This was my third year at GenCon, an annual convention where thousands play board games, role playing games, miniatures games, etc. Most attendees are, well, nerds. Mostly male too. Now perhaps nerds are more likely than others to attend a convention on a hobby they like. But nerds probably also just like games more than other folks. Why is that?
Seriously only nerds will disagree with this article. It is spot on. I’ve always had my opinions on why nerds like games and figured similarities to what is outlined in this article. I also happen to hold a doctorate in psychology so I naturally wonder and configure personalities frequently.. always asking why. A trend that I’ve seen with heavy gamers in fact relates to selfishness. They tend to not get validation from social aspects of their life, therefore seek it in the fiction they create. What I have an issue with, is that nerds tend to be automatically resistant and even rude to those who hold the capacity to converse and behave socially. What they point at as being a “tool” or a “jerk” are in fact the same reason they are seen as a nerd or a “nice guy” because real men don’t point at others to make themselves feel better nor do they seek validation from others. Validation. This is why you’re a nerd.
'This "article" is so badly written it does not deserve the kind of attention required to be appalled. I finished reading it (and it's attendant comments)'
This "article" is so badly written it does not deserve the kind of attention required to be appalled. I finished reading it (and it's attendant comments) only because you posted about it here. The "author" is either a student hurrying through an odious assignment or, as another commenter asserted, a dweeb.
How is it that a bunch of guys sitting around on a Sunday night screaming at the television and making comments about the statistics, strategies, and history of {insert some sport} is *not* nerdy behavior?
When a couple guys start spouting off about {insert some sport} at the office, and most of the women and some of the guys wander off... why is this also not nerdy and somewhat antisocial behavior?
When a group of chunky dudes show up shirtless, painted in their team's colors, with some message scrawled in big letters on their backs... why is this not nerdy behavior?
I submit that the assertions drawn by the author of the article are the result of making generalizations about the core assumptions of the attendees of something like Gen*Con. Assumptions that are likely entirely incorrect. If someone is at a Con to play games, they aren't going to sit down and tell you their life's story. They aren't going to tell you about their successful business, or their wife/husband and family, or their other hobbies, or anything else. They're there to play, because it's a hobby they truly enjoy.
The author simply proves that he does not have the social skills to engage people and discover these details, or the care for detail that would require gathering actual statistics to compare his assumptions against. He's just another nerd who thinks his opinion is worth paying attention to.
I am very much agree with akasha. With this line “Most attendees are, well, nerds. Mostly male too” does this simply mean he’s one of them?i am also playing World of Warcraft for how many years and i have full participation in all social activities.
As you say "An third explanation is hinted at by the fact that we use the word “game” to refer both to “fun/frivolous” and to “seriously selfishly strategic.” We can say fun is always include in word "game" but not selfishly strategic and frivolous......
Those commenters who are taking this post personally offensive are not reading the post clear-eyed or open-minded.
To say something like "Well, I play Warcraft and I am definitely not a nerd! When not dating supermodels or being a lead singer in international rock band, I like to wind down with a weekend at GenCon!" I am exaggerating but to those who are posting such comments....Look Around and be aware. You are probably a nerd.
I love board games but that is what turned me off to playing board games in with nerds. There is scarce social interaction and very little eye-contact either. I played at a meeting with 100+ people and it was very much like what he posted.
I recently joined a board gamers group thru meetup.com in my city. I thought it would a lot of interaction and jokes and conversation and a generally laid-back environment. Boy, was I wrong!
The place was teeming with misfits and nerds. I tried to talk conversationally during the games but it was frowned upon. It was a very rule oriented atmosphere. There were over 100 people playing various board games.
I love playing board games but I have always played with "normal" people in a mixed setting who joke around and what not. Turned out to be a bad experience.
By this reasoning, it would be extremely interesting (as a kind of social experiment) to see how nerds would react if you got a bunch of high-status beautiful women to go to the conference and take seats at the gaming tables.
I think most of you miss the point entirely. There really are hundreds of reasons people play games. For one games are a way to use our intellect and strategy. But if you're talking about video games... you can go anywhere and do anything. You can take impossible scenarios and make it possible. You can be anything. It's about using your imagination and enjoying the possibilities of what could be. And for some of us, life gets really hard at times, so you gotta go with the cheapest form of entertainment there is: games. (except trading card games. I had a friend that played those once, and sheesh did he spend a lot of money.)
