The gentrification of videogame history(felipepepe.medium.com)
felipepepe.medium.com
The gentrification of videogame history
https://felipepepe.medium.com/the-gentrification-of-video-game-history-dfe11f1e08ae
17 comments
Yeah, I feel like they reach for that simplistic framing because it appeals to our sense of justice. They didn’t want you to learn about this, but I’m telling you anyway!
But the truth is closer to what you’re saying - Americans dominate international media and culture to the point where it’s hard for local culture to survive. There doesn’t need to malice involved, and there certainly isn’t in this case, but for some people it makes the world easier to understand.
I didn’t grow up with consoles or graphics cards. I played Pokémon on game boy emulators because that’s all that would run on my computer. But no one prevents me from talking about that, by any means. Here I am on HN, talking about it.
But the truth is closer to what you’re saying - Americans dominate international media and culture to the point where it’s hard for local culture to survive. There doesn’t need to malice involved, and there certainly isn’t in this case, but for some people it makes the world easier to understand.
I didn’t grow up with consoles or graphics cards. I played Pokémon on game boy emulators because that’s all that would run on my computer. But no one prevents me from talking about that, by any means. Here I am on HN, talking about it.
Distinct cultures having distinct video game cultures... author might as well say that French people gentrified food because French food is French. It's an interesting article, but I think the "gentrifying" angle is just cliche at this point.
"Gentrification" was a great word to describe a very specific phenomenon, it's a shame it's been misused to the point of meaninglessness. I'm not even sure what OP thinks it means.
There's an aspect that the article managed to imply but I think it warrants more thinking because it directly affects a lot of people, myself including: that people cannot afford to pay for a "gaming PC".
Well, I thankfully might afford it, but how could I justify the cost? I have a laptop which works very well and is my daily workhorse for everything, including gaming. But it has Intel onboard graphics. Spend something north of a thousand bucks of hard currency (even more costly in my country) just to play Baldur's Gate 3..?
This means that I can do almost everything on it except playing some games. This is because most recent games would require a quite good discrete GPU to be even playable on lowest settings (e.g., achieving something like 25 fps on low settings on 720 fps). In fact I think this is a quite stupid move by game companies, by imposing such artificial constraints on which machines can play their games and locking out millions of PCs and thus a similar number of potential users.
Seeing those games, I don't see them as being specifically advanced or better looking in their lower settings as to justify imposing such artificial barriers of entry.
To be clear, I have no problems with games being all the graphically advanced they want. They can have Ultra settings with double advanced real-time ray tracing with three parallell RTX 6000 cooled by liquid nitrogen, by all means. But don't put those stupid gatekeeps locking out onboard GPUs and thus millions of potential players from all over the world.
Well, I thankfully might afford it, but how could I justify the cost? I have a laptop which works very well and is my daily workhorse for everything, including gaming. But it has Intel onboard graphics. Spend something north of a thousand bucks of hard currency (even more costly in my country) just to play Baldur's Gate 3..?
This means that I can do almost everything on it except playing some games. This is because most recent games would require a quite good discrete GPU to be even playable on lowest settings (e.g., achieving something like 25 fps on low settings on 720 fps). In fact I think this is a quite stupid move by game companies, by imposing such artificial constraints on which machines can play their games and locking out millions of PCs and thus a similar number of potential users.
Seeing those games, I don't see them as being specifically advanced or better looking in their lower settings as to justify imposing such artificial barriers of entry.
To be clear, I have no problems with games being all the graphically advanced they want. They can have Ultra settings with double advanced real-time ray tracing with three parallell RTX 6000 cooled by liquid nitrogen, by all means. But don't put those stupid gatekeeps locking out onboard GPUs and thus millions of potential players from all over the world.
I don't think 'gentrification' is the right word for this. However the comments here do illustrate an underlying 'real' phenomenon what ever you call it.
Just for clarity: - Non-Japan Asia is new to gaming, and that's okay, it's going to take some time before they find their own voice.
This is not factually true, video games have one of the most popular forms of entertainment in non Japan Asia for 25 years. Nearly a quarter of humanity lives in non-japan asia. There were good non japanese games, bad non japanese games, and more than anything tons of 'mid' non japanese games. They aren't new too it, and they do have their own voices and styles.
What gets talked about as history of video gaming tends to reflect American video gaming history and the unavoidable influence of America's number one vassal state, Japan. Really this is the history of games marketed in North America and that's fine, it just isn't the whole history.
Just for clarity: - Non-Japan Asia is new to gaming, and that's okay, it's going to take some time before they find their own voice.
This is not factually true, video games have one of the most popular forms of entertainment in non Japan Asia for 25 years. Nearly a quarter of humanity lives in non-japan asia. There were good non japanese games, bad non japanese games, and more than anything tons of 'mid' non japanese games. They aren't new too it, and they do have their own voices and styles.
