Jump to content

Talk:Gamer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 64.125.109.66 (talk) at 03:23, 16 July 2010 (→‎C an I just note...). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconVideo games Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Moved from the article:


One common stereotype of the gamer psyche usually pinned on the adolescent or post-adolescent male: usually a high school or college student, who sits staring at a computer monitor almost constantly with a bag of chips and a can of soda. His only friends are those he meets on the Internet, except for those he invites to have LAN parties or role-playing game sessions. He is assumed to speak online in "1337" (pronounced "leet") a "language" made up of characters and numbers that resemble letters. The stereotypes often have elements in common with those of geeks, nerds, sci-fi fans, cult television fans and losers. They are also perceived as having social inadequencies and greater than usual intelligence. The distinguishing factor of a gamer is their avid interest in games.

(Note: there are many different types of stereotypes about gamers, the one above is merely one of the more common ones.)

See also: Hacker, Script kiddie


It might be possible to cut this down into something worth keeping, but I doubt it. -Sean Curtin 23:07, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

No, a anti-gamer sticks to one game, one console. a gamer is a person addicted to games. Plus, I hate the use of "anti-gamer", Someone is either a gamer or not one.


This article seems to talk about the history of PC and Console games a lot more than it does about gamers. Could this be addressed? Making the differences between addicts and 'hardcore gamers' more prominent might help some, I was under the impression this was more about casual gamers. The history of the gaming systems/styles should be elsewhere, no? -Anon 19:53, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

Removing:

"Several of the all-time bestselling computer games (e.g., Myst, The Sims) targeted casual gamers."

The above is totally inconsistent with what the preceding sentence says about what casual gamers are. Of course, that description is pretty vague and certainly unsourced, and the list of categorisations on this page are questionable and definitely incomplete to begin with.

What to do

I think it could keep "Celebrities". Everything below that is a good start on a separate article for "Video gamer", "Video game player", or something similar. (I know plenty of gamers that don't play video games very often if at all.) Parody 04:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've got to agree, this is a pretty terrible article. The Gameplay vs. Graphics section made open judgements about the rights and wrongs of certain views - a violation of wikipedia's NPOV policy. Without those NPOV comments, very little was left. Artichoke84 10:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's going far enough. This article should read "#REDIRECT [[Game]] {{R from agent noun}}". Percy Snoodle 14:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gamer Vs. Player

Shouldn't the term be Player, we don't call people who read books Bookers we call them readers.

No, we provide definitions for the terms, not terms for the definitions. -- c0bra 23:00, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I would have to agree with C0bra. The term "gamer" is already established among the gamers. -- Whane 00:42, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gamer is a widely used and well known term within the Gaming community. It is its own subculture. And, incidently, I do not think it should be merged with "Video Game Player." Lots of people play videogames, not all of those people are gamers. --Naha|(talk) 13:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I removed Female Gamer from See Also. A female gamer is a gamer who is female. Enough said. --ScarletSpiderDave 14:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see it's been added back in, and I noticed the Girl Gamer page was nominated for deletion, but the result was no consensus. I guess it's here to stay. --ScarletSpiderDave 09:27, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology?

I'd love to see some more info on this page. What communities first started using the term "gamer", and when? Where did it come from, what did it originally mean? Would be nice to link to some more sources related to this, I'll add any I might happen to come across. radimvice 23:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-electronic games

Even though role-playing, tabletop, and board gamers are (very briefly) mentioned in the article, they are still treated as a secondary topic to video games. In my opinion, the article should either be expanded greatly in regards to non-video gamers or possibly even split into the separate articles video gamer and gamer (which could link to the full video gamer article within a subsection). - Atomskninja 11:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with the above. The article is overly focused on video games to the exclusion of other types of games, whose players are just as prominently known as gamers. —Lowellian (reply) 11:55, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glitcher?

I've never heard of the word "glitcher" being used to describe people who like finding glitches in games. This seems like a neologism to me. The demiurge 03:21, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me neither, but a quick google search does reveal the word being used in this contect. It needs a decent reference though. Marasmusine 07:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glitcher!

You would be correct in assuming that it is a neologism! It is a term that has arisen over online gaming platforms within the last five to ten years I'd imagine. A person would not normally hear the term used unless they were part of the glitching "scene". The term was created because the term 'hacker' more often refers to pc gamers as opposed to console gamers; also "hacking" connotes an act that is not standard or "legal" (example: reprogramming a game to allow a player to walk through walls, or something). "glitching" is less derogatory because it places the blame for the advantage players gain by glitching on the game programmers. (simple explanation: a hacker has created the flaw in the game that is giving them an advantage and is therefore responsible...a glitcher has simply found an existing flaw in the game and used normal control functions (jumping, shooting, driving vehicles, etc.) to gain access to an advantageous spot, and is therfore "just playing the game" *this issue of glitching legality is under debate amongst gamers*. As far as references go...I have none except my gaming experience and my word as a glitcher, I know it's not good enough, but glitchers like to remain underground due to their nature and the public opinion surrounding them...so you don't find alot of solid references. I'll look for some reference that I can cite. WikiDaily 01:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=glitcher WikiDaily 01:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

C an I just note...

that this article is rather terrible?