Half of what most of you say proves that you really know nothing about nerds. When you think nerd, you think of 30 year old men living in their parents basement, working at pizza hut, that can quote every word to every episode of star trek/wars. You think suspenders and wedgies. Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of those, but realistically most of us look and act just like anyone else. (we just have different hobbies). It's not always that nerds CAN'T interact with normal people, it's often because we prefer not to. Normal people are annoying, boring and unimaginative. Believe it or not most nerds couldn't give a crap what normal people think. I could really care less, I'm just here to set the record straight. I can't speak for everyone but I've had enough nerd friends to know it's not just me. What's with people looking down on people of higher intellect? What's that all about? If anything we should be looking down on you, but most of us don't. Fact is being a nerd is simply this: Having hobbies that society says you are too old for. Most of us are darn proud of it too, I wear the title nerd like its a freakin VIP card.
And as one person here wrote: "without nerd-like thinking we would be having this conversation on the wall of some cave." How is it that society gets furthered by the intelligence of the nerd, but society still manages to label us negatively? Just kinda ironic that although people like me are the reason this site exists, there are still sooo many incompetent, ignorant people (like the author of this topic) that dis nerds on the very internet that nerds created. Mind boggling. What a newb, this whole topic is epic fail. As many of your kind have said to many like myself, get a life.
A way of testing this theory was to see if nerds like "adventure games" more, less or the same than general population; if they prefer well-defined systems and this is the reason for their interest in games, they will not like "adventure games" very much, because these games don't have much of "well-defined system" (usually each puzzle is completely different from the former).
However I doubt that "nerds like well-defined systems more than most people": at least, according to Myers-Brigs personality theory, 54% of the population are "Judgers", but only 39% [2.1/(2.1+3.3)] of INTs. Then, if we equate being "Judger" with "liking well-defined systems" and being "INTx" with being "nerd", we can conclude that nerds like well-defined systems LESS than most people.
My impression, based on my own experience as an avidly gaming nerd, is that the love of elegant systems is a major motivation. It is also characteristic of nerds, and so serves to explain the popularity of games specifically among this group, as opposed to among shy or stigmatized people in general. Furthermore, it's consistent with the nerds' dislike of badly designed games popular among the general public, such as Monopoly.
Nerds are more sociable at conventions not because the games have well defined rules, but because it's a safe zone. It's the same reason med students will often be more comfortable talking with other med students and doctors, law students with other law students and lawyer, engineers with other engineers, etc. When you know the other people have similar interests, you have more to talk about. Games are also generally good icebreakers, so it's a good combination.
And this statement is simply wrong:
Games let nerds interact socially, yet avoid mistakes via well-defined rules, and a social norm that all legal moves are “fair game.” Role-playing has less well-defined rules, but the norm there is that social mistakes are to be blamed on characters, not players.
Look at 3 types of games:
Board games: Not all legal moves are fair game. Playing to screw over a player at one's own expense is generally considered a dickish move, especially in a game with more than 2 players. In Europe, blocking strategies in Ticket to Ride tend to be frowned on, for example.
Role-playing: Acting like a jerk in character can work, but there are still social norms--power gaming, twinkishness, and rules overlawyering are seriously frowned on. Additionally, the rules aren't that well defined, and the GM's fiat often ends up skewing things.
Miniatures gaming: There are always rules ambiguities, and exploits tend to be frowned on. For example, in Warhammer, there are two common tricks that will get people to not play with you: Targeting a template weapon to "accidentally" hit a unit in close combat (unless you're playing an army that generally allows that), and declaring impossible charges to get units to move out of turn in an advantageous way.
What you do have, I think, is that nerds like their games to be more than just a vehicle for social interaction. Most light board games (Monopoly, Parcheesi, Checkers) are simple to play, have little strategy, and don't provide much to think about. Nerd games are defined by providing a lot more to think about, whether planning many moves ahead (chess, go), conducting grand strategy (miniatures games, Eurogames), acting (RPGs), or social competition (Are You a Werewolf?, Diplomacy, others).
Well, there we have again a problem with the definition of "nerd" - if we define "nerd" as "intelligent but social reclusive person", I suppose that enthusiasts of cheese always had a bit of these reputation.
You say that "chess and go used to be things only done by the very high status", but there is no contradiction between being an "intelligent but social reclusive person" and being "very high status", perhaps much the opposite for many societies in history (it was being very outgoing and indiscriminately sociable that was considered a thing for peasants and commoners).
Of course, we can adopt a definition of "nerd" that has also "low status" as a defining criteria, but I think that this does not make much sense (after all, by these criteria, the same person, with the same personality and intersts, can be a "nerd" in some social context and not be a "nerd" in others).
