Geek Culture: Rent to Own

If you're one of the small but growing number of people who follow me on Twitter, you might have seen this comment yesterday:

Lots of people have spell-checkers on their computers. My spell-checker, much like yours, would like to correct what I wrote here, because it thinks it's a typo. But the fact of the matter is that Michelangelo was an artist, and Michaelangelo is a turtle. I will demonstrate, with a scan from this book I found on my shelf:

It is a spelling mistake that more or less has stuck. Except for, for example, certain title cards on the 80's-90's cartoon show, some toy boxes, and other instances probably since then, where a mistake was made that was actually an over-correction of a very old mistake.

I'm a goddamned authentic Turtles fan, because I know that some of you are wrong about this. But, yet, I had to be corrected on this once, too. Because it's a strange piece of trivia, and not everyone is born knowing everything about things, especially esoteric, "nerdy" things.

So, now, I'm going here. I know that's not exactly boldly going where no one has gone before, to mix my nerd metaphors bluntly. It was Leigh Alexander's rebuttal and then the Mary Sue that made me aware of this Forbes piece about "fake geek girls." And though I don't have the readership or Twitter followers of either, I've been told women should not just shut up about things when they have something to say.

I'm going to be honest, though. I like what Leigh has to say about this, for sure. But I also get where Tara Brown is coming from, at least on a surface level. First of all, geek subculture is obviously threatened by any inauthenticity that comes across as pandering. No, hang on... All subcultures feel threatened by inauthenticity that comes across as pandering. Especially if it's done by people in a higher position of relative status, looking in to a traditionally marginalized subculture.

So, if the newest hot young actress comes on television and talks about "her geek cred," there is a problem. Many geeks felt ostracized when geek interests weren't so acceptable. Hot actresses are the opposite of ostracized. Even if this actress were only a part-time geek, a geek-in-training, she could probably become a full geek in time. Whereas I, already a full geek, could never become a hot young actress.

This is not really the fault of the hot young actress, though. I might feel she's invading my space because she is younger, wealthier, skinnier, prettier. But the real problem is societal expectations and double-standards that seem to say: all women should be young, rich, thin, beautiful. But, oh, if you somehow are those things, you are not "allowed" to be smart. You're worthless as a woman unless you're sexy, but if you are sexy, don't open your mouth. The cacophony of catcalling in lots of geek spaces has sent horrifying mixed messages to women that confuse and bewilder them. We can at least feel welcome in our knowledge of, say, indie black-and-white comic-book trivia, but when another woman comes in and knows the same, and she meets geek men's super-high standards of attractiveness (that often involve comparing real women to imaginary ones), it can be a little daunting.

It's also the fault of the word "geek," which, though I've been slinging it around up to this point without much of a problem, I agree is getting increasingly useless as an identifier. It's broad. I disagree that there is some "overall geek culture" that demands liking a particular subset of particular things, things which are shared by all geeks. There are some geek-identified things I just don't dig, and that's okay. I also believe that some pursuits considered more mainstream for whatever reason are really a little bit geeky (like, for example, sports statistics).

It would be nice if people, through the internet and elsewhere, all were aware of this simple fact: humans aren't homogeneous. People look different from one another, and not all people look like airbrushed supermodels (not even the airbrushed supermodels). People like different things, to different degrees. Therefore, "geeks," a growing group if you believe it exists at all, aren't homogeneous - and that word, itself, geek, has become so watered-down to the point where it's rapidly losing whatever meaning it had anyway.

In high school I read Dragonlance books and played a lot of RPGs and spent a lot of time on the internet. In college, I got in to, among other things, Transformers, really really bad, partially because I remember liking them as a kid, and partially because people said, hey, have you seen this new Transformers show? It is pretty damn sweet. But I wasn't coming in an expert, at the time, and had a little catching-up to do. There have always been people in my life, from my parents to my friends, who were willing to pass things to me that were interesting and that they thought I would enjoy. And for a while, I was that young otaku who was still learning about lots of geek stuff, learning which die you had to roll for a saving throw and sometimes spelling the names of Ninja Turtles slightly wrong.

So maybe the worst thing about the inauthentic geek girl is that I used to be her?

