fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2075 ]

[ SECRET POST #2075 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2075 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

[Twilight]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Christian Bale, Scott Disik]

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

[ ----- SPOILERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]

10. [SPOILERS for Misfits]

__________________________________________________

11. [SPOILERS for A Song of Ice and Fire]

__________________________________________________

12. [SPOILERS for the Vampire Diaries]

__________________________________________________

[ ----- TRIGGERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]

13. [WARNING for rape]

__________________________________________________

14. [WARNING for suicide]

[Truffaldino from Bergamo (1976)]

__________________________________________________

15. [WARNING for pedophilia, rape]

[DC Comics]

__________________________________________________

16. [WARNING for depression]

[Zac Little/AngryFilmsProduction (YouTube)]

__________________________________________________

17. [WARNING for child abuse]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #296.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

it doesn't fucking mean anything anymore.

unless you're talking about the freaks at RPGcodex who won't play anything other than RPGS made between 1985 and 2000 because they like their games needlessly obtuse, so-called "hardcore" gamers don't exist.

i don't have a problem with baby's first RPG or whatever as a starting point for a new gamer. times have changed, gaming is more mainstream, and the bullshit hard games we played as a kid because developers knew we could only get like one game a year so they made them extra challenging so they'd last longer- which was also partially a side-effect of many of them being arcade ports- are a product of a different era.

but that doesn't mean that every fucking game ever has to be press A to win. that is my issue with some casuals. they don't care. it's something for them to do in between drinking pabst and discussing books they never read. why should the industry cater to people who don't even care? throw them a few shovelware wii games and let the rest of us who actually give a shit about the hobby have our actual games? they can't all be entry-level, otherwise what's the point of doing anything?

it's okay to not be a gamer. it's okay to play the sims, or WoW, or whatever. it's not okay to play those exclusively and claim you're a gamer, because you're not.

"it's okay to play the sims, or WoW, or whatever. it's not okay to play those exclusively and claim you're a gamer, because you're not."

if you're putting like 40 hours a week into raiding in WoW i'd say you're a gamer. likewise Sims or Minecraft or whatever else. even if you play simple flash games exclusively, you're a gamer of that particular genre.

i'd say it's better to go with, "is this a serious hobby of yours?" my mother spends hours playing plants vs zombies because she has nothing better to do, but she wouldn't call it a serious hobby. she's not a gamer. my sister picks up WoW, joins a guild, plays every day and would list it as one of her hobbies? yeah, she counts.

No, we can't ban "hardcore" from the lexicon. We need it to describe people like you. (See definition above.)

Seriously, people who play WoW only can't be hardcore? Dude, have you met some of those people? Sounds like baby is sad because gaming companies have run out of ideas for the new FPS to pwn noobs on. Incidentally, telling others that they're not gamers because they don't play exactly the same games you do (because how can you pwn them, if they don't even play, right?) puts you firmly in the hardcore crowd. Again, see definition above.

" Sounds like baby is sad because gaming companies have run out of ideas for the new FPS to pwn noobs on."

i stopped reading at this point. you don't even realize how wrong you are.

I think you should read the rest of the comment. Anon made a very good point, one I was going to make myself: you come across as very elitist by wanting to ban people who play different games than you from using the same word you do to describe their hobby.

Don't even try. Dude's an asshole. There's no making him consider anyone else's point of view.

Re: can we just ban "hardcore" from the gaming lexicon already

dethtoll - 2012-09-08 05:33 (UTC) - Expand

Re: can we just ban "hardcore" from the gaming lexicon already

(Anonymous) - 2012-09-08 13:59 (UTC) - Expand

Re: can we just ban "hardcore" from the gaming lexicon already

dethtoll - 2012-09-08 20:33 (UTC) - Expand

that's... not what i said at all, so who needs to do some reading here?

but fine, let's actually focus on the anon's strawman/ad hominem: the idea that i'm only mad because people are off playing FUN HAPPY WoW~ that sucks their dick and gets the crabgrass out of their lawn instead of modern tacticool manshoot combat games 'cuz i have a crippling need to "pwn nubz."

i don't actually play very many multiplayer games except left4dead exclusively with friends or friends-of-friends these days (god knows pub games will take years off your life from aggravation from screaming clan kids who kick you off because you don't have all the achievements) and i certainly am not saying people have to play exactly what i play. god knows i have weird tastes, and by some people's standards i'm "casual scum" because i prefer mass effect and new!fallout over baldur's gate and planescape torment.

but people who are only in it for one game because anything else is 'for nerds' or 'hardcore gamers' (read: nerds) shouldn't get to dictate what the industry puts out. why do you think there's such a backlash against call of duty these days?

