![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
One common stereotype of the gamer psyche usually pinned on the adolescent or post-adolescent male: usually a high school or college student, who sits staring at a computer monitor almost constantly with a bag of chips and a can of soda. His only friends are those he meets on the Internet, except for those he invites to have LAN parties or role-playing game sessions. He is assumed to speak online in "1337" (pronounced " leet") a "language" made up of characters and numbers that resemble letters. The stereotypes often have elements in common with those of geeks, nerds, sci-fi fans, cult television fans and losers. They are also perceived as having social inadequencies and greater than usual intelligence. The distinguishing factor of a gamer is their avid interest in games.
(Note: there are many different types of stereotypes about gamers, the one above is merely one of the more common ones.)
See also: Hacker, Script kiddie
It might be possible to cut this down into something worth keeping, but I doubt it. - Sean Curtin 23:07, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
No, a anti-gamer sticks to one game, one console. a gamer is a person addicted to games. Plus, I hate the use of "anti-gamer", Someone is either a gamer or not one.
This article seems to talk about the history of PC and Console games a lot more than it does about gamers. Could this be addressed? Making the differences between addicts and 'hardcore gamers' more prominent might help some, I was under the impression this was more about casual gamers. The history of the gaming systems/styles should be elsewhere, no? -Anon 19:53, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)
I think it could keep "Celebrities". Everything below that is a good start on a separate article for "Video gamer", "Video game player", or something similar. (I know plenty of gamers that don't play video games very often if at all.) Parody 04:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I've got to agree, this is a pretty terrible article. The Gameplay vs. Graphics section made open judgements about the rights and wrongs of certain views - a violation of wikipedia's NPOV policy. Without those NPOV comments, very little was left. Artichoke84 10:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't think that's going far enough. This article should read "#REDIRECT [[Game]] {{R from agent noun}}". Percy Snoodle 14:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't the term be Player, we don't call people who read books Bookers we call them readers.
Gamer is a widely used and well known term within the Gaming community. It is its own subculture. And, incidently, I do not think it should be merged with "Video Game Player." Lots of people play videogames, not all of those people are gamers. -- Naha| (talk) 13:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I removed Female Gamer from See Also. A female gamer is a gamer who is female. Enough said. --
ScarletSpiderDave
14:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
I'd love to see some more info on this page. What communities first started using the term "gamer", and when? Where did it come from, what did it originally mean? Would be nice to link to some more sources related to this, I'll add any I might happen to come across. radimvice 23:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I've never heard of the word "glitcher" being used to describe people who like finding glitches in games. This seems like a neologism to me. The demiurge 03:21, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
"Several of the all-time bestselling computer games (e.g., Myst, The Sims) targeted casual gamers."
The above is totally inconsistent with what the preceding sentence says about what casual gamers are. Of course, that description is pretty vague and certainly unsourced, and the list of categorisations on this page are questionable and definitely incomplete to begin with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.213.7.133 ( talk) 23:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
You would be correct in assuming that it is a neologism! It is a term that has arisen over online gaming platforms within the last five to ten years I'd imagine. A person would not normally hear the term used unless they were part of the glitching "scene". The term was created because the term 'hacker' more often refers to pc gamers as opposed to console gamers; also "hacking" connotes an act that is not standard or "legal" (example: reprogramming a game to allow a player to walk through walls, or something). "glitching" is less derogatory because it places the blame for the advantage players gain by glitching on the game programmers. (simple explanation: a hacker has created the flaw in the game that is giving them an advantage and is therefore responsible...a glitcher has simply found an existing flaw in the game and used normal control functions (jumping, shooting, driving vehicles, etc.) to gain access to an advantageous spot, and is therfore "just playing the game" *this issue of glitching legality is under debate amongst gamers*. As far as references go...I have none except my gaming experience and my word as a glitcher, I know it's not good enough, but glitchers like to remain underground due to their nature and the public opinion surrounding them...so you don't find alot of solid references. I'll look for some reference that I can cite. WikiDaily 01:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Added new needed category. Jason Parise 20:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm intereseted in something the media occasionly calls nintendo kid syndrome. It is when kids become highly focused on gaming, to the exclusion of social development and other such things. They may buy a basketball game as they like basketball, but would not even THINK of playing it in real life. Those kinds of things. I would appreciate any referance resource you can send me. Corrupt one 23:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
The symptoms seem to match Asperger syndrome (AS), meaning there may be a link between them, if it is NOT a type of AS itself. Corrupt one 00:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Dihydrogen Monoxide ( H2O) 22:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Please note, that the terms here are really generic, and therefore, doesn't have any citation yet. This is retired entirely from common knowledge, to say so, and is highly generic, so to the reader, please don't get based only in the facts written here.
