this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2025
11 points (73.9% liked)

Video Games

242 readers
1 users here now

A general gaming community for Piefed.

More games, less memes, no outrage culture.

Rules

  1. Stay civil.
    Debate ideas, not people. No personal attacks, no flame wars. More info here.

  2. This is not a gamer identity space.
    We don’t self-identify as “gamers.” Games are art, not a lifestyle brand. If your whole identity is about consumption, you’ll probably feel out of place here.

  3. Talk about games as art.
    Discussion should focus on design, ideas, and creative choices. What does this game say? What are the consequences of its mechanics? What does its aesthetic communicate?

  4. No discrimination.
    Prejudice, bigotry, or harassment of any kind will get you removed.

  5. No spam.
    Keep discussion meaningful. Don’t flood with promos or off-topic noise.

  6. Stay on topic.
    This space is for discussion of games as creative works, not for tech support, low-effort memes, or console wars.

  7. Evolving rules.
    These rules may change as the community grows and we refine what works.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
atomicpoet@piefed.social
11
The problem with self-identified “gamers” is that they don’t much like games. (atomicpoet.org)
submitted 9 months ago by atomicpoet@atomicpoet.org to c/videogames@piefed.social
12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The problem with self-identified “gamers” is that they don’t much like games.

What they really like is outrage. Endless Twitter threads about Ubisoft. YouTube rants about EA. It’s the same cycle every year—and every year, they eat it up.

Now, yes—sometimes outrage does move the needle. Loot boxes got attention because people wouldn’t shut up about them. Steam’s refund system only exists because players demanded it. Fair enough. But let’s be honest: that’s the exception. Most of the noise is just outrage as lifestyle.

Because while gamers are busy fuming over Assassin’s Creed DLC, thousands of games are releasing—many of them incredible. Games that will never get a spotlight, because gamers would rather keep hate-watching the same corporations they claim to despise.

Kicker is, Ubisoft and EA don’t actually matter unless you make them matter. They don’t have a constitutional right to your wallet. If you stopped buying Assassin’s Creed, it wouldn’t exist. Yet you do buy it. Then you complain about it. Then you buy it again.

Meanwhile, you could be playing Baldur’s Gate, Silksong, or any of the other masterpieces sitting right there waiting. But no—better to log on and shout about how much you hate the thing you voluntarily gave $60 to.

So sure, outrage has its uses. But don’t pretend it makes you some champion of the medium. If you care about games—actually care—play the good ones. Otherwise, drop the gamer label. Because what you’re really into isn’t games. It’s the drama.

@videogames@piefed.social

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] who@feddit.org 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I’m not talking about descriptors. I’m talking about identities.

I call myself a gamer. That is self-identifying as a gamer.

I have not adopted it as my identity, nor do I behave like the people complained about in this post. [edit: slightly rephrased]

The point is that you are, through the phrasing you have chosen, making an overly broad generalization about a very large group of humans, most of whom don't behave as you describe, and it's a bit insulting. Now that your attention has been called to it, you can choose whether to rephrase your argument.

Good day.

[–] atomicpoet@piefed.social -3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

“Gamers” are not a marginalized group, nor a protected class. If you feel like this criticism is aimed at you, maybe that’s a sign you need to do some self-reflection—or simply step back.

You’ve got a choice. Be here as someone who likes talking about video games. Or don’t be here at all.

Not every community is for everyone. And that’s okay.