Protip: Most people in the "hardcore" crowd don't actually think that FPS (or most of them at any rate) are hardcore games. Stuff like Halo and BlackOps is considered casual.

Hardcore is, like, MH and Dark Souls, to give a recent example.

I don't agree with the labels of casual and hardcore either, but you don't really know what you're talking about tbh.

That is because I've played both the Sims and WoW. So of course I don't know what I'm talking about because touching either one of those games makes you not a gamer, and furthermore I am a girl and therefore have a genetic predisposition to know nothing about games.

Whooooooooooosh

So of course I don't know what I'm talking about because touching either one of those games makes you not a gamer

No, you don't know what you're talking about because you don't know what you're talking about.

This is coming from someone who loves The Sims.

wow, someone's touchy! that's not what i said at all! love that you tried to paint me as a misogynist when i made no commentary about gender whatsoever!

what DOES piss in oatmeal taste like?

Edited 2012-09-08 06:05 (UTC)

I don't know if I'd agree with that. Most people I've seen talk about it are indeed referring to FPS (notably, people who are really really into competing in multiplayer mode and spend lots of time on it).

And those people would be considered casuals by another large group of gamers.

See? "Hardcore" and "casual" are pointless terms because no one agrees on them.

So...why do you want to ban the term "hardcore," exactly? Do you not like being called it, or something? Because you basically fit the definition of "hardcore." There's a certain set of games that one must play to be considered a gamer, and if one doesn't play those, then one is not a gamer -- regardless of the amount of time or effort that one funnels into one's game of choice. That's the hardcore attitude. You have it, and yet you apparently want to deny that you do.

It's actually rather amusing, because your very argument for why the term should be retired further demonstrates your elitism. "Hardcore," to you, refers to a segment of gamers of which you do not personally approve and who you have therefore deemed worthy of dismissal.

How's the view from your high horse, anyway?

because "hardcore" is a dumb term. i've pretty much laid it out.

i.e., "I DON'T LIKE THIS WORD SO NO ONE SHOULD USE IT EVAAAR WAAAAAAAAAAAH!!"

yeah, that's exactly what i said. idiot.

Translation: Hardcore gamers like me are the only gamers that matter. People who pour their lives into World of Warcraft and The Sims don't count as gamers because those games aren't hard. In fact, almost no games are that hard anymore therefor, anybody who plays modern video games doesn't count as a gamer at all regardless of how much time and effort they put into it.

that's a whole lot of "i didn't actually read dethtoll's comment" :)

"that is my issue with some casuals. they don't care."

i stopped reading at this point. you don't even realize how wrong you are.

Re: can we just ban "hardcore" from the gaming lexicon already

dethtoll - 2012-09-08 06:16 (UTC) - Expand

But people play for different reasons, and sometimes it's not "not caring" as much as caring about different things? Some people are interested in games as a challenge, and to them the best gameplay keeps pushing them to be able to do harder and harder things. Some people are interested in games as a new storytelling form, and to them the best gameplay is whatever would provide the best immersion into the story and tie in with the narrative. Some people are interested in games as fun, and to them the best gameplay is what keeps them consistently having a good time.

There probably genuinely are people who play games without really caring about them in any meaningful way, and I agree that dumbing down gameplay makes for shittier games. And that doesn't always mean that things should be crazy hard, but even an easy gameplay mechanic needs to be engaging and not just something that's there to fill time. For an extreme example, visual novels are the easiest form of game there is, in terms of button pressing, but you can have a visual novel that's just an easy trip from point A to point B, or one that requires the player to get engaged and think about the choices and/or time management, and how to line up all the plot points right to get the best end. It's about having to be present and aware versus getting to just sort of mindlessly have the game do everything for you.

But you can have someone play the Sims very mindfully. The game can be played in a half-assed way, but you also have people who put a ton of thought into their Sims, and try to manage everyone's goals and relationships, and lovingly build them the perfect house, etc. You can be very thoughtful about your Harvest Moon farm. You can be very thoughtful about your Pokemon team. It might be about fun and relaxation instead of skill building, but it's not necessarily just zoning out while aimlessly pressing buttons. Same goes with the story people, they're still paying attention and involved. As games have become more mainstream, you get a wider audience and different reasons for caring and different things people focus on. Skill improvement gameplay is where it started (unless you're counting some of the really old IF that sometimes went into story centered territory), but it's branched out since.

And some of these might feel like different hobbies altogether! Skill improvement/challenge gameplay is really important to a lot of people, and I think someone who plays games in part for the joy of getting better at games and accomplishing something really difficult might want to occupy a different space than someone who's trying to have the most fun or someone who's looking for the best stories in this medium, and that's totally okay. And I think it's a point of contention because that's what "gamer" used to mean, and the people working at their skill are going to take pride in it, but "gamer" as a word also sounds like it refers to anyone who's serious about games as a hobby. "You're not a gamer" can seem like it means "games are not an important hobby to you" with a side of "the way you're doing it is wrong".

