Menu

The Friday Five: 5 Aspects of Online Culture I Dislike

The Friday Five

Welcome to this week’s edition of The Friday Five! The Friday Five is a feature that I post every Friday in which I give my thoughts on a topic that’s related to basketball video games, the real NBA or another area of interest to our community, either as a list of five items or in the form of a Top 5 countdown.

NBA Live 16 and NBA 2K16 are in stores now, and to that end, it would make sense to discuss one or both of them in this week’s Friday Five. However, I’d like to spend a bit more time with both games before I offer up any impressions, and discuss certain elements of them in detail. Furthermore, this week’s topic – five aspects of online culture that I dislike – is one that I’ve been meaning to talk about for a while. The timing isn’t completely inappropriate either, as we see a lot of this stuff pop up whenever new games are released.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I maintain that we have a good thing going here at the NLSC, and I do like being a part of an online community. I also believe that the World Wide Web in general is a fantastic invention that continues to innovate, and it’s done a lot to make video games a bigger business, and an even more enjoyable hobby. However, there are some negative traits that permeate online culture, especially in gaming communities. When it comes to the five things I’m about to discuss, I think we need to either grow up, or get over ourselves…or maybe both.

1. “I want my money/time back” Complaints

nba2k16_james_harden_cropped

First of all, let’s clarify that “I want my money back” is not, in and of itself, an unacceptable statement. There are times when the quality of the product or experience leaves you with buyer’s remorse, and a feeling that you didn’t get value for money. That’s entirely fair. However, it’s become a phrase that is way overused, often over the slightest complaints and in some cases, in situations where the consumer could’ve (and should’ve) made a more informed choice. There are times when it’s fair to seek a refund, and then there are times when you should’ve known better, or you just have to eat the loss. It’s become a clichéd complaint.

“I want my (insert length of time here) back”, however, is pure arrogance and stupidity. Granted, I don’t think anyone actually expects to have their time given back to them, what with it being impossible and all, and I do get where they’re coming from. However, if you sit through a twenty minute video on YouTube that you’re not enjoying…I’m sorry, but that one’s on you. The problem is, a lot of people seem to believe that their time is more important than everyone else’s, but if that were true, you wouldn’t be wasting it watching, reading, or listening to something you don’t like. Nor would you be spending it doing unproductive stuff that you do like, for that matter. If your time is that expendable, then frankly, no one owes you anything.

2. Flaming out of a community

Larry Johnson in NBA 2K12

Here’s one that I’ve come across a few times in the fourteen years and counting that I’ve been running the NLSC. Every so often, a member of an online community will see fit to leave in a blaze of glory, burning their bridges and alienating everyone on the way out. Now, I can understand if you’ve gotten into an argument with the site administration, or other members of the community. Even if you’re in the wrong, chances are you believe that you’re in the right, and as such, you’re giving everyone a piece of your mind on the way out. I still think it’s incredibly immature of course, but at least there’s a reason for your tantrum, valid or not. Even if the site staff were at fault, you could (should?) be the bigger person. But I do get it.

Sometimes it’s a case of people never speaking up about things that have upset them, and then airing those grievances on the way out, which catches the moderators off guard. Unfortunate, and not the way to handle things, but I do get that, too. What I don’t get is when people flame out for seemingly no good reason, usually because they’ve decided they just don’t want to be a part of the community anymore. One former member who had maintained a story thread and even done some patching suddenly demanded their account be deleted, declaring that we were all losers for enjoying basketball games and patching them, and hurling a bunch of other insults. Seriously, just quietly take your leave if you’ve lost interest in an online community.

3. Overuse of snark

Nick Collison attempts a free throw in NBA Live 14

Snark definitely has its place in human interaction – online and offline – and it can be a useful tool when composing a critique. It can be very funny, not to mention an effective means of punctuating critical thought. However, it’s also become a crutch, because a lot of people online seem to believe that snark equals wit. While wit can certainly be snarky, and thus snark can also be witty, it isn’t automatically so. Think of it this way: humour can push the boundaries of good taste, but simply being offensive doesn’t automatically make what you’re saying humorous. Likewise, being snarky alone doesn’t guarantee that what you’re saying is clever, amusing, or for that matter, accurate.

