This actually reminds me of a video Sargon of Akkad did about someone that actually had fun with a game and felt confused and bad about it. It's like they don't seem to understand that games can be and to many...should be....fun. I don't quite understand it myself as to why they seem to think ideas should be shoved into our faces in every type of medium, artistic or not, out there.



Thank you for this. So many ideas of what "casual" and "hardcore" mean to each individual but a lot of the different types seem to be thought up by other gamers that don't agree with how someone else plays a game that they do or don't play so want to sound more "hardcore" instead of just...stupid at times. Everyone is going to have their idea of what this stuff means but it really doesn't mean much at all anyway. I can talk about how I'm casual in one type of game and hardcore in another...and yet be told I'm not hardcore because I haven't done things like someone else has with that very genre or whathaveyou.

well, if enjoying what I like to enjoy and let other people enjoy what they like to enjoy, makes me not a gamer, then I would more than happily say I am not a gamer. I will then just play the games I like to play, be it Psychonauts, Duke Nukem or Gone Home... but if this is the "common consesnsus", then please do not also say games should have "much more tolerant spaces", because what you are describing is the opposite of this - intolerance towards things you do not like.

So I guess this gamer is dead, long live doing what I like and playing what I find fun :)

Am I being intolerant? I just said they are not considered fun to play or even enjoyable. I never said they should nto be released or people who play them should be shamed for it. AGG and SJWs on the other hand constantly want to ban games they don't like, content they don't like (As with certain limerick), and constantly shame those who like those things.

Worth watching by the way.
https://youtu.be/vctharyt-xw

By who? Certainly not the consensus. I didn't think Gone Home was the best thing ever in the universe, but I enjoyed it enough while I was playing it.
I just recently finished playing Qora, which seems to fit what you are saying very well. It could conceivable be labelled a "non-game" or whatever people use to denigrate this type of stuff, and I actually loved it. It took me about 2 hours to complete, the didn't really have any serious "challenge" to speak of (unless you're an achievement or multiple endings completionist). The entire game consisted of pressing either the forward key, the up key or the down key, and occasionally tapping the spacebar for whatever contextual interaction was on screen- there was no possibility to miss a jump or hit the wrong thing or such.
And it was great! Great music, great art, involving and humourous story, and I certainly enjoyed it, and enjoyed it in a way I know I wouldn't enjoy if I was watching a movie. I may not have bought it at full price, but then again, I never buy a game at full price anyhow.
Is somehow it worth less because it doesn't focus so heavily on mechanics? Should I care that developers (allegedly) don't like those sort of games? Is it less deserving of praise or notice? Is my liking it somehow proof that I want to ban games not like it? Who wants to ban games not like it? Nobody I've ever read or seen has ever said "Gone Home/Depression Quest/Qora is great, other types of games shouldn't exist!".
As long as it is clearly communicated what sort of game a game is, none of this should be any issue at all. I SO much more prefer games like this rather than games that pretend to be "REAL" games but turn out to be boring linear button-mashing (supposedly requiring skill) inbetween pre-built kill animations moving from cutscene to cutscene (Metal Gear Rising Revengeance comes to mind).

I respect your opinion, however you must admit the large majority consider Depression Quest a pateethic piece of garbage, and Gone Home is held as entirely forgettable.

Why must I?
It seems a fairly circular argument, doesn't it?
"Nobody likes this game!"
"X likes it"
"X is a game critic, and they are biased"
"Y likes this game"
"No developer likes this game"
"Z likes it"
"Z is not a real developer, just some hipster"

I never said that. I just said msot people don't like them, and their quality is in question as well as the praise their recieved. I never stated no real X likes it. That would be a fallacy. And hipsters can be developers, gamers, and critics too. JUst that their tastes are different and not always exactly that good. I define a gamer as a person who invests a lot of time, effort, and interes on video games and is interested on knowing as much as possible abput video games and video games related topics. The fact that Polygon is hiring people who are not realy that interested in games is a related but separate matter.

I maintain that no true scotsman would play video games

Your personal background is of little interest to me. My background is rather similar in the gaming sense. You are misinterpreting my words and trying to twist it to make it sound as if I was refusing to acknowledge those who like those games. I am just stating they are a minority. Also stating that their praise and the possitive critiques and awards they got are questionable due to certain issues related to #GamerGate. And no, not all indie devs are hipsters, not all indie devs are Phill Fish, not all indie devs are interested in making "artsy" pretentious games. Some devs actually refuse to accept games as art because they believe art is rpetentious and they don't want video games to become pretentious (too late).

And I am "just stating" they are not a minority and that most indie devs actually do consider games art.
WHO IS RIGHT?! ONE MUST FALL! 2097! etc etc

We all just seem to be "stating" things here.

But are you seriously saying that once you remove every person who is "questionable due to certain issues related to #GamerGate", the remaining people who like games like Gone Home or Qora or Depression Quest are in the minority?
Wow, I didn't know that you had a line on the opinion of every gamer and games-related person! Can I have in on that?

EDIT: Actually, you may probably be right. I mean, not that you've provided anything to back your statements up, but we do live in a world where COD:BLOPS:MOA:BF2200 are the most profitable games ever.

And at some point in the distant future, High schoolers might be required to play them for their interactive media of the early 21st century class, because there an important cultural product as art.

You know. The games praised by the majority are games such as Silent Hill, GTA, Final Fantasy (With few exceptions to the series), Fallout, Half Life, Portal, The Elder Scrols, The Witcher, etc. They can also be considered art. But they are fun to play, and they are not just a political correctness agenda driven content. The truth is, most hardcore gamers are people like TB or Tara Babcock, not Nathan Grayson and Anita Sarkeesian (I was looking for polar opposites).

What do you guys think about the sims, the undisputed highest grossing PC franchise of all time?

Well, I forgot many franchises. But The Sims is remebered by its bugs more than anything. Other well liked franchises are for example Warcraft, Diablo (Minus Dablo III because of DRM) and Starcraft, among indie games and small IPs you could include Mirrors Edge, Machinarium, among others.