The Ignorance of the Non-Gamer Masses

     It's no secret that I really don't like casual gamers. However, there's something that I loathe even more: ignorant non-gamers. Not regular non-gamers, ignorant ones. Ones like those on Fox News (Update: Apparently "Fox 5" is not a part of Fox News, but that doesn't make Fox News any less ignorant):

     I don't normally pay any attention to Fox News, or any mainstream media for that matter, but when it comes to video games I feel I have to. I'm very conservative when it comes to politics, but I'm no right-wing nutjob. Fox News has always seemed to have a negative slant towards gaming, more so, it seems, than most other news stations. But I'm not talking about negativity, I'm talking about ignorance. The above video is the most recent demonstration of such ignorance. To be honest, they got most of the technical information right, but they got all their assumptions wrong.

     At around eight second in, the newscaster says, "Well it's Microsoft versus, just think the 'teenage boy gamer', and the 'teenage boy gamer' won." Less than ten seconds in and we're already off on the wrong path. 'Teenage boy gamers' were not Microsoft's problem. A teenage boy gamer will get the next Xbox no matter what because their parents will shell out as much money as necessary to make sure their 'little angel' is happy. They'll get the next Xbox because that's what all their friends will be getting. They'll get the next Xbox because that's where the next Call of Duty is (even though you could buy it on PS4 too). Teenage boys aren't what forced Microsoft to do an about face.

Not their fault... for once.

     Microsoft did an about face because the hardcore gaming scene came down hard on every policy they revealed. They did a complete 180 because Sony was raking in all the pre-orders after Microsoft's E3 debacle. They backpedaled because they weren't going to make money if they didn't. You have to remember that Microsoft is a corporation, and corporations exist only to make money. But this isn't a post about evil corporations, its a post about ignorance.

     Twenty seconds in and we get, "And they put two requirements, two restrictions, on this device..." Only two restrictions? I seem to remember there being more than that...

     But forty-five seconds in takes the cake. "Hmm. Alright- wait... Okay. Huh? Alright. Ok- Yeah. Yes. Okay." Top notch news casting right there, bub. This is the same guy who said he was "sort-of" a gamer. If he was any sort of real gamer, he would at least know a little about one of the biggest flip-flops in gaming history. The fact that he had no idea what she was talking about either meant he wasn't even listening to the woman (which is a whole other problem unto itself about doing your job), or he isn't as much of a gamer as he though he was. Probably the latter, but I can't count the former out.

      This is ignorance, plain and simple. It's the inability to comprehend. A fellow gamer put it this way:

"Have you GUYS noticed that "NORMAL" people all are starting to feel REALLY insecure talking about games? You can tell they KNOW they are clueless and they don't like that games are so popular, because they're not part of it. They don't like it not one bit. They're very uncomfortable talking about it because someone loves something that isn't THEM."

     Non-gamers, a.k.a. "normal people", find it hard to relate to us gamers, and it's only getting worse as the games industry grows. People fear what they don't understand. This fear leads to greater ignorance. What's worse is when the person who is supposed to be fighting ignorance and protecting the games industry is incompetent.

     I know this is an old video, but it adequately describes the situation. Now, I've never heard of Mr. Inept on the left over there, but he did a terrible job of explaining the specific scene they were talking about in the game. I don't know whether it was stage fright or something else, but he fumbled through his words and made a fool of himself and everyone who calls themselves a gamer. He later failed to get the point across, in a coherent fashion, that the game is not real and that the violence is not real. He acted more like a sore loser instead of trying to end the conversation favorably. He is not the person I would have wanted to defend my view on violence in video games. His incompetence only added fuel to the fires of ignorance.

     Later, Mr. Smug on the right says, "there's no question that there's a correlation between video game violence, and screen violence, and aggression in real life." Of course there's a question! Research is going on all the time about topics such as this, some saying there's no correlation and some saying that there is. If there was no question, why would so much money be spent on pointless research?

     At the end, Mr. Informed in the middle says, "Nonetheless, guys... You bring a game into a house... nothing to stop an eight year old kid becoming a terrorist and shooting people... in a video game." Sure there is. They're called 'parents', and if they're buying this game for their kid or leaving it out for their kid to play, then they're doing a horrible job of parenting. He's really lucky he caught himself on those last words too, or I would have had a field day...

"Watcha' doing over there, little Johnny?" "Oh, I don't know... BECOMING A TERRORIST."

     The main point I'm trying to make is that the non-gaming masses feel secure in their ignorance, and we gamers are hard pressed to break them out of it. I wish they would actually seek out a competent gamer when they do stories like these; someone who knows what they're talking about and have done at least some research in the field they're supposed to be talking about instead of just throwing it to one of their newscasters who's "not a gamer".