One year of blogging: a personal and heartfelt note from Stev3L

On the 20^th of February, 2017, while in despair at my previous job, I decided to make a gaming blog. I was worried at first about how it would go; I knew that the market for videogame writers was vastly saturated. In the end, however, my need for an outlet won the day and I made my first post in earnest; a messy little article geeking out about how Resident Evil 7 brought back a sense of horror authenticity to its franchise.

Starting my blog was the best decision I ever made. As I wrote more I quickly found a passion in what I was doing and though the click count was low, my blog quickly became a much-needed source of pride and hope.

It wasn’t until I started my Twitter account, however, that I began to experience just how great the gaming community as. While growing my own presence, I quickly fell in love with how friendly and welcoming the gaming community was. I really love using Twitter to catch up with the little circles in which I’ve found myself, and I get to enjoy so much more about what I do. I realised that I didn’t just want to write, but I wanted to become a part of this great community and engage with it as much as I could. 

I met the excellent editor of Pressquit, another gaming site that I found inspiring and fun to read, and even wrote a couple of my own articles on the site. I am most proud of my Aven Colony review on Pressquit, as it gave me a taste not just of writing for an audience, but also with getting demo copies of games for review. I felt immensely proud as it felt like a seal of approval on my work that I could write articles that got developer attention.

While I went quiet in the latter end of 2017, as I had a holiday with my fiancée and also needed to concentrate on my new job which became increasingly busy around the festive period, I got back to working on the blog as soon as I felt the writing bug take me again. One of my proudest moments came from previewing It Lurks Below, an inspired survival game built by the industry legend that had a big hand in creating Diablo. Again, it felt like a seal of approval to get attention from such an important developer. 

My proudest moment, however, was in writing my charity article for PixelGirl. This amazing streamer was one of my earliest inspirations as I joined the gaming community. Her infectiously friendly and kindhearted nature made Twitteran uplifting experience every time I saw her post something. To have the privilege of collaborating with such an influential advocate was one of the greatest moments of my blog, even more so that it was for a worthy cause. 

Today, my blog is in the middle of being tweaked for compatibility with my future plans. What started out as Stev3LGaming is going to become XYZGaming, as my focus continues to shift on the gaming community. The most important thing to my online identity is that sense of community that I found; the networks of people I have met along the way have been inspirational. If I can be half the person that these people are, I would be a very happy man indeed.

I wrote this blog post with a sense of newfound pride; XYZGaming is more than just a blog for me now. It’s my gateway to an awesome community, and a much needed creative outlet. My little hobby is now an achievement I can look upon with no small amount of pride. 

I’ve seen some amazing things this last year and met even more amazing people, but what has been the most humbling part of all of this has been the people that make the gaming community what it is. Whether developers, streamers, fans, other bloggers or Let’s Players, the game community has been an absolute inspiration to join and I thank you for being so welcoming to me. I find myself humbled by how the gaming community has shown what it’s truly capable of, and now that I’ve seen a glimpse of this greatness I am filled with elation and pride that I get to be a part of that. So from the bottom of my heart, to every single visitor to this little corner of the internet:

 

Thank you.

-Stev3L, editor and writer of XYZ/Stev3LGaming.

Bottling Lightning Twice: the challenge of following up a phenomenon

Occasionally a game comes around that surpasses all expectation. Such games become phenomenal, smashing genre conventions and presenting critically-acclaimed, excellent mechanics that other games scramble to replicate. I like to call such successes ‘bottled lightning’ games, as these titles tend to hit at just the right time and scratch just the right itches that make such phenomena practically impossible to feel ‘for the first time’ again. 

One example of such a game is Minecraft; in a games industry that at the time was dominated by linear action experiences and cutscenes, this game created a unique mix of survival and free-form creation unlike any other experience at the time. The true measure of the game’s bottled-lightning status was in its imitators; Minecraft clones became a dime-a-dozen; before it went multi-platform, developers raced on consoles to have their own ‘Minecraft-like’ experience to capitalize on the game’s immense popularity by presenting near-imitations. A renaissance of sorts happened in the genre of ‘survival games’ (a genre I’d argue didn’t so much exist pre-Minecraft), where hunger and thirst meters, as well as the mechanic of crafting from gathered materials, became commonplace in the market, even in games where it made no sense. 

