First off, let me apologize for the lack of updates recently. It's been a busy month or so for me and Paul, especially with finals next week. Rest assured though, we plan on catching up on our writing over the winter break, so keep checking the site for updates. Now onward to the article!
***
With the advent of competing technologies comes groups of zealous fans that openly declare their allegiance to one company while denouncing the competition and their supporters. Nowhere is this more evident than in the world of video games.
Since the beginning of the industry, we've had advertisements telling us to buy an Intellivision over an Atari 2600 if we wanted a baseball game that was "the closest thing to the real thing." During the era of 16-bit gaming, Sega won many fans by touting the so-called "blast processing" capabilities of their Genesis. Fans of the system quickly joined together under the infamous battle cry, "Genesis does what Nintendon't." Of course, advertising and competition are nothing new. If companies want to try and make their product successful they must show that their competitor's product is inferior to their own.
Instead, what I'd like to focus on is the brand loyalty that is so inherit in gaming culture and the consequences of such loyalty. I will refer to this behavior as "fanboyism."
Gamers are fanatical when it comes to their hobby. Simply implying that one console or one company is better than another is enough to start a giant flame war on most message boards. People are so unyielding in their opinions that they will spend hours telling others why Console X sucks, why Console Y is awesome, and why supporters of Console X are idiots and need to "STFU."
But, why are people so adamant about their gaming preferences? Is it just blind brand loyalty? Could it be the result of years of playing one company's systems? What if one person had a bad experience with another company's console, never finding any games that interested them? Whatever the reason, fanboys (and fangirls) are prevalent throughout the gaming community.
And they are hurting the growth of video games.
By pledging loyalty to one system, players become extremely close-minded. They worship their console of choice, declaring it perfect and failing to see that no console is infallible. In some rare cases, fans will refuse to even play games on other consoles, coming to the conclusion that if it's not on their system, then it isn't worth playing. This results in players who lack appreciation for gaming as a whole. They are so adamant about supporting their favorite system that they miss out on the innovations and creativity of other games and consoles. If gaming is to grow and mature as a medium, then gamers must experience all forms of gaming available.
One of the biggest examples of how fanboyismis detrimental to gaming is my very own childhood. Since I was born, I was a Nintendo fanboy. I have had almost every Nintendo system at one point in time. This is because the NES was the first system I ever remember playing. Essentially, I developed brand loyalty from the very beginning. On the playground, my friends and I would argue over what systems were the best, and I would always side with Nintendo.
It wasn't until the previous generation of gaming that I bought my first non-Nintendo console: an Xbox. The reason for this sudden purchase? When the Gamecube was released, I found myself disappointed in the lack of good games the console offered. A friend showed me some of the games he had on the Xbox, including the original Halo. It was these occasional Xbox sessions that convinced me to buy my own system.
As I got older, I continued to branch out to other systems and see what they had to offer. It was through this that I realized the error of my fanboy ways. It's true that I played some incredibly important and influential games on Nintendo consoles, but there were so many other games that I missed throughout the years. Last April I beat Metal Gear Solid for the first time. I was ecstatic at how revolutionary the game was, and at the same time I was kicking myself because it had taken me 10 years to play such an important game. Likewise, only after I've finished Half-Life 2 am I now going back and playing the original. I've also just recently been introduced to all the old Lucasarts adventure games, and to this day I still get ridiculed for never beating Final Fantasy VII. I even missed the Sega Dreamcast, a system that was way ahead of its time. The point is that, by being a Nintendo fanboy, I ignored other games and other systems that were just as important to the growth of gaming.
The fact that I am arguing against a group of people that I was once a part of reveals an interesting point. It shows that no one is safe from fanboyism. If that's the case, then does that mean there's no way to completely eradicate fanboyism? There's no denying the fact that no matter how hard people try to rid the world of console zealots, there will always be a few present. However, if the majority of gamers can get together and be open-minded about their experiences then the fanboys and fangirls will become a dying breed.
In an ideal world, I see gaming as a Socialist business*. Each of the big console creators would come together and make one super console, that all games would be playable on. Then there would be no fanboyism and everyone would be able to experience every important game ever made. Until then, gamers need to put aside at least some of their petty brand loyalty, so that they can be open to the many different experiences video games can offer.
*This statement is in no way supposed to be representative of my political and economic stances. It's just a metaphor people, don't read too deep into it! Oh, wait...
Posts
4 comments:
I think you are are blurring some things together. First let me get some definitions out of the way, I shall use brand loyalty in the obvious way, and shall define fanboyism as believing that one gaming system is better than the others. I find your definition of fanboyism confusing, you define it to be equal to brand loyalty, which I feel is something totally different than (what I feel is) the common use of 'fanboy.'
Using one of your examples, the fighting between console x and console y is an example of fanboyism, not brand loyalty. This fanboyism arises from from a few causes, mainly form people liking to argue on the internet (see also the greater internet dickwad theory), and from people trying to convince themselves that the hundreds of dollars they spent of their gaming system was spent on the best system, and thus they have not waisted there money. Overall, I don't see this as a problem, see below.
The problem here is this unconditional brand loyalty, as you pointed out. This goes beyond just the gaming industry and is a large problem. As one who believes in the free market, specifically the Austrian School of Economics, (not Socialism, you evil commie you! :P) people should purchases the best item on the market. By purchasing inferior items because the come from your favorite company, then you are encouraging that company to continue to make inferior products. In the ideal world, everyone would chose what they think is the best console, thus creating an intense competition between the companies who produce each console, encouraging innovation after each product cycle. This is close to how it is now, with three companies fighting to create the best system. The result of this is that there will be fighting between companies and individuals regarding which system is the best, bringing us back to fanboyism. So fanboyism is a sign that the market is working well, and as long as there is not unconditional brand loyalty, everyone ends up winning.
So to sum it up, fanboy's are a sign that the market is working well, and PC's are superior to consoles.
I see something slightly wrong about your ideal video game industry. I honestly see the development of videogames as an art. If something so great were to only be limited to the big game consoler makers, then there will be a lot of lost great art. An ideal world shouldn't just consist of a high ration of good to bad games. Because who knows, some people may actually like those "bad" games. Definitely, the big companies would judge how good a game is by how much money it makes anyways.
I liked the article though. Definitely, fanboys just limit themselves by being so close-minded.
First off, your writing has improved. I understood your writing more easily and I didn't get bored (Most people's writing is boring).
Keep writing, keep reading writing you like.
I have no criticism for your ideal console future.
These days, North American "hardcore" gaming, outside of MMOs and strategy games, is shifting to the XBOX 360. Western Europe's hardcore gaming, excepting PC genres, is still PlayStation. Japan is abandoning arcades and smoking Wii. South Korea is PC. Poor countries are PC (in some cases, older consoles too),
and blah.
Some people call what we have now the one console future.
But meh, whatever-
When it comes to Fanboys, I say we might as well pity our fellow man and woman for their immaturity.
Last note: Don't put female meaning words (female, girls, non-males.) in brackets.....like in this sentence. Even though your point clearly was, "we shouldn't single out female gamers," your print looked like a singling out of female gamers.
lol
Not a criticism, I promise. We all put females in brackets now and then.
I'm going to regret that sentence.
Post a Comment