I'm sorry, but these two sentences are stupid. Should it be removed or rephrased?
Nevermind, I decided to remove it as rephrasing it didn't do much. Farslayer ( talk) 07:15, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be quite a bit of presumptive and biased language being used in this article. For instance, saying that the large majority of hardcore gamers are obese and subject to poor health? Not only uncited, but generally unsupportable given that being a concentrated gamer does not correlate with negligence of one's health. -- Hidoshi ( talk) 05:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Even though role-playing, tabletop, and board gamers are (very briefly) mentioned in the article, they are still treated as a secondary topic to video games. In my opinion, the article should either be expanded greatly in regards to non-video gamers or possibly even split into the separate articles video gamer and gamer (which could link to the full video gamer article within a subsection). - Atomskninja 11:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
People who don't play casual games but don't spend all their time being geeks and playing and reading about games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.175.152 ( talk) 14:57, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
No way. That makes no sence, and there is no referance. Corrupt one ( talk) 06:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
The noob section doesn't read write so i'm going to edit it for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.201.210 ( talk) 22:44, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Being what one could call a gamer myself, I can kind of see where the article is meaning to go. My problem is that it seems like it's missing something. Does it maybe seem less objective than necessary? I can't quite see how, but it seems incomplete. 98.230.221.68 ( talk) 07:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Gamer. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:13, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gamer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:14, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Gamer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:01, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
I think the headline for the section Gamer tag should be changed to Handle, as Gamer tag is usually associated with Xbox Live's Gamertag system, and the official term for a callsign/username/etc. is the user's handle. If handle is not a better term to use mainly, then username is also a better choice than Gamer tag. Wohlerbear ( talk) 20:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
The section of the article defining newbie is one of the most edited sections of the article. I think a single definition should be decided on and a hidden comment inserted in the article directing editors of the newbie section to this talk page before they edit it. As far as the definition goes, I support the current one - we don't really need a section differentiating newbs and noobs. The article for newbie certainly doesn't. I'm reluctant to insert a hidden comment declaring that the definition is dictated by consensus when no consensus has been made yet, so I could use some discussion. — Ledgend Gamer 01:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Since being a woman gamer warrants a unqiue section, I added Adolescent gamer. TheRedEagle ( talk) 23:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
As no source was given for "Adolescent gamer" as a separate type of gamer apart from being a demographic, I removed the section. Please provide a reliable source giving it as a separate "type". Alternatively, why not create a "Demographics" section? This and other information can be put there. -- Muhandes ( talk) 06:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
So now there are defined 'subcultures' of people to define what are basically individuals who casually play computer games and those who invest their whole lives in it to the point where they have little to no social life other than through 'Gaming'? I think it is hilarious there's even a separate page on the 'Girl Gamer' as though it’s some kind of strange phenomenon females play games extant to ‘normal’ ways of playing computer games as though it were an entirely male dominated hobby. This article should be about two paragraphs long really, the rest should be shuffled off into various psychology pages. People who invest all of their lives playing computer games isn't really notable beyond beyond a sub-section in each of the aformentioned page that disscus human psychology. I suppose this is the internet though, guess who will gain consensus, certainly not the published literature reading world when they have reference to any form of internet-based cod journalism at their disposal. ISBN book numbers seem to be verboten to those who edit here. 78.150.193.182 ( talk) 06:41, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't really think it is necessary to have pages for
girl gamer, and
hardcore gamer. I have proposed that they be merged with this article. --
XeF4 (
talk)
02:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Jane McGonigal is getting a lot of press coverage on the topic of gaming. Her book Reality is Broken may be a decent source for expanding article content if anyone has access to it. Active Banana (bananaphone 18:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I was a gamer in the 1980s, but no one called us gamers then. When did the word take root? Kingturtle = ( talk) 20:30, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
This isn't verification, but the Google Ngram view shows a modern-usage spike at about 1976 for "Gamer" and 1984 for "gamer". Marasmusine ( talk) 10:01, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
It is troubling that the only information about "gaymers" seems to be written by a single individual Alexander Sliwinski and that the only coverage is two studies by people trying to get into grad school and not actual professional surveys and someone who is filing for a commercial trademark for a website. One of the surveyors that we are supposed to take as a fact states that the most basic premise of the survey the design itself was flawed. Active Banana (bananaphone 09:24, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry undid some vandalism a friend did on this computer 72.199.100.223 ( talk) 05:58, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Please refer to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use–mention_distinction
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The topic of this article is not the term gamer, but human beings who play games. The introduction should be rewritten. -- 95.34.149.224 ( talk) 11:12, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AD%D8%B1%D9%91%D9%8A%D9%81%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%A8
ar:حرّيفة اللعب — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maherelsayed ( talk • contribs) 16:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
This particular section of the article just seems so unprofessional and un-encyclopedic to me. I don't know if I should edit it myself though, since there's a lot I'd like to see changed, including the deletion of several categories.
