes aren't enough and the games that do include "diversity" tend to market it as if these "diverse" characters are little more than freak shows for the "normal" people to ogle at.

So far, Skyrim may have had the most respectable way of including homosexuality, but I digress.

RPG's are generally more open to something different than something like a First-Person shooter, and the only time I've seen a possibly gay character in a shooter that was done well was (I'm not kidding) Bulletstorm. (And maybe Heavy in TF2)

I fully expected it to be bland and muscle headed, but at least it was fun. However, there was one, miniscule, almost insignificant part that showed they at least tried. Ishi, the cyborg teammate of the main character, mentions that he may be attracted to the main character on some level. The main character, who I would have to assume was heterosexual, merely states that he is not there one judge.

It's never brought up again, but the mere fact that I remembered it and not all of the bland story and all the other bland characters must mean something.

Diversity is just supposed to be there, it's not supposed to be the direct focus of the story.

That's what separates Star Trek from The Help.

Kanji Tatsumi, Persona 4. And I will remind you, the height of older gamings appraoch to difference in sexuality was when Final Fight had you go beat the crap out of transvestites.

Oh, and - Veronica Santangelo and Arcade Gannon from Fallout New Vegas - the most sane, levelheaded and pleasent people you will come across in the entire damn game, easily two of the most dependeable and interesting companions each having numerous chances to kick ass, and a lesbian and a gay man, respectively.

I never knew Persona 4 and Fallout: NV were shooters.

Also, Kanji being gay is still fairly debatable in the American version of the game (The Japanese version they were a little more blunt about it, but with the changes they made to the American release Kanji seems more like a heterosexual man with feminine tendencies.)

You're debating whether New Vegas, is a shooter.

Point stands on it, Veronica and Arcade. Matter of fact, Veronicas lover, Christina, is the only bright spot left in the entire dismal hell that is Dead Money.

New Vegas is an RPG with guns. The same way shooters with RPG elements don't become RPG's, RPG's with shooter elements don't become shooters.

My argument was never that RPG's handle diversity poorly, but that shooters specifically handle it poorly and you pointed to an RPG instead.

An RPG with guns makes it sound like the guns are optional. There is a difference between a shooter with rpg elements and a shooter RPG. If it is impossible to go through the game without firing a shot, then the game is a shooter rpg. You cannot complete New Vegas without shooting a gun, therefore its a shooter RPG.

Call it what you want but the point is I'm excluding it when I use the word "shooters." As far as I'm concerned, my point remains valid and the only progress made was that we discovered we disagree what the definition of a shooter is.

Translation - I'm right, but you refuse to admit it.

... Yes.

 

[GenericPCUser]

While I despise the 'graphics-first' mentality as much as the next man, I don't like how everyone stereotypes the sort of person who goes for that as beer-drinking frat-boys who only ever play CoD and Halo while popping Ritalin pills. I know gamers like to think of themselves as some kind of oppressed minority striving for artistic perfection while surrounded on all sides by evil publishers who only cater to the guys who gave us wedgies in middle school, but that whole attitude just seems incredibly childish nowadays.

I actually think we should be blaming pedantic, cashed up wankers who buy expensive graphics cards, talk earnestly about things like 'frame-rates' and 'antialiasing' and believe that if you don't have an HD TV then "ohmigod, WHY would you play games at all? Don't you know HD is like, a standard now?"

I've met quite a few so-called 'frat-boy' gamers ands most of them have been pretty cool guys. Whereas I can't listen to a cashed-up inner city trendy going on about how "why would you play games on anything but the PC" without wanting to punch them in the face.

If you play fighters on and HD tv there is input delay. Standard is the way to go.

 

[Twilight_guy]

People have been complaining about this since Sony got into the market and introduce new types of gamers. If you think letting more people play games is a bad thing then your an idiot. Having more people is a good thing. I don't care if they are jocks or casual gamers or whatever there are enough developers and the market is big enough to support diverse interests. Nobody complains because ESPN exists and there need to be more Sci-fi channels. Why? Because people can just choose what they want to see and the people who make the shows will produce different thing for different audiences. We don't all need to be robots who think the same things and play the same games, we can have diverse interests and the medium can be diverse. Games aren't all produced by one guy trying to please everyone or a bunch of people who all talk to each other, its a bunch of groups targeting different crowds. What that one frat guy plays has no effect on you unless you play the same game. A diverse market is good. The big name games are produced by people targeting a wide audience. If you don't like it, find a new developer, find one who isn't partially targeting people you don't like, stick a sock in your mouth and mittens on your hands, I don't care just stop trying to force games to fit into your ideal state or isolate themselves.

 

[Matrixbeast]

Hmm...Nah.
The frat-boy isn't anymore of a plague on gaming as the elitist, tourneyfag, or hipster.
Different people are into different genres. I don't know jack shit about RTS's but you don't see me going around calling Starcraft fans plagues on the gaming industry.
(And I refuse to believe the validity of that quote in the OP. Calling bullshit on that one)

 

[sivlin]

I feel as though just because your games are niche and you like them - it doesn't make them good. There is normally a reason something is in a niche category. It will appeal immensely to a few people but it just really isn't what the rest of us are looking for.

Don't get me wrong though, I have heard amazing things about disgaea and will probably end up playing it at some point in time.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Two problems I noticed there:
1. Why the hell do you listen to IGN? They are well known for game bias, usually directly linked to sponsorship.
2. Why the hell do you go to Gamestop? They are best know for the notorious customer harassment, in fact it's part of their job requirement, no I am not making that up.

