Geek Rant Topic 16: Revisiting the Geek Definiton

When All Else Fails, you call Mousa the 14, that one ranting geek.

Remember this old thing?

I've been doing a bit of net gallivanting and have found that I'm a bit conflicted in my definitions.

What? What is it? What's with the giggles?

Oh Right. Get your jollies out of the way first.

Done making fun of me and the laughing? Good, now on to the real discussion.

A I was saying, I have found that my definitions and the manner in which I have come upon the have been a little off.

But first, before I elaborate on the geek definition, I wan to shove the Nerd one out of the way

NERD: A socially inadequate person who is noted not only for their poor social skills or lack of caring of mainstream interests and styles, but for their intelligence, display of said intelligence, and deep knowledge of a wide variety of fields or a specified field. The big difference between a geek and a nerd is that a Nerd's brilliance is usually within academic pursuits. They are Science geeks, math geeks, computer geeks. If it is an academic field with real life applications or at least has a real field of study and you are intellectually vested in it, you are a nerd.

Was my old definition and little has changed. The social inadequacy isn't quite necessary but basically a nerd is someone who is just plain smart. He's the guy who fixes your computer and does your homework for you. Those guys that TV shows put in glasses and button down shirts and suspenders and make them spout facts, just facts, ad nothing but the facts because they're that smart.

Basically 95% of the lyrics to this song:

Are about them.

Now for the other 10% about Dungeons and Dragons and choosing between Kirk or Picard and X-Men comics and Renaissance Faires? Geek, or at least geek as how I defined it previously

The geek has always been a different monster.

GEEK: A subset of hobbyist, people who have an deep interest in traditionally non-mainstream subjects that are often considered childish in nature. Similar to the Nerd, they are usually socially inadequate and brilliant. Unlike the nerd, their brilliance tends to be dedicated to their specific hobby. Usual interests of Geeks fall under Science-Fiction and Fantasy Genres spanning all mediums.

Problem is, I was defining geek by what we like rather than how we like it which appears to be the common theme I found in my journeys.

The definition I've stumbled across, which I agree with, is the second half of my previous definition:

Another aspect of Geeks as defined by The Game Overthinker in his video on continuity found here. the short and paraphrased version is this: "Geeks glean fun from turning something that is already fun into work" such as playing video games competitively, Stop Having Fun Guys, or collecting the entirety of the Marvel universe's comics to "keep the continuity straight".

I, for some reason, always viewed it as a content thing, like we like specific things rather than liking things a certain way. The Game Overthinker basically had it as "Likes things to a degree deeper than common knowledge". He even goes further into the subject here on The Big Picture though to be fair, him using the word nerd bugged me to high heaven. Though Bobbo does bring up excellent points about how the general public enjoys content considered "Geeky", its simply the manner in which it is enjoyed. Geeks like things on a deeper level and while I think Bob's description of "Turning something in a math problem" is going too far, it's basically in that direction of turning something fun into work but still deriving fun from it.

Which means it's not just sci-fi and fantasy fans, anybody can be a geek if they're obsessive enough about their respective hobby. Sports, history, Lego, whatever, I mean this is how experts are born.

That still leaves one little problem. The content-based description. There is still a specified group of somewhat socially awkward individuals that are part of some internet-based conglomerate of anime fans, Japan officianados, Magic: The Gathering players, video gamers, Trekkies, Star Wars fans, nostalgia nuts, cartoon lovers, media junkies, comedian reviewers, overthinkers, sci-fi lovers, fantasy lovers, Webcomic readers and makers, and comic book lovers. I mean these interests are filled with geeks and the fandoms overlap greatly (Which is why I called myself the Omni-Geek, since I loved all and specialized in none.) and they are still considered primarily non-mainstream and seen as childish or unwilling to let go of things that are aimed at kids and young teens.

In short, there's a working definition, but what do you call it?

I mean, it sounds like I'm obsessing but I like seeing things properly labeled in their proper space.

....

Now my membership at TvTropes suddenly makes sense....

-Good Bye, Good Luck, and Imagination Is Your Greatest Power.

Mousa The 14

Geek Rant Topic 10: Geeky Men Are Not Men

When All Else Fails, you call Mousa the 14, that one ranting geek.

What happened to me? College happened! Yeay higher education! This also means I've postponed my "Namco's Embargo" and "Geek Entitlement and General Jerkassery" topics, mostly due to writer's block on the topics. Now, back to the show:

Geeky men are sexless homos. Kind of. Some of us are not, some of us are. Men are allowed to be geeky and still be fully functional members of society simultaneously, even though these qualities tend to almost contradict each other. But any of us who may be insecure, or might have poor social skills, or that unusually high number of us on the net with Aspergers, ADD, OCD, and ADHD (Not me, I'm not trying to be speshul on the net.), not so much. There's just something about this confidence thing that some people can't get enough of. It makes them look like leaders, look reliable and in charge. That's probably why some of them can get away with being jerks: If you're damn confident and charismatic enough, nobody is going to care what a jerk you really are or they'll at least tolerate it.

