So maybe I am feeling a bit touchy about readers' response to the NYT column. Not that I mind being disagreed with or criticized for my opinions; I don't do what I do because I want everyone to nod and smile. I guess I just felt disappointed in the audience, when even those who stood on my side of the issue were busy on message boards flaming something else they didn't like about the column.I have felt this disappointment for some time, mind you, at the fact that whenever we as gamers on the internet have the opportunity to discuss anything at all of significance, we lapse into contentious flamewars.
I always feel like we end up injuring the very thing we're defending: our right to be considered a legitimate audience for a legitimate medium, our right to be considered as mature, responsible consumers, our right to self-regulate appropriate content, an entire kitchen sink of issues that ends up all chipped and powdered porcelain on the bathroom floor.
Since these are some of the things I care about, I feel I have a golden opportunity in addressing the core audience that comprises a lot of Kotaku's readership, so I used my feature to comment on it today. Excerpt:
We so desperately want “more choice” in games, more freedom, and more insight into how our choices impact the game world – and this is because we want to experiment. Human beings no longer live in an era where they must fight each other for social dominance, survive harsh elements or kill their food, but some lingering relic of that instinct probably persists, and it’s probably that itch that we scratch when we’re playing a violent game.At least, that has something to do with it. Another part is, I think, we enjoy learning about ourselves based on the actions we take in simulated environments. Of all the things we do in games, very little of it can safely, legally or literally be replicated in reality – we’ll never fly a spaceship, we’ll never save a planet, we’ll never sleep with a blue alien.
And obviously, not all the things we do in games, not nearly, could be construed as reprehensible. Gamers also love their peaceful Azeroth sunsets, their epics of aging mercenaries, their interludes of salvation.
But when we defend attacks on game content with “geez, it’s only a game,” then we’re also relegating those moments of meaning to mere two-dimensional thrills.
Most of all, I'm tired of hearing "it's just a game" whenever the conversation gets difficult, like when we're talking about Resident Evil 5 and the fact that the imagery is just a little bit uncomfortable to some of us.