Part of this is also generational: an "uphill both ways" kind of thing. "Geekdom" is more accepted now than it used to be; Transformers are "so mainstream," and sometimes, I honestly do want to rail against that a little bit, 'cause, I remember it being so much harder. I read Deadpool before his appearance in every Marvel title was declared mandatory. Barnes and Noble has a manga section now; I remember having to mail order my MixxZines. I saw people in a chat room last night bemoaning that their theoretical children wouldn't grow up with the "real" Looney Tunes; will their children complain that their kids don't get the "real" Pokemon? (Am I already showing my age? What do kids like these days? iCarly?) But is there any way to say "I was here first" without sounding like an idiot? Does it make me a hipster? Yeah, that term is as meaningless as "geek."

Let's be fair here: however you define it, Geekdom Needs Women. Without more diverse women everywhere (older, younger, skinny, not, good with makeup and clothes or not so good with that), it'll be hard for geek men to accept that any kind of woman can also have "geek interests" in any sort of quantity (obsessed, or not). Also, the truly maladjusted men out there will have to accept that women are all individual people instead of some group called "women." But, baby steps.

Wasn't I talking about the Ninja Turtles? I guess I started there. Hey complaining fans: if you're not oldschool on the Turtles, you also came in late. You don't really own your anger at Michael Bay doing whatever-the-heck he's doing to make the franchise more accessible to another younger generation. But if you're not exactly getting your trivia right then it's possible that that younger generation was, at one point, yours.

The good news about that outrage, though, is you really can rent it. Borrow that fandom for a little while and see if it fits right. And then maybe you can come over some time and browse through my comic book collection? You may find something you like.

Gunpoint preview

I wrote a little article on Tap today about my experiences with Gunpoint. Check it out!

Gunpoint is an interesting game: it's gotten a lot of press coverage for an indie demo, because it's made by a person who is also writing about games and thus "in the press." It inspires jokes about nepotism.

I tend to cover what comes across my desk and is personally interesting to me, be it indie, AAA, whatever; as a basically-independent blogger I have that luxury. Gunpoint is interesting to me because I read Tom Francis' design articles before he started making the game, and because the game itself has a cool hook. It turned out to be pretty fun in its own right. I personally now live in that weird space between being a developer and being in the press, so I know where this game is coming from. It seems to be created out of the sheer joy of creating a thing.

Some people say that the press shouldn't develop games, or that the press shouldn't declare themselves to be fans of particular games or back games on Kickstarter. I suppose it's all good to want to hold all game writers to a neutral standard, but I disagree with this. I think it definitely depends on one's role within the press. After all, are we not fans of games? Isn't that why we write about them in the first place?

It's possible, I suppose, that there is a role for someone who doesn't actually like games in the video game press, to do the "hard-hitting journalism" some think is needed. But that's probably what it would take: someone who is informed about games, but doesn't actually like them. Or at least most of them. It's a tall order.

GDC 2012, the rest of the recap

For my last two days of GDC, I went to a few very popular sessions and a couple of quiet ones. A few were development roundtables that prefer people not blog about their contents, but which were helpful to me as someone who is developing contents I'm not supposed to blog about.

Other things:

The Microtalks (I took notes like whoa during these, because I felt so privileged just to be there, but hopefully video will end up on the internet at some point because this was amazing kinetic energy)

Scott Phillips - Saints Row the Third Post-Mortem

Huge privilege to be there, as well, because the recap can't show you the tone video and previsualization animatics that were shown during the talk. All I gotta say is, I think it would be impossible not to watch that tone video without smiling. At least, if you're me.

Of course, being there means I missed the tease about a new Deadly Premonition HD, but this is why I need an extra me so that I can have every possible amazing experience.

Ray Mazza - Lessons Learned Bringing the Sims to Facebook 

It looks like the write-ups on this talk are a little short, but, social games, amIrite? Anyway, this was a really great and useful talk about the power of human-to-human connection in social games. It really made me put my design brain on.

My final session on Friday was the "free to play" panel moderated by Tom Chick. It was a very energetic debate about the merits of and problems with free-to-play games in the current market. I think it is very interesting to have gone to the Sims talk, and also to this one. I am pro "free to play," and pro "social game," because I see these games' potential to reach a broader audience that may not be interested in playing the same kinds of games. Matthias Worch, who was on the panel mostly as an anti-FTP-advocate, said that everyone in the room could easily afford paying at least a dollar for a game. And that, certainly, is true. But, everyone in that room was already bought in to the idea of even playing a video game in the first place. And for others that are not, well, I'd like to bring them around too.