And of course they get it out of being sure of themselves, these confident men. A belief that they can feel good about themselves and gosh darned it, everyone else should feel good that this person exists. Color me shocked, turned out vinegar attracts more flies than honey becuase those who are insecure enough to be doormats aren't going to get squat. Turns out the movies lie, what a concept. Excuse me while I make a few false dichotomies for your entertainment value:

• Don't hold doors, that's for pansies and losers that let the world walk all over them. Let the people open their own doors.
• Nobody's gonna take you seriously if you say yes. Helping people's for pansies and losers that let the world walk all over them. Say no all the time, be a b******, they can help themselves, no I don't care how heavy that couch is.
• What's this? You're showing some semblance of feelings? What crap is this? Chuck Norris doesn't cry! The only thing you should feel is joy, lust, and RAEG! Having feelings and talking about them at any time is for pansies and losers that let the world walk all over them. MEN are emotionally deficient, got it?

Now class, what have we learned from this? That's right, to our shock and awe some people think like this. Broad strokes are easier than having to evaluate people individually so if you're into sports or some sort of athlete or at least a charismatic business student, the likelihood of having confidence and charm is so high it's not even a question. You will have it becuase it makes you a MAN. After all, MEN are designed to be hunters and gatherers, to compete, to kill, to go for blood. Be a "MAN" physically and mentally, you are ideal. Tradition and genetics and familiarity build today's standards.

Which mean those who are less then fit either by too much or too little weight have lost a portion of the battle but that's not a deal breaker. The insecurity is still there, becuase let's face it, some of us can be proud and pretty danged confident about our interests or whatever it is the heck we do, but really, those of us in the geeky and nerdy spectrum haven't exactly been praised for our encyclopedic knowledge of the Magic: The Gathering expanded universe. We're not allowed to like what we do without the general public looking upon us with with either ignoring us or general disdain. I mean, we have homebody interests: computers, documenting, organizing, math(a.k.a. Modifying Counter Strike, making wikis about Hunter X Hunter, collecting the entire DC Universe, and Dungeons & Dragons respectively, just to name some examples.)? These aren't MAN'S skills! Go outside and kill yourself ten buffalo and feast upon their testes while you make a sport out of their inflated stomach that involves beating each other up, you pansies!

So nothing to be proud of, skills traditionally unmasculine, extreme doormat tendencies if you're good and an entitlement obsessed overbearing jerkass if you're bad. And of course my entire post was self-deprecation which is also frowned upon becuase it implies insecurities and nobody likes insecurities. Good. Flipping. Grief.

Why can't the world just screw their standards of masculinity? Who cares about these flimsy standards? Yes I know men are providers, have their heads together and in the right place, I'm not talking about disregarding that, I'm talking about disregarding the standards of being a MAN in the social sense, not the familial or interpersonal relationship sense, but just the being yourself sense. Apparently anyone who deviates the norm doesn't deserve companions other than themselves or some other human low on the gender hierarchy than geeks, which is probably the homosexuals, because you can't get any more unmanly than digging dudes, amirite?

But of course this is just whining about a problem that I'm unwilling to change for myself. Most of your confident men friends may tell you changing is easy, just go out there and get our of your comfort zone. If that's their advice, obviously their minds are wired too differently for them to understand the roadblocks or history that built you up to your current mindset, or they don't want to/care to understand, or they are so far ingrained in their confidence mindset of doing anything easily that anything less is too unusual for them to comprehend. Either way, it's helpful unhelpful advice. It's basically helpful for confident people in hiding or in a rut and anybody who is even less than that are boned. You can try, but why put on a mask of being all "MANly" it accomplishes so much, but you may as well live a lie. Not everyone is raised to the proper standards of MANliness and some can act, but it's not who they are. Perhaps some of us are averse to violence, aggression, competition, athletics, or enjoy coding, showtunes, platformers, Dungeons and Dragons, or some combination of the above and more, why should it matter? Why should those all fall into other dark recesses of society with all who have those qualities as part of their make up?

Being the best version of yourself should be all that it takes to be a man. If confidence is difficult, then it is, and it may take a while to get it out there, but if people are going to look down on you for it, then to heck with them. An insecurity or two isn't going to kill anybody, though making an effort to break out of them would be preferred but we're only human, guide-dangit.

