Gatekeeping

[DunkeyKong]

Honestly the debate kinda proves something about the benefits of gatekeeping..

The bigger something get's, the more it will tear itself apart by different ideals and desires for the medium.

That's true, I guess they already gave some examples

 

[dropsmegamega]

Wait, what do you mean? Genuine question.

It's the same principle as age ratings basically. Some people just don't have enough maturity or understanding and if you try correcting then, even if in the most harmless way, they already feel insulted. Now imagine an army of people like that.

 

[Prism_Red]

It goes both ways.
For me personally, gatekeeping is one of many methods used as way to set a standard, and that's the only extend on how it could be considered as either good or bad. The way I see it, it depends on the intent of the gatekeeper and the gatekeep-ed.

Example, everyone can be a chef right? If you cook professionally in food service establishment, you would be considered a chef, but would you consider yourself a chef if all you do is making instant ramen in the kitchen?
Now, the head chef (the gatekeeper in this case) will eventually have to make a decision.

Good outcome:
- The head chef saw your effort to learn to cook other stuff and supports you all the way.
- You have no desire to improve your cooking skill and the head chef kicks you out.

Bad outcome:
- The head chef saw your effort to learn to cook other stuff but kicks you out anyway.
- You have no desire to improve your cooking skill and the head chef is still keeping you making instant ramen in the kitchen.

That's just an analogy, but applicable to most other cases.

 

[tropicalavera]

grouchomarxquote.jpg

 

[NoctemDead]

For supporters of Gatekeeping, I'm curious what that that looks like in practical terms and how it helps with some of the large problems in the thread. For instance, how does gatekeeping of new community members prevent lootboxes and microtransactions or ideological creep in series?

If somebody comes into a forum talking about how they love Fallout 4 and 76, do we tell them they have to like Fallout 2 and New Vegas more because they're the last real Fallout RPGs? And then we do that 10,000 times and the next Fallout game is now... a better RPG? Or do we just feel better about ourselves because we are the keeper of the old ways and enforcing the truth in our social ground? (Just using a franchise I'm familiar with because I Don't Know Jack about Star Wars)

My question is, at what point does the gatekeeping of the individuals coming to a space to talk about a hobby translate to the desired outcome at the industry level?

To answer the main question, I think you have to at some degree depending on what you define as "gatekeeping". For instance, needing an account to participate is a "gate" that one must pass through to participate. Enforcing rules of communication and not tolerating certain types of speech/behavior. There's certainly an argument to gatekeep things like The Repo, self promotion, articles - but I tend to think of these more as vetting and holding standards than gatekeeping in the strictest sense.

Aside from that, I would prefer positive interaction (e.g. - "if you like that entry in the series, check out this older one!") over negative ( "Fans of the new entries are just eating up slop and encouraging [IP holder] to ruin [series]"

 

[Prism_Red]

To answer the main question, I think you have to at some degree depending on what you define as "gatekeeping". For instance, needing an account to participate is a "gate" that one must pass through to participate. Enforcing rules of communication and not tolerating certain types of speech/behavior. There's certainly an argument to gatekeep things like The Repo, self promotion, articles - but I tend to think of these more as vetting and holding standards than gatekeeping in the strictest sense.

Aside from that, I would prefer positive interaction (e.g. - "if you like that entry in the series, check out this older one!") over negative ( "Fans of the new entries are just eating up slop and encouraging [IP holder] to ruin [series]"

This is pretty much my point, but articulately explained better.

 

[What's His Face]

Absolutely.

 

[DunkeyKong]

This is pretty much my point, but articulately explained better.

I think both of you guys explained it best!

 

[Jeanfranc]

DAMN! How did something about gatekeeping turned into gaming industry? Not complaining though

In fact, I love reading all of this perspective or point of view so…more please

This is a gaming forum, as above so below

 

[DunkeyKong]

This is a gaming forum, as above so below

I love that quote

 

[CG4R12I4N]

The difference is that unlike that chef example or any other jobs that gives out product instead of service, gaming is pretty much a line of enjoyment luxury instead of necessity really. So I honestly don't quite understand the need of mass boycotting influence to make a statement to the dev so that they 'improve'. Just like artform, you like what you like, others like what they like, there's no need to force them to understand your point when your own wallet can speak for itself.

