226 Views | 8 Comments

Life, The Universe, And Gaming: When Loving Gaming Goes Too Far

Life, The Universe, And Gaming: When Loving Gaming Goes Too Far

Gaming’s great, right?

In the real world, we might compare gaming to that really cool guy everybody knows who makes for great company, gets on with everyone, and is never shy to take over a conversation and just entertain anyone around. Gaming is, in that way, the social butterfly of entertainment. But in this analogy, what exactly does that make us, the gamer? If not some friend to gaming, are we then some overly obsessed fan instead?

When you think of it like that, the fervent passion with which gaming is treated seems almost ridiculous. It would be on stalker level, borderline restraining order level if gaming were an actual person, but somehow it’s alright to dote over it and cause actual, legitimate rifts with other people simply because they don’t agree with you and your way of thinking.

And don’t you dare read this thinking it doesn’t apply to you. If someone hates a game you enjoy, you are just as guilty of being a hypocrite as someone who likes a game that you hate. I will explain in due time.

The idea for this particular column came about through two ways. The first was quite simply, a chat that I had the other day with Dean regarding the various opinions of our writers and how they sometimes clash. We are very thankful for these clashing mindsets and welcome any and all debate because it means that we grow as a group and can exhibit some relevant diversity that transcends basic race, age, social class and other irrelevant differences.

The second involves a recent thought process of mine that came about through some soul searching that I have been doing. I am in my early twenties now, and where a lot of my age-equivalent friends are working and earning a living, or in the process of doing so, I see no such future for myself at least insofar as regular living goes. I don’t see myself as the type of person who spends so many years studying, only to slot into some menial job for the rest of my life where all I exist to do is earn money which I will then spend on myself or save, until I start a family and live out some traditional life until I die. It all seems so banal and meaningless in the bigger picture.

For what it’s worth I’d really like to do more of this gaming stuff and leave my mark on the world, whether it extends to other forms of media such as vlogs, video shows and so on, or whether it is just personal growth as a writer in the gaming industry. I’d also like to push other avenues of gaming such as promotion, at shopping malls and so on.

This thought pattern, however, got me to wondering how far I wish to take this gaming fascination of mine. Ever since I can remember, gaming had me hook, line and sinker. From begging my parents to visit a particular cousin so I could nag him to let me play games on his PC to sneaking a game out of a friend’s house so I could play it at home before returning it (which I did, I’m no thief). I see people who are now in their thirties, forties or later, who are gaming, and it gets me wondering: just how far down does this rabbit hole go?

I have never seen gaming as a hobby or enthusiast pastime. It’s a passion sure, but it’s also a way of life for me. My ideal night does not involve forgoing other activities in favour of gaming, my ideal night just involves gaming. The difference here is that I don’t even consider other activities on the same level as gaming. If anything those other activities are just hindrances to my gaming time. Sure I do other things; I read, I watch series, movies, listen to music, write of course, I even play sport when I get a chance to. There is a lot more to me than just gaming, however gaming is a quintessential component of my life now and I don’t see how I could go about my life devoid of it.

And that’s really where I’m coming from here. We can all agree that gaming is great, but what exactly are we doing with our lives here? Is there some sort of productive reason to play games? Were our parents correct all along in saying that we’re just being immature and should grow up and stop playing games? I can’t see myself believing that for a second, but I have to ask: Where exactly are we as gamers going?

Some of you of course are not as fervent gamers as I am. Some of you just play games, and that’s perfectly fine. I try to play as much as I can, where my consumption of games is on the absolute highest level without sacrificing my life entirely. I like to think I can make a good balance of things but the truth is that anything I do that isn’t gaming, is gaming time that I am sacrificing, the way I see it.