Look, I'm going around in circles and it appears I'm having trouble figuring out which parts I'm endorsing and condemning so I'm going to add this last bit of polish and head to sleep. The point is :The Standards are exclusionary, pointless, and demeaning and only breed insecurities, bitterness, and anger and not of the MANly kind either, but something cold and dark that breeds jerkasses and doormats.

-Good Bye, Good Luck, and Imagination Is Your Greatest Power

Mousa the 14

Geek Rant Topic 06: JRPGs

When All Else Fails, you call Mousa the 14, that one ranting geek.

So uh, yeah, Guess I didn't get the memo. When did JRPGs (Japanese Role Playing Games, for the non-geek visitors.) become a laughingstock in North America? Too busy playing manly army games and 90's comic throwbacks to care about something that uses primary colors with characters that have personalities؟

That was the Irony mark by the way. And was I being mean? Indeed. I'm still seething from my overview of Faux Hardcore gamers.

Now, the list of Faux hardcore gamer requirements are basically why JRPGs are considered a joke, but once upon a time these were the types of video games were loved. In a time before I was born of course, but that's not the point. If I were to bring up a game like Earthbound, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, and the Pre-Final Fantasy 7 Final Fantasy games, I would've thought they were talking about a completely different genre of games because a good majority of gamers seem to love those games for their compelling story lines, interesting characters, fun world to explore, gameplay, and whatnot.

Bring up anything post Final Fantasy 7 you're likely to get bombarded with a vitriol matched only by the Tea Party. But why is that? I seriously doubt JRPGs killed their dogs, and if they did we have bigger things to worry about, like finding out where the Allspark is or how to stop Skynet from killing us.

Well first of wall what do we have t compare them to? If there's a "J" in front of the RPG then J is obviously a qualifier to point out this is similar to but not likea set standard. Here's a poorly researched history lesson for you:

Video Game RPGs are mostly based around the Dungeons and Dragons. The DnD style of game was a complex story telling adventure that featured you and yoru friends exploring a new world as a different person as they fought monsters, explored towns, saved princesses all while upgrading their skills and weapons and maintaining an inventory as well as your health. Video Game RPGs are simplified versions of these because Video Games by definition are limited and therefore cannot provide much the depth, creativity, or numerous elements involved in your standard Dungeons and Dragons game or it's numerous counterparts.

Sacrifices had to be made and one can easily see what sort of Video Game RPG you're playing based on which sacrifices were made.

JRPGs are heavy on story and characters and because of that the decisions you make have little impact on how the story plays out except for a few changes in character development or a different ending when you beat the game. This meant a lot of gameplay was marginalized. You are basically watching an anime and a movie and your job is to move characters from A to B, make sure they don't die in non-plot related things, occasionally do some side quests that involve talking to certain people or delivering things, and fight on a usually non-necessary basis. A majority of JRPGs would make solid TV series or Movies rather than actual games where interactivity and decision making is key. In terms of actual figthing JRPGs basically are numbers game where you have to equio your characters with high ranking weapons and have them use high powered attacks, and maintain their health bar over 75%. All this in turn-based combat.

The numbers from the origin RPGs are there but the fun of actually being a person in the story is not. It's more like you're following some guy and his friends.

In Breif, and I quote someone else: "An angsty teenager with god awful hair struggling with groundless and poorly defined emotional problems through chapters of text boxes. "

Contrast with the common Western RPGs which take a more free-range open sandbox sort of style and has more emphasis on free range combat stuff a la Legend of Zelda or Assassin's Creed. but you tend to get a simpler story and you have a bigger opportunity to do far more sidequests. You can actually choose what class of character you want to be and what skills you can upgrade. Games with karma meters or dialogue selections allow for there to be slightly more effects on what you do, though usually not as much as people would like. The kicker is that usually the main story is nothing to look at and you find yourself eventually getting bored once the exploration becomes repetitive and you realize what you do doesn't have as much of an impact as you like.

In breif, and I quote someone else: "three hours of beating wolves to death in the rain in order to grab a handful of low-grade magical crap that you'll only sell a few minutes later. "

The false dichotomy here is basically choosing between more story and more choice. And more obviously the non-anime fan western audience want more choice.

However that's far deeper than what people actually complain about in terms of JRPG flaws.

Ignoring all the failings that involve appeal ling to the Faux Hardcore gamer, allow me to enumerate a lot of the commonly mentioned "problems" with JRPGs.