 

[Jeanfranc]

To answer the main question, I think you have to at some degree depending on what you define as "gatekeeping". For instance, needing an account to participate is a "gate" that one must pass through to participate. Enforcing rules of communication and not tolerating certain types of speech/behavior. There's certainly an argument to gatekeep things like The Repo, self promotion, articles - but I tend to think of these more as vetting and holding standards than gatekeeping in the strictest sense.

Aside from that, I would prefer positive interaction (e.g. - "if you like that entry in the series, check out this older one!") over negative ( "Fans of the new entries are just eating up slop and encouraging [IP holder] to ruin [series]"

Yes, you gatekeep people to prevent them from shitting up online spaces, it's not about affecting the industry.

 

[Ikagura]

It's quite a minefield of a debate.


I'll just put that one quote: "If you try to appeal to everyone, you’ll appeal to no one".

 

[Prism_Red]

Just like artform, you like what you like, others like what they like, there's no need to force them to understand your point when your own wallet can speak for itself.

True that, but the problem still start to begin when somebody try to force their way of view down somebody's throat, that is one example of gatekeeping.

If only everyone can accept that we're all different and that's fine, man we woulda live in peace.

 

[dropsmegamega]

For supporters of Gatekeeping, I'm curious what that that looks like in practical terms and how it helps with some of the large problems in the thread. For instance, how does gatekeeping of new community members prevent lootboxes and microtransactions or ideological creep in series?

If somebody comes into a forum talking about how they love Fallout 4 and 76, do we tell them they have to like Fallout 2 and New Vegas more because they're the last real Fallout RPGs? And then we do that 10,000 times and the next Fallout game is now... a better RPG? Or do we just feel better about ourselves because we are the keeper of the old ways and enforcing the truth in our social ground? (Just using a franchise I'm familiar with because I Don't Know Jack about Star Wars)

My question is, at what point does the gatekeeping of the individuals coming to a space to talk about a hobby translate to the desired outcome at the industry level?

To answer the main question, I think you have to at some degree depending on what you define as "gatekeeping". For instance, needing an account to participate is a "gate" that one must pass through to participate. Enforcing rules of communication and not tolerating certain types of speech/behavior. There's certainly an argument to gatekeep things like The Repo, self promotion, articles - but I tend to think of these more as vetting and holding standards than gatekeeping in the strictest sense.

Aside from that, I would prefer positive interaction (e.g. - "if you like that entry in the series, check out this older one!") over negative ( "Fans of the new entries are just eating up slop and encouraging [IP holder] to ruin [series]"

Answering your example, gatekeeping won't magically save the industry, but it could keep a classic fallout community from becoming another bethesda's fallout community. People can like whatever they want, but have to understand that niche spaces are to discuss niche stuff. Diluting a community, principally when its a series that had extreme changes to its design principles just weakens it.

And yeah series will not change because of a niche community of course, at best some indies or spiritual sequels with a more oldschool design will show up, sometimes even made by members themselves. And if these go well, maybe more people can come to understand good points about classic design and maybe, just maybe, the main series could change or make a spinoff thinking about that kind of public. These things just can't happen if all communities simply get diluted into whatever is popular right now. It's almost like fighting propaganda.

 

[Ikagura]

This is a forum of a romhacking site, the Repository is locked behind having an account therefore it's a form of gatekeeping.

Now, romhack and rom sites have been shut down because they got too popular to be kept safe. It has been proven with Emuparadise and Vimm's Lair.

If a community is built upon a legally grey area that's for the best to not have snitch nor people having easy access to a rom site to share it on Facebook.


Of course some are getting zealous about the gatekeeping to the point of preventing genuine fans but if you let your house's door open you'll have more chances to get things stolen and that's all I need to say.

 

[Meekoos]

For supporters of Gatekeeping, I'm curious what that that looks like in practical terms and how it helps with some of the large problems in the thread. For instance, how does gatekeeping of new community members prevent lootboxes and microtransactions or ideological creep in series?...

...To answer the main question, I think you have to at some degree depending on what you define as "gatekeeping". For instance, needing an account to participate is a "gate" that one must pass through to participate. Enforcing rules of communication and not tolerating certain types of speech/behavior. There's certainly an argument to gatekeep things like The Repo, self promotion, articles - but I tend to think of these more as vetting and holding standards than gatekeeping in the strictest sense.