I guess the bottom line is avoid the bad parts of town if you want to live in peace.

 

[Nicarus]

One of my favorite series, Shin Megami Tensei is another example. It gets good reviews but it's hated by the public because "Its a Final Fantasy knockoff, brah".

Why am i writing this? Two weeks ago, I went in to Gamestop to get my reserve of Devil Survivor Overclocked...It took the cashier ten minutes to find the game and when he did, he says..."It looked like another generic weeaboo game".

I may not have played the Shin Megami Tensei games personally, but I like them enough to say this:

I want to know where you are, so I can join you and kick the everloving s@#$ outta that cashier and whoever called SMT a "Final Fantasy knockoff"!!! This slander of these great games is like letting monkeys loose in the Louvre.

 

[RaikuFA]

Hmm...Nah.
The frat-boy isn't anymore of a plague on gaming as the elitist, tourneyfag, or hipster.
Different people are into different genres. I don't know jack shit about RTS's but you don't see me going around calling Starcraft fans plagues on the gaming industry.
(And I refuse to believe the validity of that quote in the OP. Calling bullshit on that one)

hate all 3 of those types. tourneys the most

 

[Vault101]

Im not entirley sure what a "frat boy" is but from the little Ive heard it sounds like one of the most horrible disgusting creatures on this planet

as for games.....well mainstream is mainstream

 

[martin's a madman]

I haven't heard of any of those games, and I wouldn't exactly qualify as a bro'.

I've watched some gameplays and they don't look particularly interesting.

 

[Vault101]

I would agree to a change in the diversity of games, and a main character with more personality that his cardboard cut-out.

Yes, it is true that games are more diverse than ever before, and characters have more depth than ever before. But thats supremely obvious - only someone who knowss literally nothing about gaming and has pusposefully ignored every game to have been made for the last 10 years could disagree with that

I never said games were more diverse in the past, but I think most would agree that games are still pretty stagnant when it comes to diversity. The small changes aren't enough and the games that do include "diversity" tend to market it as if these "diverse" characters are little more than freak shows for the "normal" people to ogle at.

So far, Skyrim may have had the most respectable way of including homosexuality, but I digress.

RPG's are generally more open to something different than something like a First-Person shooter, and the only time I've seen a possibly gay character in a shooter that was done well was (I'm not kidding) Bulletstorm. (And maybe Heavy in TF2)

I fully expected it to be bland and muscle headed, but at least it was fun. However, there was one, miniscule, almost insignificant part that showed they at least tried. Ishi, the cyborg teammate of the main character, mentions that he may be attracted to the main character on some level. The main character, who I would have to assume was heterosexual, merely states that he is not there one judge.

It's never brought up again, but the mere fact that I remembered it and not all of the bland story and all the other bland characters must mean something.

Diversity is just supposed to be there, it's not supposed to be the direct focus of the story.

That's what separates Star Trek from The Help.

Kanji Tatsumi, Persona 4. And I will remind you, the height of older gamings appraoch to difference in sexuality was when Final Fight had you go beat the crap out of transvestites.

Oh, and - Veronica Santangelo and Arcade Gannon from Fallout New Vegas - the most sane, levelheaded and pleasent people you will come across in the entire damn game, easily two of the most dependeable and interesting companions each having numerous chances to kick ass, and a lesbian and a gay man, respectively.

I never knew Persona 4 and Fallout: NV were shooters.

Also, Kanji being gay is still fairly debatable in the American version of the game (The Japanese version they were a little more blunt about it, but with the changes they made to the American release Kanji seems more like a heterosexual man with feminine tendencies.)

You're debating whether New Vegas, is a shooter.

Point stands on it, Veronica and Arcade. Matter of fact, Veronicas lover, Christina, is the only bright spot left in the entire dismal hell that is Dead Money.

New Vegas is an RPG with guns. The same way shooters with RPG elements don't become RPG's, RPG's with shooter elements don't become shooters.

My argument was never that RPG's handle diversity poorly, but that shooters specifically handle it poorly and you pointed to an RPG instead.

An RPG with guns makes it sound like the guns are optional. There is a difference between a shooter with rpg elements and a shooter RPG. If it is impossible to go through the game without firing a shot, then the game is a shooter rpg. You cannot complete New Vegas without shooting a gun, therefore its a shooter RPG.

since when? I was under the impression melee was very over powered hell i had a very low to moderate melee level yet I found a special fire axe which allowed me to VERY easyly chop up anyone and everything

 

[xPixelatedx]

It may not have ruined gaming, but you are right in assuming it did some damage. Attracting everyone into gaming who previously wasn't interested, meant the industry basically had to surrender to their interests over ours, because there are a lot more fratboys then gaming nerds. Therefor thats where the money is focused right now. Why should they make a great game with weird or neat concept for you, when they can make another CoD or Madden and make a billion dollars? Even Nintendo went down this route by trying to appeal to people's grandmothers and really really young children rather then their fanbase this last gaming generation. Corporations just care about money, and they know where the money is; in the most bland, inoffensive things a person can conceive. There is no profit in trying to make amazing things for the people who require true enrichment.

The movie industry is in the exact same boat right now. Transformers or Avatar, anyone?

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

i think the mentality that most people who play games are dumb and everything is being becoming casual is the REAL plague on the industry.

 

[mysecondlife]

I hate those douchebags that are hung up on review scores and metacritic scores

"cod blops has higher metascore than kz3 so it must be a better game"

I would kick his ass if I could

if that's the frat boy mentality you have in mind, then yes it is a plague