-Gamer demographics shouldn't be in this section.
-Newbies aren't a "type" of gamer like the others, its a description of one's skillset for an individual game. Whether or not one's a n00b varies from game to game.
-Mid-core seems most definitely like a neologism. By description, this seems like the same thing as a recreational gamer or "rec gamer," which I'm fairly certain is a much more common term.
-Pro-gamers should be merged with hardcore gamers, with the former being a subset of the later.
-Neither girl gamers nor gaymers seem to be relevant "types" of gamers. Being a casual, rec, or hardcore gamer are descriptive of your gaming habits and preferences, while being female or gay are most definitely not. Allowing non-game related "types" of gamers opens a pandora's box of pointless descriptive terms attached to being a gamer like "American gamer," "teen gamer," "Christian gamer," "hipster gamer," ect.
Thegargoylevine ( talk) 22:56, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
This doesn't seem to keep in line with Wikipedia's Neutral viewpoint policies. Being a hardcore gamer and being an addict to games are not the same thing. Gaming Addict should be its own classification and not piggybacked off of Hardcore gamers. 76.170.170.58 ( talk) 00:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
This seems very un-professional to have an article full of stereotypes.
Really? Girl Gamer? Gaymer? We shouldn't categorize people on their sexual preference or what organs they have below the belt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.109.30.243 ( talk) 21:57, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Has anyone heard of side gamers? I've removed this unsourced addition: Diego ( talk) 17:48, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
A side gamer is a highly skilled user who plays many different types of video games without really caring about rankings, achievements, competitions, popularity, and such. Side gamers don't play to compete with each other, but simply because they love gaming from the depths of their soul. Side gamers, as well as Hardcore gamers, extend gaming into their lifestyle, expending significant time on games but, unlike the others, they like to play and complete as many different games as possible, not only focusing on a few ones. Also, Side gamers generally prefer playing in single-player mode, they're extremely wise about gaming culture & history, and they play both mainstream, rare/unknown, indie, and retro games; regardless of review scores and popularity. Side gamers generally don't want to "master" their games but just to complete them as fast as possible and move on to the next game.
C an I just note... that this article is rather terrible?
Aside from dealing exclusively in extremes, there is no citable source for pretty much anything on the page. It needs a complete rewrite. -- 203.184.21.75 01:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
-- Maybe could use a rewrite, but this article describes something that few formal studies have been performed on, therefore speculation and personal experience is a requirement. Jason Parise 20:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
-- Agreed on the article needing a rewrite. It's not up to the quality you'd expect from an encyclopedia. W —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.125.109.66 ( talk) 03:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
-- I agree with the article needing a rewrite. The bulk of the article is made of generalizations of various "groups" of gamers, and overall seems to be something I'd see on Reddit or a Facebook meme than on Wikipedia. It just seems so unprofessional. Thegargoylevine ( talk) 22:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
--
Jason - there are a dearth of studies on what typifies games, "gamers", and the people who play them. The work of Jenson and deCastell, Nick Yee, and others, has worked to demo-grify, if you like, ethnograph-ize, and illustrate the gamer-ness of game players. There are more... T.L. Taylor, Nick Taylor... the list goes on. I'm gonna throw a vote in to this necrotized series of comments and say that this article is one of the most replete with original research and speculation I've read on Wikipedia lately... 192.241.57.20 ( talk) 16:52, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm preserving the following content deleted from the page. Although it has been challenged, I'm pretty sure much of it can be referenced to reliable sources. Diego ( talk) 16:29, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
There are multiple instances of original research in the article, and it would be appreciated if you did not remove or euphemize the tag which did not illustrate this. For example, the 'hardcore gaming' section and the 'guilds' section all have unsourced hypotheses and are in effect original research. To prove an edit is NOT original research, a reliable source must be given. The presence of a 'citation needed' tag does not prove that it's not original research, only a reliable source can do that. Tutelary ( talk) 15:18, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be some sort of explanation/research section on how this term was coined in the first place instead of just taking it for granted and listing variations ("gaymer") of the term? 178.191.59.106 ( talk) 04:08, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
An aforementioned section in case the IP I reverted wishes to elaborate more on their case on why the section does not belong. Tutelary ( talk) 20:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Just an observation of the arguing edits in the female gamer section, including some wacky broken non-neutral citations. I've put in a request for semi-protection. Nerdwiththehat Talk 16:10, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Not too long a ago, sterotypical gamers were seen as the complete anti-thesis to a jock. Scrawny virgin nerds eating pizza all day and fantasizing about nuking their schools.
