NLSC Your source for basketball video games.
We’re at midcourt, and the ball is about to go up…it’s Monday Tip-Off! Join me as I begin the week here at the NLSC with my opinions and commentary on basketball gaming topics, as well as tales of the fun I’ve been having on the virtual hardwood. This week, I’m tipping things off with some thoughts on how criticism is vital, as the ability to critique and display knowledge separates the fans from the Stans.
NBA The Run was released last week, and the resulting reception and discourse hasn’t been surprising. Some people are enjoying the game, and having had some fun with it myself, I’m not shocked to hear that. Others feel the gameplay is a bit disappointing, and are critical of the lack of offline modes. I tend to agree with many of those points. And then, there are the people trying to shout down all criticism of NBA The Run. They’re decrying critics as haters who are bad on the sticks and out of touch with modern gaming, all because they dared to have negative (yet reasonable) opinions.
I saw it coming. This toxic positivity, this strong emotional investment in a video game to the point where you take any criticism of it personally, has been brewing long before the game’s release. As I said last week, I think that aspect of the community that NBA The Run has cultivated is potentially going to be very damaging. Dee and I will be reviewing NBA The Run on this week’s NLSC Podcast, so I won’t be going into too much detail about the game itself here. However, I do want to reflect on this toxic Stan culture in gaming, because it isn’t just NBA The Run. Somewhere along the line, too many people have decided that “real fans” shouldn’t engage in criticism.
This is, of course, an absurd notion. Certainly, fanatical devotion implies enjoyment, and often comes with a tendency to be optimistic in the name of being supportive. I’m not suggesting that it’s wrong to enjoy things. I don’t agree with being a contrarian just for the sake of it, or subscribe to the notion that negativity is somehow more honest than positivity. It’s also important to note that when it comes to entertainment such as video games, we all have different standards and expectations. I’ll be the first to admit to being nostalgic for some janky titles! To that end, it’s fine to enjoy games for what they are. If you’re having fun, then for you that’s as deep as it needs to be. I get that.
Mind you, there’s a difference between saying “it’s a bit janky, but I don’t care, I love it anyway”, and “you’re wrong, the gameplay is incredible and not janky at all”, when the latter clearly isn’t the case. This refusal to even tolerate criticism as a difference of opinion and standards, all because anything that you like must be amazing and beyond critique, is where the line between being a fan and being a Stan is crossed. To a Stan, you can’t be a real fan if you don’t love something unconditionally, and if you’re not a fan then you must be a hater, in which case your opinion is null and void. There’s no room for any disagreement or nuance, and all criticism is assumed to be in bad faith.
That’s not to say that having a positive opinion about something that someone else is critical of makes you a Stan. It’s also fine to not want to engage with the criticism, and just enjoy what you like. Again, you cross the line between fan and Stan when you gate-keep the fandom and discourse, treating knowledgeable fans expressing valid and well-reasoned criticism as haters. The notion that it’s wrong to be discerning as a fan is ridiculous. No, a fan doesn’t have to be critical any more than they have to love everything about their hobby or passion. However, the ability to evaluate and explain what you do and don’t like has generally been a sign of a fan who knows their stuff.
These days, they’re more likely to be written off as a hater, or at the very least taking something too seriously. The comment that prompted me to write this column is a good example of that. In response to a few paragraphs providing initial impressions of NBA The Run, this person lamented that “this is why we can’t have nice things”, and suggested that it was “overanalysing” the game. Apparently, sharing opinions about gameplay, recounting experiences playing online with others, and evaluating whether a title is fairly priced, now counts as “overanalysing”! In reality, it’s scrambling to find a buzzword that’ll dismiss criticism they disagree with, but can’t really argue against.
It’s hardly surprising in a time where “it’s not that deep” has become such a reliable thought-terminating cliché when you’re unwilling or unable to argue a valid point. It’s the way it goes in the social media age, where anything longer than a sentence is an “essay” to people’s fried attention spans (though again, “I’m not reading all that” is a convenient escape hatch when you have no counterpoints). It paints criticism as being unwelcome, or even malicious; an attempt to dictate others’ opinions rather than just sharing your own, and ruin something you don’t like for those who do. In short, it’s very typical of Stan culture, where to be discerning is to be disingenuous or disloyal.
What bothers me about that comment is that it’s not only anti-intellectual, but also anti-consumer. “Don’t think, don’t critique; just consume and enjoy!” I’m sorry, but it’s not taking things too seriously, or “overanalysing”, to have tastes and expectations for your entertainment! Furthermore, if you say you don’t like something, your criticism will be far more credible if you can explain why. The same goes for praise. Sure, you don’t have to expand on your point – write an “essay”, if you will – but if you’re unable to muster a comment longer than “it’s awesome” or “it sucks”, and you’re dismissive of any dissenting opinions, don’t be surprised if you’re written off as a Stan or a hater.
On top of the ability to be discerning and provide insightful criticism as well as praise, there’s another distinction that we can draw between fans and Stans. While fans find enjoyment and take interest beyond their favourites, Stans have a more singular focus. For example, basketball fans may have their favourite teams and players, but they still enjoy the sport in general, so their interest extends beyond them. Conversely, Stans of individual players are heavily invested in being able to say that their chosen favourite is the best, without really caring about basketball otherwise. Their fandom is more about achieving a status symbol and bragging rights than a genuine love of hoops.