Anyway, since I'm already committed, I heard some games may have come out this week while I was otherwise occupied? ...Just a few. So, maybe some stuff about that, soon.

Thanks to everyone I got to hang out with at GDC this year, and those I had close misses with, let's hang out in the future!

GDC 2012 Day One

So here I am, Day Two of GDC, Day One already in the bag.

Here's some of the stuff I saw on my first day of the GDC Main Conference, and the great Gamasutra coverage of them:

Sid Meier – Interesting Decisions

Mare Sheppard – Why I Hate Women in Games Initiatives

Keiji Inafune – The Future of Japanese Games

I was also the first on the Expo floor Wednesday to get my hands on Gunpoint! Is that exciting? You bet that is exciting.

One talk I wasn't able to find much of a write-up about in the major blogs is the talk given by Scott Rigby from Immersyve about player motivation and retention. This talk was particularly relevant to my line of work at the moment, and I am always interested in hearing more about player psychology. It does seem as if Rigby has given similar talks before, so here's a writeup from 2010. I have more thoughts about this talk, but probably not the time to collect them all just yet.

As for the other talks, while I'm getting ramped up to hear more today, my quick and somewhat-disorganized thoughts here:

Meier is has great insights but at GDC tends to give very general-audience talks. I had the privilege of meeting him once in a more small-scale setting at Michigan University, and he's a great person to have a conversation with. Once he's up in front of a big crowd, like in GDC, he's not able to get as specific and his lecture felt a lot like a broad overview of the topic. My favorite part of the talk was where he talked about different playtesters and their attitudes toward the game they're trying.

One thing I found interesting was, when he wasn't talking about strategy games (which of course he knows best) he discussed racing games as his most-cited second example, and how the idea of decision-making might apply in such a game. I know there are a lot of racing games out there still, but I wonder how relevant that example felt to the majority of the audience. I see it as sort of a niche genre this day and age, but it may be I who am uncultured in that department.

I was interested in seeing Inafune's talk, I confess, partially because I, too, am a huge fan of Mega Man. However, he obviously wasn't there to talk about that. His relationship with Mega Man is complicated. So, when he gives a talk where the major takeaway is: "We need to get beyond re-hashing the same ideas and heroes at this point, and come up with more new ideas," the question you do not get up to ask him is: "How do you feel about how Capcom is handling Mega Man?"

So of course someone did just that.

Beyond the standard audience shenanigans, this was a great talk. Many Japanese developers are a little tight-lipped at GDC sessions, but Inafune is fairly outspoken. He was talking about issues with the Japanese industry focusing on sequels, HD Remakes, and rehashes, and how he feels the country has lost its will to succeed. (It was a great temptation to make #winning jokes on Twitter.) Really, though, this isn't just a problem with the Japanese industry. It is a problem with the AAA industry in general. Hell, it's even a problem with the movie industry. It's a symptom of a world becoming more risk-averse and it's a hard problem to fix. However, the problem may be more obvious in Japanese games because of less visible indie projects. And indie has its own issues…

I also definitely have more thoughts about Mare Sheppard's talk. I thought it was a good talk, because it challenged some assumptions and had some important information. But in the end I can't agree with her, and that's complicated. It was, at least, the second or third-most controversial thing yesterday.

I plan to write more about this, but it looks like Day Two is already about to start. Sims, Saints Row, and other fun talks are on my to-do list today.

Spring Travels Begin

If you're looking for me
You'd better check at GDC
'Cause that is where you'll find me
At the GDC - show -
Out in California -
Seeea Lab at the bottom of, The, Sea

Whoa, I kinda lost control of that, there.

Anyway, yes! I'm headed out to GDC starting on Tuesday. This year, I'll be splitting my time between covering news for Tap, and checking out sessions on casual games, since that is the sort of thing I am working on at the moment. For further announcements about my development-side adventures, please watch this space! I hope to have more great things to announce when I get back.

In writing announcements, I have another article in Ctrl+Alt+Defeat this month! I'm always honored when someone asks me to contribute my thoughts, so I used the opportunity to elaborate on why I do bad things in games, and why I don't usually feel guilty about it. But to be honest, every other piece in there is gold and mine is only okay, so please just be reading this publication, won't you?

I'd like, by the way, to thank my family right now, and if you see the article you will understand. As I have relocated recently, and often travel far and wide, collecting my thoughts in writing sometimes makes me realize just how much important is left back at home. And how I should always remember to say so.