With Minecraft being a billion-dollar product nowadays, and therefore the go-to-target of hipster scorn, it’s easy to forget the game’s early status as a pioneer that launched many modern trends we see today. Like it or not, Minecraft indeed bottled lightning. Who doesn’t remember the unique feeling of discomfort and newness as they launched the game for the first time, and how exciting the community was when they were discovering and re-telling every little legend and myth that formed around the game? It’s impossible to recreate that feeling in the game today; to play Minecraft for the first time again is impossible.

Dark Souls exists in a similar vein to Minecraft, and achieved widespread popularity in a similar, albeit less extreme way. As mainstream RPGs, such as Skyrim, became perceived as being simplified and ‘too easy’, and with the industry suffering from a perception of being ‘dumbed down’ to fit with an increasingly mainstream audience, Dark Souls came along as a punishing, opaque experience that offered deep, complex systems and a high barrier to entry. The game was a celebration of everything that had, up to now, been accepted tropes of videogames being so niche. As a phenomenon, Dark Souls gained notoriety rather than outright affection at first, as a difficult game accessible only for a certain kind of gamer and unapologetic of that fact. But as an industry trend, Dark Souls was a bona-fide cult hit, and it was undoubtedly helped by its unique flavour of gameplay that was rare to see in the games industry. 

Arguably, Dark Souls was the only game of its kind to truly strike its own unique formula that has been difficult to replicate, even for its sequels from the same company; for all the love Dark Souls II and III get, most fans now agree that the original Dark Souls is undoubtedly the quintessential experience of its gameplay. Even the game that preceded it, Demon’s Souls, doesn’t quite scratch the same itch. Dark Souls is certainly not without its imitators, many of which are excellent games, such as the sublime Japanese mythology-inspired Nioh. 

This leaves the problem of how to bottle lightning a second time; how does one follow up such phenomenal success with the weight of expectation? Fans would arguably want a sequel which would bottle lightning a second time and so uniquely feel new and exciting to play. But the sad reality is that this is, by definition, impossible to achieve with a sequel. Even if it succeeds in being so unique that it becomes its own phenomena, much like how Dark Souls did with its following-up from Demon’s Souls, a quitter hit that didn’t quite match its successor’s dizzying heights, it’s arguably because that game is so uniquely its own that it is instantly set apart from anything else. Instantly a game like this would set itself apart from its predecessors. Such games may bottle lightning in their own way but not their original inspiration’s lightning. So maybe the best way to approach such sequels and follow ups is not to expect this to happen and instead be happy creating new and interesting interpretations of the lightning formula; arguably, Dark Souls has already found some success in doing this with its sequels and with Bloodborne. Its sequels are successful and well-liked by critics and present interesting takes on the formula their predecessor founded. While not quite the same as playing the original, sublime title, what these games do is create unique interpretations of their own that make for great videogames. 

Bottling lightning may be something to aim for, but for audiences to expect the same to happen with follow-ups to the game would be foolish; a Minecraft 2, for example, would probably not nearly be a successful venture because it wouldn’t go off on quite the same tangent that Minecraft did and scratch the unique itch in quite nearly as impactful a way as the original. But instead creating new formula that expand on and interpret gameplay in new ways is still a worthy aspiration for any sequel and can sometimes be its own bottled lightning.

Control the Controller: Rebuttal

Another day, another sad media opinion piece dragging the videogame market through the mud. This time it is the turn of The Star Online, which concludes: ‘Videogames are doing many children great harm. The many children in question constitute a significant number of boys in the up-and-coming generation. For these boys to become authentic men, they need to be rescued. They are not going to rescue themselves.’

One of the better videos on the topic of videogame addiction and the surrounding media hysteria surrounding it is by Extra Credits, shown here. The video is rightfully careful to discriminate addiction from compulsion, and importantly demonstrates why videogame ‘addiction’ as it is termed by the media is largely sensationalism. I think the most important part of the video to pay attention to is that addiction refers to the alteration of brain chemistry to create biological dependence on the substance, an effect commonly seen in truly harmful addictions such as nicotine and alcohol and to a lesser extent, caffeine. Addiction carries with it a horrifying stereotypical image; a violent man with poor hygiene performing desperate acts of crime to further fund his own habits, perhaps. This imagery is often wrong and unfair to those who suffer from addiction, which in itself is one way in which the article and wider media are largely wrong. Not only does such sensationalism harm gamers but it also harms those who suffer from addictions.