Would be nice if there was a word for game enthusiasts in general, and another for game enthusiasts of the skill development and challenge variety. I'd be happy to say I wasn't a skill/challenge game enthusiast because, well, I'm not. I dabble, and sometimes I'm driven to get as good as I can at a single game, but I'm much more on the story side personally and I'd be happy to leave that word to the people who it accurately describes. But I refuse to say I'm not a game enthusiast at all. Games are an important hobby to me, and I don't like the implication that engaging with them in the "wrong" way means they're not.

Eh, my definition's similar. You're not a casual gamer if you only play the sims, or wow. But I also include only playing left for dead or modern warfare. Someone who only plays one or two games is a modern warfare/sims etc fan not really a gamer.

To me a gamer plays a variety of games. If it's something like sims, and plants versus zombies, and counter-strike, and wow then they're a gamer. I even wonder if people who only play one genre should be considered gamers instead of fans of FPSs or MMOs instead of games in general.

Of course this definition doesn't allow someone to say "Ooh, I play HARDCORE GAME therefore I'm a _real_ gamer." so I doubt it'll catch on.

I disagree that we should retire the term "hardcore". Or, if "hardcore" is way to obnoxious, we at the very least still need a term like "core". Why? Because the word "gamer" is becoming meaningless.

As gaming becomes more and more mainstream, defining "gamer" as "anyone who plays or has played any video game at all" is swiftly becoming synonymous with "any living human being from the developed world under the age of 40". Completely meaningless. It's like saying "book reader" or "movie watcher". Just about every single person on the planet has watched a movie or has read something in their lives. It's those that don't that have to identify themselves - they're the exception. Book reader, movie watcher, and gamer are the rule. It's just another piece of consumable media entertainment.

However books and film as hobbies have terms like "avid reader" or "film buff"/"cinophile". Gaming desperately needs such a term. It also needs to reclaim the term "casual", because "casual filmgoer" is just something that describes most people - there's no elitist or misogynist edge to it. Nor would someone who watches a few films a year act like you pissed on their dog if you called them a "casual filmgoer".

I think gamer used to have a certain, specific meaning, with a certain set of expectations, close to what I'd suggest calling "core" now. But as the audience broadened, along with the rise of geek culture as cultural cool, relative newcomers wanted to lay claim to the title, and so what were once "gamers" invented the term "casual" to describe them. Unfortunately it also got wrapped up in geek culture's tendency toward misogyny, even though a man who only plays Football Manager or only owns the yearly CoD is just as much a casual as a woman who plays a couple of hours of WoW a week as her only gaming outlet.

You don't have this problem with other forms of entertainment-as-hobby. No (sane) person who only watches a few films a year is going to call themselves a film buff. Nobody who isn't pretending at the mantle to impress someone is going to call themselves an avid reader if they only read one series, by one author. We need a word like "core", if gamer is going to mean "anybody who picks up a controller, ever", to differentiate those who game as a hobby and those who enjoy the occasional Deathmatch with their buddies. And it needs to sound just as ridiculous for the latter to call themselves "core".

Like this:

Non-film-watcher: may or may not have heard of Citizen Kane
Filmgoer: has heard of Citizen Kane, may have watched it
Film buff: has watched Citizen Kane, could discuss the themes in the film and what impact the film had on the history of filmmaking

Non-gamer: may or may not have heard of Starcraft
Gamer: has heard of Starcraft, may or may not have played it
Core gamer: has played Starcraft, knows what company developed it, knows when it was released, knows what a zerg rush is and could competently perform one

I mean there's a chance a film buff hasn't watched Citizen Kane, but it would be very surprising. You would, rightly, question their knowledge of cinema. Just like it would be surprising if a "core gamer" hadn't played Starcraft and didn't know Blizzard. You would, rightly, question their supposed expertise of video games.

(This epiphany brought to you by being set up on a blind date with a gentleman who had apparently mentioned to my friends that he was a "gamer". Since this was one of my desired traits in a romantic partner, they set him up with me. ...Dude was not a gamer, unless gamer means "beat Diablo a couple of times back in the 1990s and now sometimes fiddles around with Temple Run on his iPhone during breaks". No. "Gamer" is fucking meaningless now. We need core/casual. I mean I want to date a dude for whom gaming is a hobby, not a dude who goes to a retro-gaming LAN party once a year because he hasn't touched a new game since Quake. Asking for an "avid reader" isn't a problem, so why is "core gamer" so unspeakable?)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only