1) The Main protagonist is usually same broody emotional and emo or stereotypical energetic and excitable male anime protagonist.
1a) That is usually portrayed in an overly handsome/cutesy anime style
1b) And he wields a sword 99.99% of the time
1c) and has an annoying voice
2) The combat is turn based which is boring and lacks innovation.
3) Nothing you do actually matters
4) The art is 99.99% of the time going to be done in the typical Japanese animation style or as many call it, an anime style.
5) They lack replay value
6) The plots are usually cliche
7) No customization for anything.
9) Numbers are imperative in order to beat enemies rather than skills.
9a) Level grinding is imperative so you Can be stronger than the next boss
9b) No skill needed, just buy the next strongest weapons and armour
10) And It's not really roleplaying if you're going through someone else's story, limited to their personal skills with no variation, and it's their personality that drives the plot and not yours.

If there's more I remember, I'll add them but that's the basic outline ad they are frankly valid arguments. But it's hard to see why JRPGs were liked once upon a time.

Chrono Trigger still had the skill limitations and numbers crunching and you were playing as a set of established characters. But then The protagonist had a blank slate personality, what decisions you made in the game affected a great deal of the story, and the combat style was more of a faux-turn based one.

Earthbound has many of the similar failings Chrono Trigger had but it was open world, the writing was clever and the story was well done, and you had a lot of freedom in what you could do.

So JRPGs aren't necessarily a problem, it's that as games become bigger and more expensive to make it becomes more difficult to combine the best of both wolds to create something fun and interesting.

There is another factor I didn't mention that could be a cause of all this: Following the Leader. You see, Final Fantasy 7 introduced something new for it's time with a complex and fascinating protagonist with a deep and interesting plot even though it was wrought with all the things on the list many claim to hate about JRPGs. Well guess what, after the super success of FF7, many tired to follow in suit and thus nigh every JRPG we see these days is what one might call a rehash of Final Fantasy 7. Everything was starting too like trite and cliche after the original and now what we have left is a big ball of rage.

What can be done? Not sure, it seems like it's hard to break trends when you have budgets. We can only hope something new and creative comes our way like Okami, The World Ends With You, or the Tales of Symphonia/Phantasia battle system used for more RPGs.

Wait...

-Good Bye, Good Luck, and Imagination Is Your Greatest Power.
Mousa the 14

Geek Rant Topic 05: Nerd or Geek

When all else fails, you call Mousa the 14, that one ranting geek.

call me a semantics freak, but I coulda swore that these terms had specific definitions, but that could just be me. More a long time people have used the words interchangeably to simply mean "Socially inept guys we mainstream people don't like because they have non-mainstream interests, dress casually, act weird, and aren't particularly attractive."

Then why have two words? Words that are different yet supposedly mean the same or similar thing? and I'm sure people have their own personal mental dictionaries that give each of these words a specific term. even my mainstay, TvTropes.org, has separate definitions for each.

Geek

Nerd

The distinction is subtle, too subtle for anybody to really care so they ignore it. However I believe that from all I've heard and read I can glean some sort of distinction.

I realize this may be futile. I mean, XKCD is laughing at me right now for it. But the alt text proves to me that even the XKCD guy has a version of it and in fact mine is quite similar. So without further ado I present the definitions.

NERD: A socially inadequate person who is noted not only for their poor social skills or lack of caring of mainstream interests and styles, but for their intelligence, display of said intelligence, and deep knowledge of a wide variety of fields or a specified field. The big difference between a geek and a nerd is that a Nerd's brilliance is usually within academic pursuits. They are Science geeks, math geeks, computer geeks. If it is an academic field with real life applications or at least has a real field of study and you are intellectually vested in it, you are a nerd.

GEEK: A subset of hobbyist, people who have an deep interest in traditionally non-mainstream subjects that are often considered childish in nature. Similar to the Nerd, they are usually socially inadequate and brilliant. Unlike the nerd, their brilliance tends to be dedicated to their specific hobby. Usual interests of Geeks fall under Science-Fiction and Fantasy Genres spanning all mediums. Another aspect of Geeks as defined by The Game Overthinker in his video on continuity found here. the short and paraphrased version is this: "Geeks glean fun from turning something that is already fun into work" such as playing video games competitively, Stop Having Fun Guys, or collecting the entirety of the Marvel universe's comics to "keep the continuity straight".

Geeks follow this mantra "(Insert Hobby here), My Anti-Drug: Because Crack is Cheaper"

Agree with me, don't agree with me. I think I'm right, but I'm just that one ranting geek among millions. I doubt I'm wrong but I dare thou to challenge me.

Though it does seem strange that some, including myself, are arguing over the semantics of an insult pointed in our general direction.

Oh well.

-Good Bye, Good Luck, and Imagination Is Your Greatest Power.
Mousa The 14