On the other hand, Extra Credits reports that videogames rather use the way in which brain chemistry works to create a rewarding system for the player. This is a correct identification, and possibly the main reason that we play videogames as a whole. However, this comes with a lot of issues regarding responsible use of the tools available to videogame developers, something which has sadly been lacking. Many of the big developers instead exploit compelling design in gaming for immoral reasons, in the most cynical of ways. More needs to be done from an industry perspective to tackle immorality in game design, and more pressure from the market will eventually lead to an improvement in this area.

More immediately, however, many of the assertions of the article are downright false and damaging. The way in which the writer paints game compulsion in children is offensive and harmful and not indicative of a healthy approach. This is a tough, negative approach to a problem. Blame is placed squarely on the videogames and they are identified in this article as the singular variable that is causing so much damage. The solution to the problem is to ‘confiscate the controller, smash it, and toss the pieces in a dumpster located at least ten miles from home – and do not ever, under any circumstances, allow one of these nefarious devices back in said household.’

This is, of course, a nuclear option. The complete withdrawal of videogames from a child’s life is an extreme course of action to take. Let’s face it, we live in a time where gaming is more visible than ever, and more accessible than ever. Either through mobile gaming, or through their own social networks, a child is going to be exposed to videogames. To tackle the underlying issue which is toxic videogame playing, a nuclear option is oftentimes going to do more harm than good unless in the most extreme of cases. Granted, where gaming becomes the square, central behavioural issue, some withdrawal of gaming privileges can, in a parenting sense, be a logical move to make. However, this is definitely where the facade of the article’s bias begins to fade; look at the terminology used. Games are described as ‘nefarious’. Evil, cunning things that are out to get you. This is the definite thing that games are not. Games are tools, and it is the misuse of these tools that are causing the problems.

On the other hand, Extra Credits has a great counter-strategy in the positive sense to combat toxic, compulsive gaming in young people. It correctly identifies that in a lot of these cases where videogames have become a harmful element of people’s lives, the main problem is mismanagement. Not just of the videogame as a tool, but a chronic mismanagement of that person’s life, either through a lack of real discipline or parental engagement. This is where I particularly like EC’s approach: it identifies the use of a positive mechanism by which to tackle and encourage videogame behaviour.

Too much is placed on the negative aspect of videogames. They’re addictive, they’re violent, mind-numbing. Not enough is placed on the positive ways in which we can use them. Through a good use of scheduling and the right encouragement and parental framework, games can be just another useful tool by which to raise your child. Instead of taking away, and engaging in destructive activities that only serve to cement one’s dominion over their child, Extra Credits instead encourages positive relationships with games.

Instead of throwing out the controller, pick it up, and use it as a point to engage with your child. Talk to them about games. It’s such an important part of your child’s life, and they would be thrilled to be able to have a meaningful conversation with their role models about it. Learn about gaming and learn about the right and wrong games for your child to play. Use this knowledge to push your children from the toxic parts of gaming into the kind of games that help them grow; the Minecrafts, the Zeldas, the Don’t Starves of the world. Ultimately, I think that Extra Credits approach is a lot more involved and a lot more realistic. We live in a world where videogames exist, and they are protected as free speech and as an art form. Not only that but videogames are a valuable medium that has developed a strong economy but also is a strong learning tool and culture in and of itself. To think that we can destroy people’s engagement with the medium is naive and destructive in and of itself. Instead of treating videogames like the enemy, the public should instead treat it like a tool, just like television and books.

The Star Online’s article may be sensationalism for the sake of clicks, or it may be a genuine piece of opinion. But it most certainly is harmful and encourages exactly the wrong kind of engagement with gaming, coming from a stark misunderstanding of what a videogame is. While there are massive issues underlying the cynical exploitation of videogame mechanisms, particularly in the mobile and microtransaction space, games are a tool that I will always firmly believe is a force for good. Not only that, but I am a strong proponent of the use of positive mechanisms instead of negative, and the use of engagement and knowledge will surely be far more effective in everyday circumstance than the use of force and oppression.

However, if there is an extreme case where videogames are causing genuine harm to a child, then professional help and a measured response is needed. A knee-jerk reaction informed by a sensationalist article will help nobody. Instead, seek professional help to come up with a measured response plan. It may be the case that videogame time for your child should be reduced or limited as much as possible, but the important thing here is developing an individual, measured plan. Just throwing away videogames is an expensive and damaging thing to do and treating them like the enemy is a more harmful plan in itself. Professional help exists and will undoubtedly assist parenting, but ultimately it is down to parenting strategy to decide a child’s fate, not a videogame’s.