I realise that sounds like gatekeeping – something that I despise – but you can see it in action in the discourse. Basketball fans have their preferences and biases, but they’re still passionate about the sport as a whole. With Stans, it’s all about pumping up their favourite player and dumping on everyone else, past or present. It perhaps shouldn’t be surprising that video games foster similar attitudes. Brand warfare is hardly a new phenomenon in gaming, as any 90s kid who witnessed the battle between Nintendo and Sega can attest. We can say that for gamers the rivalry was all in fun, but people definitely cared about being on the winning side, and picking the most popular brand.
That kind of Stan culture has had an unfortunate impact on basketball gaming, as it’s the driving force behind the apologists and shills who defend NBA 2K at any cost. The series’ explosion in popularity beyond hardcore hoops heads is also a factor. Once again, it’s impossible to say that without sounding like I’m gatekeeping, but there’s no denying that the approach to gameplay design has changed to appease gamers who love online play and playing a popular game, but don’t really care about authenticity. Anyone who criticises the games must be bad at them, or “too broke” to afford to buy VC or the special editions, or they’re stuck in the past, a victim of myopic nostalgia.
Indeed, anti-nostalgic sentiment is part and parcel of being a Stan, as dismissing the past and any potentially unflattering comparisons is essential to propping up your favourite as the Undisputed GOAT. It leads to absolutes such as “everyone always hates the latest NBA 2K and then loves it when the new one comes out”, which is a gross oversimplification that conveniently dismisses all criticism out of hand. We’re seeing it now with NBA The Run; “It’s a new game, it’s going to be different,” “You clearly haven’t played NBA Street in a while/at all,” and of course, “You’re blinded by nostalgia”. The irony here is that NBA The Run is undoubtedly banking on nostalgia!
I’ve said it before, but I don’t criticise new things simply because I believe everything used to be better. Rather, I’ve been playing video games for long enough that I’ve seen my share of bad ones, so I know that new doesn’t always mean improved! I’ve been burned enough times by disappointing releases to notice red flags. Sure, it’s easy to call me an old head and suggest that I’m sporting some rose-tinted nostalgia goggles, but with age and experience comes critical thinking and discriminating taste. When we’re young, we’re usually more easily entertained and prone to liking anything that’s new. That’s not to say that no kid has good taste, but most of us have to develop it.
To that end, Stans tend to be at the younger end of the demographic. When they are my age though, it’s honestly rather sad! Young Stans at least have the excuse of still needing to mature, but an old Stan comes across as desperately trying to stay youthful, cool, and relevant; very “how do you do, fellow kids?” In any event, just as we see both kinds of Stans in NBA and basketball fandom, it’s been an issue with NBA 2K gamers, and now the NBA The Run community. Between the young crowd being less critical of their hobby, and older gamers and content creators hoping to avoid being labelled out-of-touch haters, fans become Stans, and criticism is promptly shut down.
It’s unfortunate because I think it’s important to be optimistic, as well as supportive of new basketball games trying to make a splash in the market. The toxic negativity that eternally permeates online discourse is also unquestionably tiring, so I do understand the plea to “let people enjoy things“. Of course, as others have pointed out, we also need to let people not enjoy things; especially in a medium like video games, where user feedback can be vital to improving the product, not to mention allow others to make an informed decision before purchasing a new title. It doesn’t mean you have to agree with the criticism, but if you’re going to argue it, at least provide counterpoints!
So far, many of the positive reviews for NBA The Run on Steam are retaliatory in nature, classifying the negative reviews as “hating” and advising people to ignore them. That’s not to say that they’re being dishonest about enjoying the game, but their response to other people’s valid criticism is childish, making excuses and resorting to ad hominem attacks. It’s a perfect example of Stan culture in gaming. They’ve become invested in NBA The Run and its success to the point where any criticism of it is seen as an attack on them personally. It’s the same thing that’s happened with the NBA 2K series, as well as both NBA Playgrounds games whenever they’ve received criticism.
In a way, by vehemently refusing to conform to the stereotype of online fans being harshly critical and generally unpleasable, Stans are the new contrarians. Of course, much like the old contrarians, their stance isn’t inherently noble or correct. Indeed, given the origins of the term, by definition they’re misguided at best! They don’t make fanbases appear more informed, and they certainly don’t make them more pleasant to be a part of. Unfortunately, when gaming content creators with a large following also become Stans, they end up doing their audience a disservice by refusing to advocate for their fellow gamers, and mislead them about games with highly suspect reviews.
That’s a topic for another time, though. For now, I’ll say this. Ideally, fans should get enjoyment out of whatever it is they love. Optimism and positivity are important, and I like that we’re not just accepting cynical pessimism and negativity as automatically being the intellectually superior stance. It’s also fine to have different opinions, and many of us have that game we like despite it being a bit janky. With that being said, we should scrutinise and discern quality in our favourite things. Uncritical support of a product – even if well-intentioned – lacks savvy as consumer. Remember: fans, not fanboys; critics, not haters. Criticism is the line that separates fans from the Stans.
