"Triplis;15442458" wrote:
It's curious how perceptions vary. I interpreted the author as trying to explain that doing crazy stuff in a video game is actually pretty normal, as opposed to drumming up drama by insinuating that gamers are all crazy. I guess they didn't take into account all the people who don't do weird stuff, but it seemed to me that the goal was to talk about those who do and emphasize that it's normal, not imply that everyone does.
I guess if you don't buy into the author's argument and know nothing of the sims, you might think sims fans are crazy. But if that's your reaction, you might also think FPS players are all serial murderers waiting to happen, so I don't know that it's going to make much of a difference.
My issue is that it gives the impression all simmers are sadistic to their sims, it doesn't discuss different types of player:
'Why are
WE sadistic to our sims?'
'StarSweetieSqueaker is probably not a deranged psychopath living out sick, twisted fantasies of murder and torture. They are, most likely, an ordinary person – or at least,
an ordinary The Sims player.'
It's written as though this is what
all sims players spend their time doing. It's just one of many
types of gameplay.
I see the article as very one-sided and gives a bad impression of Sims players to the outside world. Especially where she talks about killing toddlers and children. It doesn't take into account that there's a social worker in most games to stop people doing that, for example. I'd also argue that some people enjoy reading those novels written by abuse survivors. But we don't point at them and call them sadists because they enjoy reading about someone else's pain. Idk... I read that as almost a vilification or scare-mongering article. Sensationalist. Click-bait. Not a well balanced or researched piece of journalism.