Seriously only nerds will disagree with this article. It is spot on. I’ve always had my opinions on why nerds like games and figured similarities to what is outlined in this article. I also happen to hold a doctorate in psychology so I naturally wonder and configure personalities frequently.. always asking why. A trend that I’ve seen with heavy gamers in fact relates to selfishness. They tend to not get validation from social aspects of their life, therefore seek it in the fiction they create. What I have an issue with, is that nerds tend to be automatically resistant and even rude to those who hold the capacity to converse and behave socially. What they point at as being a “tool” or a “jerk” are in fact the same reason they are seen as a nerd or a “nice guy” because real men don’t point at others to make themselves feel better nor do they seek validation from others. Validation. This is why you’re a nerd.
'This "article" is so badly written it does not deserve the kind of attention required to be appalled. I finished reading it (and it's attendant comments)'
It's spelled 'its'.
Agreed. The grammar is vomit inducing.
This "article" is so badly written it does not deserve the kind of attention required to be appalled. I finished reading it (and it's attendant comments) only because you posted about it here. The "author" is either a student hurrying through an odious assignment or, as another commenter asserted, a dweeb.
Perhaps you don't like playing with nerds because they tend to use correct grammar.
Counterpoints to this idiocy:
How is it that a bunch of guys sitting around on a Sunday night screaming at the television and making comments about the statistics, strategies, and history of {insert some sport} is *not* nerdy behavior?
When a couple guys start spouting off about {insert some sport} at the office, and most of the women and some of the guys wander off... why is this also not nerdy and somewhat antisocial behavior?
When a group of chunky dudes show up shirtless, painted in their team's colors, with some message scrawled in big letters on their backs... why is this not nerdy behavior?
I submit that the assertions drawn by the author of the article are the result of making generalizations about the core assumptions of the attendees of something like Gen*Con. Assumptions that are likely entirely incorrect. If someone is at a Con to play games, they aren't going to sit down and tell you their life's story. They aren't going to tell you about their successful business, or their wife/husband and family, or their other hobbies, or anything else. They're there to play, because it's a hobby they truly enjoy.
The author simply proves that he does not have the social skills to engage people and discover these details, or the care for detail that would require gathering actual statistics to compare his assumptions against. He's just another nerd who thinks his opinion is worth paying attention to.
So, yeah, just another self-centered dweeb.
I am very much agree with akasha. With this line “Most attendees are, well, nerds. Mostly male too” does this simply mean he’s one of them?i am also playing World of Warcraft for how many years and i have full participation in all social activities.
As you say "An third explanation is hinted at by the fact that we use the word “game” to refer both to “fun/frivolous” and to “seriously selfishly strategic.” We can say fun is always include in word "game" but not selfishly strategic and frivolous......
Those commenters who are taking this post personally offensive are not reading the post clear-eyed or open-minded.
To say something like "Well, I play Warcraft and I am definitely not a nerd! When not dating supermodels or being a lead singer in international rock band, I like to wind down with a weekend at GenCon!" I am exaggerating but to those who are posting such comments....Look Around and be aware. You are probably a nerd.
I love board games but that is what turned me off to playing board games in with nerds. There is scarce social interaction and very little eye-contact either. I played at a meeting with 100+ people and it was very much like what he posted.
I found this post to be very, very true.
I recently joined a board gamers group thru meetup.com in my city. I thought it would a lot of interaction and jokes and conversation and a generally laid-back environment. Boy, was I wrong!
The place was teeming with misfits and nerds. I tried to talk conversationally during the games but it was frowned upon. It was a very rule oriented atmosphere. There were over 100 people playing various board games.
I love playing board games but I have always played with "normal" people in a mixed setting who joke around and what not. Turned out to be a bad experience.
By this reasoning, it would be extremely interesting (as a kind of social experiment) to see how nerds would react if you got a bunch of high-status beautiful women to go to the conference and take seats at the gaming tables.
I think most of you miss the point entirely. There really are hundreds of reasons people play games. For one games are a way to use our intellect and strategy. But if you're talking about video games... you can go anywhere and do anything. You can take impossible scenarios and make it possible. You can be anything. It's about using your imagination and enjoying the possibilities of what could be. And for some of us, life gets really hard at times, so you gotta go with the cheapest form of entertainment there is: games. (except trading card games. I had a friend that played those once, and sheesh did he spend a lot of money.)