Someone who was close to me recently posited that my gaming habits would be the reason I died alone. Now that might sound extreme to any of us who are fervent gamers, and I don’t believe that for a moment, but there is some truth to it. See, it is my opinion that when we take gaming so importantly in our lives, where we worship it, then it blinds us to certain things. An example would be potential partners. Thankfully this isn’t as bad any more as gaming hits the mainstream and we can share our passions with others, but it’s still something of an issue when the deal-breaker for you involves having to leave home because it robs you of gaming time. How will you ever experience life? Although conversely, what’s to say you aren’t already? Besides, all those old women living with their cats for company were not gamers…

h52AD64F8 Let’s take all of this and apply some practical examples of what I’m talking about. We can begin with the recently released triple-A titles DmC, Dead Space 3 and Aliens: Colonial Marines. Those are pretty much the only games I can talk about for this year anyway. Do you know that DmC is actually underperforming in sales, despite being an excellent offering from Ninja Theory? How about that Dead Space 3 is being billed as the worst in the series, despite receiving rave reviews from various critics? We don’t have to talk about Aliens: Colonial Marines because it’s apparently a piece of shit that shit shits, but we can perhaps mention that it has sold well thus far because of its name. No surprises there.

Do we as gamers have a right to be dumbstruck when a game the likes of DmC, which for all intents and purposes has been receiving mass critical successes, fails to sell as well as it should? Do we have a right to then point fingers and blame at people who report these things to the world, as if they’re the reason that the game hasn’t been selling well? Fanboyism is a two-way street and while there are those who have hated on the game since its announcement, there are those who have defended it just as passionately. And neither are right, just like neither are wrong.

In October last year, we gave you an article about the massive disappointment that Assassin’s Creed III was. I didn’t agree with that article at all, and while there were certain points where I understood where critics were coming from, I still felt that some leeway could have been offered in lieu of previous titles in the series, or production values or what have you. Now for all my disagreements with that article, I did not take it personally, nor swear bloody vengeance on the writer. Why? Because gaming just isn’t that fucking serious. It really isn’t.

When it came to picking a game of the year, I hadn’t yet played Far Cry 3 so I attacked the mention of it as a contender because I claimed that those who had played it were hyped. Nobody retorted to that, very thankfully, but when I got around to playing it and realising what an excellent offering it was, I went about correcting myself and apologising for being so hard-headed about it. That said, I personally felt that the same courtesy was not afforded to me regarding Mass Effect 3, in various circles. Apparently if a game garners enough negative attention then it cannot be considered for such an honour, regardless of the subjectivity of that attention.

It’s okay to love gaming. It’s a great thing that can be your crutch when you really need something to get you out of the dumps or keep your head afloat. Like a Companion Cube. But don’t stray beyond the line of enjoying a pastime and become a fanboy. A gaming fanboy. Gaming can and does do wrong from time to time, and it’s okay to call it out on that. Don’t creep out the social butterfly of a person that gaming is, with your incessant adoration. It exists for our entertainment and of course, to part us with loads of our (or our parents’) hard-earned cash. It doesn’t exist to create feuds and angry words between friends.

Once again, I am not merely addressing those who criticise games but also those who defend them. Just like a hater is blind to a game’s strengths, a fanboy is blind to a game’s flaws, and you really need to stop, step back and really look at the debate as a cohesive argument before you begin hating someone for always being negative about a game, or equally so, hating someone for always being positive about a game. Likewise, liking someone simply because they share your sentiments. That doesn’t make them more likeable than the person who disagrees with you, or it shouldn’t. It’s okay to disagree. Healthy, even.

But for the love of gaming, stop being a fucking blinded lover with rose-tinted spectacles and learn to take the bad with the good.

You’re just creeping everyone out.

If You Liked This, You Should Try These!

Name: Caveshen "CaViE" Rajman
Location: Durban
Position: Editor, Columns & Podcasts

  • Trebzz

    So what if we die alone this is a temporary world and we shall all taste death sooner or later :P But great article dude really enjoyed it

  • CataclysmicDawn

    I was worried you’d attack me in this article, but this is nicely done sir.

    However, I do disagree with one thing: Assassin’s Creed 3 didn’t deserve pulled punches because of what it’s predecessors did, because frankly, it’s another R600-R700 out of your pocket. As such, Dead Space 3, and many other sequels don’t deserve shielding because their prequels were great, it’s like saying Leeds United are a great football team because they had success once.

    • http://egamer.co.za/ Azhar Amien

      I second that completely, Bracken.