What gets talked about as history of video gaming tends to reflect American video gaming history and the unavoidable influence of America's number one vassal state, Japan. Really this is the history of games marketed in North America and that's fine, it just isn't the whole history.
Yeah, there's a real point that this article is making, but "gentrification" is not even remotely the correct word.
Alright, this is one place where I don't think the race discussion belongs. The fremium games being played over in Asia are just, literally, lower quality games. Americans have higher taste because it's always been a powerhouse for video games, they've explored and innovated a lot of genres. Non-Japan Asia is new to gaming, and that's okay, it's going to take some time before they find their own voice.
"But popular games in India will never be discussed outside of the country unless they’re first presented via a US-based media like IGN"
No. Even GREAT games in America are not being discussed because that's how advanced the gaming culture is here. We've been doing it awhile. There's just a lot of ground to cover for new players (literally), and again, that's okay.
Lastly, white Americans are very important to the history video games. They took it up, built it up, evolved it, and they did it very seriously (fuck man, I think they might have invented a lot of it). They are steeped in the history of gaming, so the "gentrification" charge is really insulting. It would be better to merge into this history than try to fork it and claim outlandish things, one because it's practical, two because its honorable.
"But popular games in India will never be discussed outside of the country unless they’re first presented via a US-based media like IGN"
No. Even GREAT games in America are not being discussed because that's how advanced the gaming culture is here. We've been doing it awhile. There's just a lot of ground to cover for new players (literally), and again, that's okay.
Lastly, white Americans are very important to the history video games. They took it up, built it up, evolved it, and they did it very seriously (fuck man, I think they might have invented a lot of it). They are steeped in the history of gaming, so the "gentrification" charge is really insulting. It would be better to merge into this history than try to fork it and claim outlandish things, one because it's practical, two because its honorable.
Maybe the other games just sucked? That screenshot of that vietnamese game we're supposed to feel bad for not knowing about looks awful, like any of the western mobile slop that's a dime a dozen. There is no fucking way on earth you're going to make me feel like I'm discounting "women's games" from gaming history by invoking a kim kardashian video game
> Asian free-to-play MMOs like MapleStory and Fantasy Journey to the West have always been more popular than World of Warcraft, but prejudice erased them.
Yeah no, it wasn't prejudice that erased them, but budget and quality. I mean just look at three screenshots of these games tell me you'd be as excited about them as you'd be about World of Warcraft, as a kid.
Yeah no, it wasn't prejudice that erased them, but budget and quality. I mean just look at three screenshots of these games tell me you'd be as excited about them as you'd be about World of Warcraft, as a kid.
I remember seeing plenty of ads for MapleStory in the 2000s online, but then, and even now, I have zero idea what kind of game it even is, or if it was even a game. I didn't know. It seemed like some kind of anime flash/browser social chatroom for weebs. As I recall the marketing for it was truly baffling and ineffective.
World of WarCraft, on the other hand, I knew exactly what it was because me and my friends and cousins had all been playing WarCraft and StarCraft since around 1995 or so.
But MapleStory? I couldn't even have told you with certainty if it was even actually a game or not. Turns out it is, but I didn't know that back then. I just looked and saw that it released in NA in 2005, that was halfway through highschool for me but I never met a single person there or in college that played it. If lots of people were playing it, I have no idea who they were.
World of WarCraft, on the other hand, I knew exactly what it was because me and my friends and cousins had all been playing WarCraft and StarCraft since around 1995 or so.
But MapleStory? I couldn't even have told you with certainty if it was even actually a game or not. Turns out it is, but I didn't know that back then. I just looked and saw that it released in NA in 2005, that was halfway through highschool for me but I never met a single person there or in college that played it. If lots of people were playing it, I have no idea who they were.
Yeah lmao, I was well aware of maple story as a kid, it was advertised to me on the western websites I used growing up, it was just bad and clearly not as impressive as something loke WoW which I also didn't play but at a light glance I can clearly say it had a lot more effort put into it
When I was younger and had less money I tried to find a free alternative to World of Warcraft. I probably played every single free rpg and mmorpg out there. To be frank, they were universally garbage. This has changed a little bit with some newer games (Star Wars MMO freemium is pretty good). The reason some of these games are not talked about is that they were not as good, regardless of origin.
This feels like bait of one form or another
For real, the ad in the middle was kind of obvious.
But framing it as erasure, gentrification, Sinophobia, etc., seems totally unnecessary. Americans discuss gaming from their perspective and based on their own experiences and that’s OK. That’s authentic. If your perspective and experience is different, and of interest to a broader audience, just share it with the world!