It’s one thing to see snark on message boards and in comments sections – a lot of people fancy themselves comedians online – but I’m seeing it more and more in “professional” coverage of video games. Video game journalism, if you’re not opposed to that term. Again, snark does have its place, as some online personalities have produced very entertaining content using that approach. However, it shouldn’t be the only voice we hear, especially from gaming publications. Done poorly, snark just makes a reviewer or gamer seem more interested in feeling superior than being informative and constructively critical. If it sucks, explain why in a way that shows you know your stuff, rather than simply finding colourful ways to insult a product.

4. The false dichotomy of “awesome or terrible”

Derrick Rose in NBA 2K13

Do you remember when YouTube used to have star ratings, instead of the Like/Dislike buttons? Before it was “Like, Comment, and Subscribe!” it was “Rate, Comment, and Subscribe!”, and man, were people upset when the star ratings were removed! The funny thing is, by and large, most people were only making use of two of the star ratings: one star when they disliked a video, five stars when they liked it. In other words, introducing a binary Like and Dislike system simply streamlined what users were already doing, and better represented the general reaction to the video.

This is really a symptom of a bigger problem in online culture, that being the tendency to label everything as either good or bad, with no in between. Something either ticks all the boxes to qualify as awesome, or it doesn’t and is therefore terrible, and it sucks. Whether it’s a video game, an athlete, a film, or something else being discussed online, you can bet that it’ll be simplistically sorted into one of those polar opposites. Just as overuse of snark waters down valid criticism, when we ignore the middle ground that encompasses very good, good but flawed, greatly flawed but with good ideas, satisfactory, below satisfactory, middle-of-the-road-average, and everything else in between, it only serves to undermine the credibility of our critique.

5. Rage over things you don’t like or aren’t interested in

DeAndre Jordan in NBA Live 16

This one ties into something that I’m going to talk about in more detail in an upcoming edition of Monday Tip-Off, specifically in regards to fanboys and haters in the basketball gaming community. Generally speaking however, it’s one of the most puzzling and annoying aspects of online culture: people seem to get really mad that stuff they don’t like, or aren’t interested in, dares to even exist. Instead of focusing on the things that they do like, a lot of people seem to spend a lot of time getting upset that a video game they don’t want to play, a television show they don’t want to watch, or a singer or band they don’t want to listen to, just plain exists.

It’s simple: every second you spend hating on something that doesn’t interest you – and you can easily avoid – is time you could’ve spent enjoying something that you do like. The world cannot, will not, and should not, exclusively cater to your personal tastes. Perhaps the worst example of it, though? When a website like Yahoo! NBA posts ten articles, eight of them relevant news stories, one opinion piece, and a “just for fun” filler article…maybe a couple more of the latter if it’s a slow news day…and people get really upset about the articles that clearly aren’t news, and could easily be avoided if you’re not interested in them. Maybe if we didn’t all think our time was much more valuable than everyone else’s…

Once again, I really do enjoy being part of an online community, and I think our community in particular has been able to do some awesome things. However, there are aspects of the online culture that I think we need to grow out of. What are some traits and attitudes of online communities that you find annoying? Let me know in the comments below, and as always, feel free to join in the discussion in the NLSC Forum! That’s all for this week, so thanks for checking in, have a great weekend, and please join me again next Friday for another Five.

Support The NLSC on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!
Subscribe
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

2 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
mp3
mp3
October 3, 2015 5:29 am

Must of being a tough Fri five to write (wording) with the nature of the community and like you said with both games fresh out in stores so kudos Andrew I think that was well put together!

I have said this before but I think we all hype the games up in our own heads so much that they can never live up to but for me and looking back at say nba live 95 I think we are getting a pretty decent game for our money