Well I more or less shared my own story of gatekeeping earlier in the thread without being explicitly told I was unwelcomed until one person did lash out on me.

Let's try this with literature publishing then? We have genres made not just sort what goes on a shelf but how to market to people. Publishers know this and so usually want to have either wide range in demographics or specialize in certain genres and so take these into account whenever there's an entry novel brought in. They have questions of will this sell in this demographic and genre the author is going for? Does it meet our branding standards? Most novels just don't make the cut from quality control before they turn them down of it just doesn't work as a product under us. Author might turn around and quit, try other publishers or try to "lower their standards" by going into another demographic, YA for example which doesn't seem to have a shut off valve as a lot of them still have hopes of churning out the next Harry Potter Mega franchise if not can hope have a trilogy to recoup the loses of those first novels that failed to launch.

Are those original publishers gatekeeping, do they have higher standards or do they not want to compete with a flooded a market that's already established with other publishers? Ask either side and you'll get the same answer of quality vs gatekeeping, does it work? Dunno, adult fantasy still has new authors and novels today read different from what they were 5-10 to 20 years ago.

For gaming we the consumer have no control of the market except not buying a product. Boycotts don't do anything other than give you clicks and signatures online, we're not organized to that extent of a change so the idea of gatekeeping doesn't apply to an industry except where we talk about said hobby.

 

[dropsmegamega]

The difference is that unlike that chef example or any other jobs that gives out product instead of service, gaming is pretty much a line of enjoyment luxury instead of necessity really. So I honestly don't quite understand the need of mass boycotting influence to make a statement to the dev so that they 'improve'. Just like artform, you like what you like, others like what they like, there's no need to force them to understand your point when your own wallet can speak for itself.

Except wallets don't speak. If nobody buys a game and people aren't clear why, there is no improvement whatsoever. And the same mistakes will keep being made. Like you said, they are products and feedback is necessary. In an age that has dislikes and negative comments removed, journos paid for good reviews and whatnot, people will still find their ways to make their statements because that is the human thing to do.

 

[ZombieFish]

Honestly the debate kinda proves something about the benefits of gatekeeping..

The bigger something get's, the more it will tear itself apart by different ideals and desires for the medium.

If you mean that the limited but extant gatekeeping here has fostered a healthy conversation with a lot of takes worth reading and very little outright trolling, I agree. This thread is a solid lurk.

 

[Jeanfranc]

I firmly believe that most sites would be better if you couldn't access them from mobile phones

Post automatically merged: Friday at 3:01 PM

If you mean that the limited but extant gatekeeping here has fostered a healthy conversation with a lot of takes worth reading and very little outright trolling, I agree. This thread is a solid lurk.

actually this goes for most threads here, it's like a dream compared to places like /vr/

 

[ZombieFish]

I firmly believe that most sites would be better if you couldn't access them from mobile phones

Post automatically merged: Friday at 3:01 PM

actually this goes for most threads here, it's like a dream compared to places like /vr/

Hey, wait, I’m lurking from my phone cause it’s 10am and I’m doing other stuff too. This really is a nice place though, and my hope is that, being a nice place, it won’t attract folks looking for a fetid swamp. *knocks on wood*

 

[NoctemDead]

Answering your example, gatekeeping won't magically save the industry, but it could keep a classic fallout community from becoming another bethesda's fallout community. People can like whatever they want, but have to understand that niche spaces are to discuss niche stuff. Diluting a community, principally when its a series that had extreme changes to its design principles just weakens it.

And yeah series will not change because of a niche community of course, at best some indies or spiritual sequels with a more oldschool design will show up, sometimes even made by members themselves. And if these go well, maybe more people can come to understand good points about classic design and maybe, just maybe, the main series could change or make a spinoff thinking about that kind of public. These things just can't happen if all communities simply get diluted into whatever is popular right now. It's almost like fighting propaganda.

What you describe doesn't sound super like gatekeeping to me? If you start a classic Fallout forum, then insisting posts stay on that topic is really just sticking to the niche discussion at hand.

When I think of gatekeeping, I think of examples like:
- People who emulate games don't count, only people who play on real hardware
- Gen Z/young people shouldn't give their opinions because they weren't there for the context of the game when it came out, they wouldn't understand
- People who watch anime with dubs don't actually count as fans
- Only people who beat [game] on the hardest difficulty/with a popular challenge can really give their opinion on the gameplay

etc. Those are the types of attitudes that come to mind when someone says there's gatekeeping in a certain community.