Half of what most of you say proves that you really know nothing about nerds. When you think nerd, you think of 30 year old men living in their parents basement, working at pizza hut, that can quote every word to every episode of star trek/wars. You think suspenders and wedgies. Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of those, but realistically most of us look and act just like anyone else. (we just have different hobbies). It's not always that nerds CAN'T interact with normal people, it's often because we prefer not to. Normal people are annoying, boring and unimaginative. Believe it or not most nerds couldn't give a crap what normal people think. I could really care less, I'm just here to set the record straight. I can't speak for everyone but I've had enough nerd friends to know it's not just me. What's with people looking down on people of higher intellect? What's that all about? If anything we should be looking down on you, but most of us don't. Fact is being a nerd is simply this: Having hobbies that society says you are too old for. Most of us are darn proud of it too, I wear the title nerd like its a freakin VIP card.
And as one person here wrote: "without nerd-like thinking we would be having this conversation on the wall of some cave." How is it that society gets furthered by the intelligence of the nerd, but society still manages to label us negatively? Just kinda ironic that although people like me are the reason this site exists, there are still sooo many incompetent, ignorant people (like the author of this topic) that dis nerds on the very internet that nerds created. Mind boggling. What a newb, this whole topic is epic fail. As many of your kind have said to many like myself, get a life.
what a bunch of nerds
A way of testing this theory was to see if nerds like "adventure games" more, less or the same than general population; if they prefer well-defined systems and this is the reason for their interest in games, they will not like "adventure games" very much, because these games don't have much of "well-defined system" (usually each puzzle is completely different from the former).
However I doubt that "nerds like well-defined systems more than most people": at least, according to Myers-Brigs personality theory, 54% of the population are "Judgers", but only 39% [2.1/(2.1+3.3)] of INTs. Then, if we equate being "Judger" with "liking well-defined systems" and being "INTx" with being "nerd", we can conclude that nerds like well-defined systems LESS than most people.
My impression, based on my own experience as an avidly gaming nerd, is that the love of elegant systems is a major motivation. It is also characteristic of nerds, and so serves to explain the popularity of games specifically among this group, as opposed to among shy or stigmatized people in general. Furthermore, it's consistent with the nerds' dislike of badly designed games popular among the general public, such as Monopoly.
Nerds are more sociable at conventions not because the games have well defined rules, but because it's a safe zone. It's the same reason med students will often be more comfortable talking with other med students and doctors, law students with other law students and lawyer, engineers with other engineers, etc. When you know the other people have similar interests, you have more to talk about. Games are also generally good icebreakers, so it's a good combination.
And this statement is simply wrong:
Games let nerds interact socially, yet avoid mistakes via well-defined rules, and a social norm that all legal moves are “fair game.” Role-playing has less well-defined rules, but the norm there is that social mistakes are to be blamed on characters, not players.
Look at 3 types of games:
Board games: Not all legal moves are fair game. Playing to screw over a player at one's own expense is generally considered a dickish move, especially in a game with more than 2 players. In Europe, blocking strategies in Ticket to Ride tend to be frowned on, for example.
Role-playing: Acting like a jerk in character can work, but there are still social norms--power gaming, twinkishness, and rules overlawyering are seriously frowned on. Additionally, the rules aren't that well defined, and the GM's fiat often ends up skewing things.
Miniatures gaming: There are always rules ambiguities, and exploits tend to be frowned on. For example, in Warhammer, there are two common tricks that will get people to not play with you: Targeting a template weapon to "accidentally" hit a unit in close combat (unless you're playing an army that generally allows that), and declaring impossible charges to get units to move out of turn in an advantageous way.
What you do have, I think, is that nerds like their games to be more than just a vehicle for social interaction. Most light board games (Monopoly, Parcheesi, Checkers) are simple to play, have little strategy, and don't provide much to think about. Nerd games are defined by providing a lot more to think about, whether planning many moves ahead (chess, go), conducting grand strategy (miniatures games, Eurogames), acting (RPGs), or social competition (Are You a Werewolf?, Diplomacy, others).
Well, there we have again a problem with the definition of "nerd" - if we define "nerd" as "intelligent but social reclusive person", I suppose that enthusiasts of cheese always had a bit of these reputation.
You say that "chess and go used to be things only done by the very high status", but there is no contradiction between being an "intelligent but social reclusive person" and being "very high status", perhaps much the opposite for many societies in history (it was being very outgoing and indiscriminately sociable that was considered a thing for peasants and commoners).
Of course, we can adopt a definition of "nerd" that has also "low status" as a defining criteria, but I think that this does not make much sense (after all, by these criteria, the same person, with the same personality and intersts, can be a "nerd" in some social context and not be a "nerd" in others).