Especially hardcore gamers are the most un-macho bunch I can think of: Obsessing over their virtual towns in Civilization, going bonkers over endings in RPGs (Mass Effect 3 anyone?), optimizing for hours and hours their trade routes in Elite and Eve Online... woaaahha! So macho!
So, please, since when is "gaming" (ugh) considered a "man's man" tool to discriminate women? The whole undercurrent of the article is so bizarre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.65.11.98 ( talk) 00:52, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
...thinking how absurd, that'd be just like having a page for Gamers . Oh :P.
So, skimming the article ( "A female gamer, or gamer girl..." - really ???) , and then the talk page, it seems like it's been bad to start with, and hasn't changed considerably since first being fleshed out. So, what to do about this article then ?
Please let me point out that I am, honest to god, an inclusionist at heart - I'd be happy to see every neighborhood school having an article. But an article with verifiable information (even if it's not been published in academia or in newspapers or such). But I saw very little on this article that was verifiable.... The two options I see then are - post at Article for Deletion - WP:AfD , or cut down to basically a description of what the term "Gamer" refers to. (Gamer Culture / Gaming Culture, I think, if someone did want to see an article in that direction, would lend itself far better to having some content than "Gamer" / this one here..).
So any thoughts before I proceed with one or the other ?
Regards 37.49.76.172 ( talk) 23:39, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Hmm, was "log in" supposed to be a constructive hint, or trying to tell me what to do ? (I don't recall a policy saying "always edit via your account if you have one"). But whatever, that's not my point.
Perhaps I was a bit blunt or proposed to be overly bold in my message above - but sorry, any article about a "Gamer" is not going to go very well, and the way this one is structured even less so. My point (and that of the Wikipedia), is that information presented here needs to be verifiable. The people that put on costumes to Anime cons (Cosplayers?), that's a group that is relatively easily defined - its the people that turn up to those cons in costumes. There are things you can write about them (whether thats interesting/notable and merits inclusion on the Wikipedia is a different question - but like I said, I'm more on the tolerant side of things). "Gamers" on the other hand, I can't see defined here other than by self-reference... which seems a very, very weak definition to me. (And "People that play video games" on the other hand, is not a very interesting category, since it seems to be eg over half of the US Adult population... You might as well have "People that watch movies" or something along those lines.).
Now people that play video games professionally - ie earn their living that way - thats a clearly defined group. (I'm pretty sure there's an article on them). But my point holds - a page on "gaming culture" would work ok I think - and you could probably keep at least a considerable bit of the content from here on that page. But "Gamers" just doesn't make sense... (and thus more detailed criticism or reading of this page is not really necessary, at least not for proposing to move the page / parts of its content to
Gaming culture).
Sean Heron (
talk)
17:26, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 17:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
There has been a long string of criticism of this article (see a number of sections in the talk-archive), which have not really been addressed. For the most part, they cannot really be addressed, since the fundamental problem is there is no definition of "Gamer" that is usable for making an article covering the term.
I therefore propose to merge that content which is usable into the article Gaming culture. I've suggested two sections above, and had no comments on the action as of yet (there was opposition to my alternate proposal of submitting to AfD, so I'm not doing that). I'm happy to hear any constructive comments or alternate suggestions! Regards Sean Heron ( talk) 09:07, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
P.S. As stated above, a page
Professional video game players is something perhaps worth creating, or splitting some of the content from here off to.
P.P.S. I stumbled over a page that seems an appropriate example for this page:
Lamer. Definition of the term, a bit of etymology, and thats it. ( No attempt to describe long and wide the makeup, age distribution, properties and development over time, etc. of the "group" the term is applied to / that apply the term to themselves).