Again, it's all context sensitive and should be capable of nuance. If you're on a forum specifically about original hardware, your opinion about something you emulated probably is not within scope. If you're on a Japanese language forum, then watching things with only English dub is probably not going to fit in with the major discussion.

But again I think there are positive ways to introduce things rather than ways to shut down discovery altogether if it's not within a given path (which IMO is often what the word "gatekeeping" implies).

For instance "You should check out the original Fallout games sometimes, they give some context to the Enclave and Brotherhood of Steel in their original entries that explains why many fans object to their overuse in the modern installments of the franchise" vs. "Well, you were raised on that Bethesda slop, so the quality of the old writing is probably lost on you and your opinion doesn't matter as a true fan until you experience all of these games in the way that I find valid."

One is sharing knowledge and encouraging people to become familiar with aspects of a hobby that you love, one is adversarial and asks a person to achieve an arbitrary baseline of performance before being accepted as a member of the group. If it were a professional association or a hobby that could have dangerous consequences (firearms come to mind as an activity where I do want people gatekept and filtered for safety, for instance) it would be more understandable. But if we're here to talk about games, TV shows, etc. I think the purity testing often drives blood pressure up and enjoyment down for parties on both ends of it.

 

[Ikagura]

I'll be honest, if my favourite series started to cater to the most casual players I'd genuinely lose hope for it.

And sadly the Ys series is going into a direction I absolutely dislike.

 

[dropsmegamega]

What you describe doesn't sound super like gatekeeping to me? If you start a classic Fallout forum, then insisting posts stay on that topic is really just sticking to the niche discussion at hand.

When I think of gatekeeping, I think of examples like:
- People who emulate games don't count, only people who play on real hardware
- Gen Z/young people shouldn't give their opinions because they weren't there for the context of the game when it came out, they wouldn't understand
- People who watch anime with dubs don't actually count as fans
- Only people who beat [game] on the hardest difficulty/with a popular challenge can really give their opinion on the gameplay

etc. Those are the types of attitudes that come to mind when someone says there's gatekeeping in a certain community.

Again, it's all context sensitive and should be capable of nuance. If you're on a forum specifically about original hardware, your opinion about something you emulated probably is not within scope. If you're on a Japanese language forum, then watching things with only English dub is probably not going to fit in with the major discussion.

But again I think there are positive ways to introduce things rather than ways to shut down discovery altogether if it's not within a given path (which IMO is often what the word "gatekeeping" implies).

For instance "You should check out the original Fallout games sometimes, they give some context to the Enclave and Brotherhood of Steel in their original entries that explains why many fans object to their overuse in the modern installments of the franchise" vs. "Well, you were raised on that Bethesda slop, so the quality of the old writing is probably lost on you and your opinion doesn't matter as a true fan until you experience all of these games in the way that I find valid."

One is sharing knowledge and encouraging people to become familiar with aspects of a hobby that you love, one is adversarial and asks a person to achieve an arbitrary baseline of performance before being accepted as a member of the group. If it were a professional association or a hobby that could have dangerous consequences (firearms come to mind as an activity where I do want people gatekept and filtered for safety, for instance) it would be more understandable. But if we're here to talk about games, TV shows, etc. I think the purity testing often drives blood pressure up and enjoyment down for parties on both ends of it.

That's fair. I interpreted it like that because its common for communities like that to be accused of gatekeeping just because of their focus. I also try to be more positive and introduce these kind of games to people, but more than often I feel either people end up searching these by themselves by having interest in retro games or just don't. In general there is a lot of contradiction between design principles of old vs new to the point people end up dismissing each other- the same reasons by why I like old fallout may be the reasons people dislike it and vice versa. Gatekeeping becomes a expression of that kind of contradictions I guess...

 

[Raccoonus]

Human behavior can never be generalized because of the nature of it. In the context of entertainment it never makes sense to gatekeep as growth does nothing but provide you with more of the thing you love and avoids the problem of big risky changes to an established property so it can get more appeal; if it can get more appeal naturally from it's own community that is often better overall because it maintains it's original design and intent.