Gaming's Online Multiplayer Problems

Playing an online competitive game as a latecomer just downright sucks. It is the gaming equivalent of opening a door to be punched in the face by a boxing glove that was rigged as a trap. Trying to get into any online game after its main hype has passed is a difficult and grindy experience. Many new players will get soul-crushingly destroyed by the hordes of skilled and practiced players who understand the ins and outs of every map and have even begun to peel away at the layers of metagaming.

One of the most prominent example of a game with a severe gap of skill between newcomers and experienced players is Overwatch. It truly is a shame to see that there is a game out there made with so much accessibility in mind to be one of the most harrowing online multiplayer experiences one can face as a newbie. Despite the amazing premise of the game and the wonderful character and charm, it is impossible for me to get into Overwatch because I simply can’t stand how I get destroyed in every match with no hope of a win as a new player.

The biggest problem with gaming’s accessibility is gamers’ general disdain for newbies. Many can relate to the experience of being referred to dismissively as a ‘casual’ or ‘noob’ and treated like a second-class citizen as a result. The ‘git gud’ culture is pervasive throughout all genres of videogames and is a sign of a more toxic attitude behind the scenes of gaming. This is not a sustainable situation and this is precisely the kind of behaviour that turns off non-gamers from the medium. We have created a strange kind of culture where new players are specifically made to feel unwelcome.

While everybody loves to be good at games, and most gamers offer little more than snorts of derision to the lesser-skilled, I believe that this is one of the biggest problems with online gaming and gamer culture to date; a gaming culture that alienates rather than includes. This has caused major problems with how gaming is viewed by outsiders looking in.

On the other hand, there are big problems with marketing a game with accessibility in mind. There is an image of games that cater for ‘casual’ gamers as being of ‘lesser’ quality. In fact, many commenters on more toxic gaming sites will happily deride the more easily accessible games as ‘for casuals’ and will treat such games with disdain and even anger.

A happy balance needs to be struck between maintaining a game’s hardcore appeal but also in allowing more accessibility. Currently, the balance seems to have shifted towards the ‘hardcore’ gamers, with Overwatch and Dark Souls dominating the gaming world, and a typical walled-off mentality to any would-be newcomer to gaming. But if gaming is to continue to grow we need to examine how we are treating our player bases. If we continue to alienate, gaming culture runs the risk of continuing to be alienated by other media cultures as a childish pursuit.

More effort needs to be made to make online competitive gaming a more friendly place for all. We are nowhere near a level where we can call online gaming an all-around ‘good’ experience. Between toxic tryhards and angry trolls, it is difficult to find any online game that hasn’t been tarnished terribly by the toxicity of gamer culture. Perhaps the difficulty of integrating into an online competitive game is the most practical example of how gaming’s community problems are stacking up.

We need more games that will try to level the gap between new and lesser skilled players and the more experienced, hardcore gamers that practice all day long. Perhaps this can be done by better separating the two; so far I have seen an extreme deluge of games where hardcore gamers are placed into the same playlists as new players and often exploit such matchmaking systems to create easy matchups for themselves. It’s clear that matchmaking algorithms as they are today are not sufficient for keeping the skill gap at an even and fair level.

On the other hand, perhaps we also need more games like Mario Kart, where newbies are allowed to feel like they have a chance to win, with powerups and other gameplay difficulties dynamically adjusted to allow the lesser skilled to even the playing field. Hardcore gamers will cry foul at this idea, but perhaps this could be done in conjunction with a ‘hardcore’ multiplayer mode that turns off such adjustment, to appease those that want to play purely through skill, as fair or unfair as that can be.

In any game, there are winners and losers, but the real challenge is making losing fun, or making the losers feel like they had a real chance. Gaming has been far too unforgiving to the losers. In order to help gaming culture continue to mature, and for the medium to continue to grow, we need a shift in thought and a shift in design ideas to allow those of all skill levels to play online games on a relatively even and enjoyable field, such that new and less experienced players can enjoy a gentler introduction to games they’re trying for the first time, and that hardcore gamers can still get that purely-skill based level of eSport that they deserve.