Sean Heron (
talk)
13:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
"sometimes also called" an electronic athlete or eathlete? What?? Where? [citation needed]? Not only are those two unsourced "synonyms" not widespread, this implies that they apply to anyone who plays interactive games, including things which have nothing to do with e-sports like tabletop games and card games. Needs to be removed or reworded or something but that makes zero sense being there as it is. 174.82.103.15 ( talk) 03:09, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
There are several YouTube Grandma Gamers. Should this be incorporated into the article? https://www.tweaktown.com/news/65410/82-year-old-gamer-skyrim-grandma-elder-scrolls-6/index.htmlHere's and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jjx4jEtp1Qs and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGVm8qym7l8 -- The Eloquent Peasant ( talk) 17:09, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Game name. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 17:06, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Video game enthusiast. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 17:39, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hardcore game. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 17:11, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
The paragraph opening the "Stereotypes" section is absolutely insane, demonstrably wrong and its source is, to put it mildly, weak.
"Although men and women play roughly the same number of games, there is a stereotype that women are not considered ¨True Gamers¨ because they tend to play more casual games which do not require much skill and dedication. This stereotype exists due to the fact that at a professional level, most of the teams competing are composed of men, thus, overshadowing the girl gamers who could compete at the same level but are not able to get the same amount of media attention.[6]"
It is wholly untrue that female gamers with the abilities/talents to compete with the male gamers on the pro-scene are marginalized or made invisible. The opposite is true, they are heavily focused on, possibly because they are rare. The female gamers can EASILY get "the same amount of media attention", as evidenced by the various female teams that the multi-game gaming orgs have. Navi is a fine example, with their "Navi Ladies" ( https://liquipedia.net/dota2/Natus_Vincere_Ladies). Another fine example would be the fact that most major tournaments have female-only divisions, where-as the primary parts of the tournaments are open for all genders. Gaming does not seek to "silence" or "overshadow" or "marginalize" women in pro-gaming and its insulting to many that such a claim is made.
The source is literally some college gender warriors random project and they even follow it up by claiming that this "evil big gaming keeping the women down" is also why women stay out of STEM. Someone really dropped the ball, not only on reviewing the source, but also at applying common sense or having any sort of familiarity with the subject. There is literal affirmative action to get more ladies to compete and ofcourse a blue flower in a sea of red flowers will get more attention than just another red flower.
If the female gamers can compete on the level, then they are welcome at the level. Embraced at the level and, frankly, given way more attention than males on the same skill-level. A couple of examples of that already exists. Scarlett (in starcraft 2) for example, although some would argue that its different as she was not born female.
There were also a lady on one of the top League of Legends teams once (sorry that i cant remember the name), although she decided to retire very quickly, because she felt uncomfortable with the extreme amount of attention levied on her, simply for being female and competing at that level. From what i remember, she also had a similar "origin story" to Scarlett.
Nonetheless, the point stands that whoever plays the best wins the trophy, irrelevant of their genitalia. It is disgusting to read that opening paragraph of the Stereotypes section and how ridiculously obviously un-true it is, to anyone who has even a smidgen of familiarity with this extremely popular subject (pro-gaming). For shame! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.163.26.233 ( talk) 17:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
In the article about the Bartle taxonomy of player types (referenced in the Stereotypes section, subsection Classification in taxonomies), there is no mention about Completionists as "combinations of the Achiever and Explorer types" being a type of their own. Also, the part about "finding every secret within it such as Atrox, the God of Knowledge.." looks like vandalism, not even mentioning the two dots at the end.
Since I can't edit the article, would someone who can take a look? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geronator ( talk • contribs) 19:21, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello! I am a complete stranger. Just noticed the Atrox thing right now--what is up with that? -- Some stranger
![]() | This
edit request to
Gamer has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Eliterange8822 ( talk) 18:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
i need to correct spelling
person who plays video games or participates in role-playing games.
"every gamer has suffered from small-screen videos" if you think this your wrong no the sucks a gamer does not role play we are not dumb we are smart if your dumb ask buga he is a multi millon dollar person — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliterange8822 ( talk • contribs) 19:04, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Where is the picture of a bird? I thought this article had a picture of a bird as the example of a gamer. I saw a screenshot with a bird, where is the picture of a bird in this article? 2601:405:4400:9420:DCC3:A1CB:AB77:6A75 ( talk) 09:18, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Enedisnavarro.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 22:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 13 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
JClem 12.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 21:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)