    • http://egamer.co.za/author/cavie Caveshen “CaViE” Rajman

      Sure, but, you’re instead criticising Leeds United because they’ve stopped playing long balls and are now playing more around passing and ball control. Dead Space 3 continued the shift away from the suspense horror that the first Dead Space was and the second Dead Space wasn’t. Assassin’s Creed III was a GREAT game for me, I legitimately did not see what was so bad about it. The ending was the only aspect I agreed on. Maybe also that you don’t really have the motivation to do various side quests, fair play, but what motivation was there in Constantinople and Rome again?

      These are long defunct arguments though. My point in this column was that if you’re going to defend something, don’t blind yourself to its faults. Being in love with gaming does that, sometimes.

    • CataclysmicDawn

      Just as a point, I wouldn’t be criticising a particular style of play (This has relevance, don’t worry, not going on a football-only rant), I would be complaining that they don’t have the quality to implement a technical passing game and that BECAUSE their style of play no longer takes the same route towards goal, they have suffered as a clun.

      As such, Potential Sequel should play to a series’ strengths, rather than implement something completely different which the series’ current path or gameplay style may not work with. Effectively, building something which a series is not meant to be. How would you feel if they stuck machine guns and a cover system in Dragon’s Dogma?

      A perfect example would be Need for Speed Carbon v. NFS ProStreet. NFS Carbon, admittedly was not up to Most Wanted’s standards, but it still provided an open world, highly customisable vehicles, a fun campaign and police pwnage. ProStreet took to the tracks and changed everything from the driving mechanics to limiting the title to a level-based structure. The fact that I shelled out R500 for two entirely different games, one which gave me hundreds of hours of play time, and the other which I sold to Cash Crusaders because they offered more than BT did.

    • http://egamer.co.za/author/cavie Caveshen “CaViE” Rajman

      Alternatively, Carbon was criticised for being Most Wanted at night but less interesting while Pro Street was just a bad game. Shift on the other hand, did simulation racing right, which did change things up entirely from the abhorrent Undercover which was basically the cop-out we all saw coming.

      So if Undercover is Most Wanted but is bad, and we all know how much everyone loves the Call of Duty inspired ‘sequels that add little and less’ then why are we criticising those that take a different approach as if we understand their reasons? Sure a guiding influence is revenue. But I do think that in the case of Dead Space 2, at least, they couldn’t maintain the psychological thriller aspects of the first game so they were forced to change it up a bit. Add in more action and on-rails-ish sequences. With Assassin’s Creed III the game was in development parallel to Brotherhood and Revelations so some aspects were tacked on where others had to be entirely redone, just like the differences between AC and AC2, the latter which I felt strayed entirely away from stealth and introduced more adventure into the series. Are we criticising that move away? No, because it worked well for the series at the time. Now we’re just oversaturated and so the lukewarm experience that AC3 apparently was, was not enough for some. That’s what it was about there, for me.

    • http://egamer.co.za/ Azhar Amien

      I don’t think Dead Space 2 was changed at all because they were forced, or trying to take a different approach. You are right though that they couldn’t maintain it, because Visceral just aren’t, in my opinion, skilled or creative enough when it comes to horror. But the real point I want to make is that Dead Space 2 wasn’t forced or a creative choice, it was entirely done for wider appeal, as was Dead Space 3. The tacked on multiplayer, online pass and action advertising were just some of the indicators of that for me. It was a business decision, and not for the game’s benefit. Whether you like Dead Space 2 and 3 is besides the point that they are rock-bottom survival horror/horror games, which is damaging since Visceral believe they crafted good horror games.

      In my opinion, Assassin’s Creed III being described as lukewarm is about right. I think it’s within anyone’s rights to get bored of a franchise if it gets over-saturated, doesn’t test itself or starts to run dry. Annualising AC for me was a bad thing. So even though it was great for you and many others, which is fine, I think it’s a dangerous thing when a franchise grows complacent.

      The more sequels you make, the harder it gets to impress, and the more you risk straying from your roots. And the faster you make sequels, the quicker fans get over it. Real progression, confident/bold design choices and constantly challenging yourself are the keys in my opinion.

      Mass appeal, microtransactions, tacked on multiplayer, action-focus – these aren’t bold design choices or real progression, speaking of Dead Space here.

    • http://egamer.co.za/author/cavie Caveshen “CaViE” Rajman

      Concur wholeheartedly.