Aside from dealing exclusively in extremes, there is no citable source for pretty much anything on the page. It needs a complete rewrite. --203.184.21.75 01:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Marasmusine 07:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- Maybe could use a rewrite, but this article describes something that few formal studies have been performed on, therefore speculation and personal experience is a requirement. Jason Parise 20:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- Agreed on the article needing a rewrite. It's not up to the quality you'd expect from an encyclopedia. W

Powergamer

Added new needed category. Jason Parise 20:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.[?]
  • If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.[?]
  • There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?]
  • This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.[?]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • The script has spotted the following contractions: don't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 22:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Nintendo kid syndrome?

I'm intereseted in something the media occasionly calls nintendo kid syndrome. It is when kids become highly focused on gaming, to the exclusion of social development and other such things. They may buy a basketball game as they like basketball, but would not even THINK of playing it in real life. Those kinds of things. I would appreciate any referance resource you can send me. Corrupt one 23:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The symptoms seem to match Asperger syndrome (AS), meaning there may be a link between them, if it is NOT a type of AS itself. Corrupt one 00:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um...

Please note, that the terms here are really generic, and therefore, doesn't have any citation yet. This is retired entirely from common knowledge, to say so, and is highly generic, so to the reader, please don't get based only in the facts written here.

I'm sorry, but these two sentences are stupid. Should it be removed or rephrased?

Nevermind, I decided to remove it as rephrasing it didn't do much. Farslayer (talk) 07:15, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Phrasing

There seems to be quite a bit of presumptive and biased language being used in this article. For instance, saying that the large majority of hardcore gamers are obese and subject to poor health? Not only uncited, but generally unsupportable given that being a concentrated gamer does not correlate with negligence of one's health. -- Hidoshi (talk) 05:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Average Gamers?

People who don't play casual games but don't spend all their time being geeks and playing and reading about games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.175.152 (talk) 14:57, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No way. That makes no sence, and there is no referance. Corrupt one (talk) 06:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


n00b section vandalised

The noob section doesn't read write so i'm going to edit it for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.201.210 (talk) 22:44, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Objectivity

Being what one could call a gamer myself, I can kind of see where the article is meaning to go. My problem is that it seems like it's missing something. Does it maybe seem less objective than necessary? I can't quite see how, but it seems incomplete. 98.230.221.68 (talk) 07:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As it's such a broad term, the article is just functioning as a jumping point for more specific gamer articles. But on the whole, they lack content. This can be improved by finding books or magazine articles on the subject and use them to build up some prose. Marasmusine (talk) 11:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gamer tag

I think the headline for the section Gamer tag should be changed to Handle, as Gamer tag is usually associated with Xbox Live's Gamertag system, and the official term for a callsign/username/etc. is the user's handle. If handle is not a better term to use mainly, then username is also a better choice than Gamer tag. Wohlerbear (talk) 20:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree insomuch as gamertag is a term that is distinctly attached to Microsoft and Xbox Live, but I don't think Handle is any more appropriate a term; Handle is a term I would much more readily associate with CB and HAM radio culture than gaming. I feel Screen Name is more appropriate. More importantly, "screen name" redirects to "User (Computer)" which has a subsection for screen name. Why is there no specific page for Screen Name? Meowtiger (talk) 07:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Newbie - requires definition

The section of the article defining newbie is one of the most edited sections of the article. I think a single definition should be decided on and a hidden comment inserted in the article directing editors of the newbie section to this talk page before they edit it. As far as the definition goes, I support the current one - we don't really need a section differentiating newbs and noobs. The article for newbie certainly doesn't. I'm reluctant to insert a hidden comment declaring that the definition is dictated by consensus when no consensus has been made yet, so I could use some discussion. LedgendGamer 01:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can go wherever the reliable sources take us. So far I've yet to find anything comparing the two terms. Telegraph.co.uk suggest "noob" as "a derogatory name for someone new to a particular task or community", quoting the Global Language Monitor. I've been reverting a lot, because it just seems to have been anonymous editors coming a long and making arbitary distinctions and spellings. Marasmusine (talk) 07:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Forbes article probably also useful. It makes the distinction, but - yikes - also defines them as neologisms, which we are supposed to avoid. Marasmusine (talk) 07:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]