It's as if... if you don't have it when you grow up... its bad for you. I'm sure grandparents would say TV is bad, but parents say it's fine. We would say gaming is fine, but not VR?
Relevant to society as a whole. You can talk to almost anyone about a popular TV show, but you'll only be able to talk to a certain demographic of people about even the most popular video games.
Different shows appeal to different demographics, so we can't really say that you can talk to «anyone» about a TV show. The number is so big and the genres so diverse that there is nothing we can talk about to everyone (except maybe the news which can be found on the internet anyways). The only difference is that TV has been around longer than computers/consoles, but in a few decades even older generations will be used to gaming, thus making it a subject as wide as the TV. It was the same with the radio and TV some 50 years ago, and it will always happen when a new technology is presented to the public.
"Different shows appeal to different demographics, so we can't really say that you can talk to «anyone» about a TV show. "
You pretty much can, though, as television itself is popular enough that even people outside of a very popular show's demographic will likely still know about that show.
"in a few decades even older generations will be used to gaming, thus making it a subject as wide as the TV."
Maybe, but that's irrelevant to what we're talking about.
I think the idea that you are going out into the world and talking to random strangers is silly. there are few people who talk to those who do not share common interest. using the term "social relevance" is incredibly broad. gamers talk to gamers, and that is their social group. therefore games are socially relevant to them just like @bethorien said. also television is world-wide. i could go up to a random stranger and start talking to them about a japanese anime that im into and they would probably be confused. i could then go up to someone i know is into it and they would share my interest. another example of "social relevance" within a specific demographic.
"I think the idea that you are going out into the world and talking to random strangers is silly."
Well, more like acquaintances and extended family, but why not random people? The picture is clearly speaking in general, not about specific demographics.
"there are few people who talk to those who do not share common interest."
I talk to a lot more people who don't play video games, than people who play them. It's still a relatively niche hobby.
"using the term "social relevance" is incredibly broad."
Yes, just like how the picture is speaking very broadly.
"gamers talk to gamers, and that is their social group."
Gamers don't only talk to gamers, that would be ridiculous.
"therefore games are socially relevant to them"
To them, but not in general.
"also television is world-wide."
So are video games.
"i could go up to a random stranger and start talking to them about a japanese anime that im into and they would probably be confused."
Yes, and the point is *most* random strangers won't know what your talking about because, in general, anime isn't socially relevant.
"i could then go up to someone i know is into it and they would share my interest."
Obviously.
"another example of "social relevance" within a specific demographic.
Sure, but we're not talking about specific demographics.
You're making some good points but the thing is, you can indeed probably talk to anyone about a TV show and they will vaguely know what you're talking about. But that's it. If you came up to me and started talking about The Walking Dead which is apparently very popular now and can thus be called "socially relevant", I'd say "yeah I know about it" and I'd be smiling and nodding for the rest of the conversation. So yes, television is a very wide medium indeed, but that doesn't mean you can talk to everyone about everything. Everything popular enough becomes socially relevant, whether it's a book, movie, series/anime, game etc., no matter the medium. And of course it depends upon your preferences and demographic, but provided a thing gets popular, people will at least hear about it anyways.
"you can indeed probably talk to anyone about a TV show and they will vaguely know what you're talking about. But that's it. If you came up to me and started talking about The Walking Dead which is apparently very popular now and can thus be called "socially relevant", I'd say "yeah I know about it" and I'd be smiling and nodding for the rest of the conversation."
This right here is exactly what I'm talking about. That's what makes TV in general socially relevant.
"So yes, television is a very wide medium indeed, but that doesn't mean you can talk to everyone about everything."
Well obviously not absolutely everything. Again, I'm talking about TV in general.
"Everything popular enough becomes socially relevant, whether it's a book, movie, series/anime, game etc., no matter the medium."
I don't think any anime has become anywhere near relevant to society in general since maybe The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya. Books and movies are generally socially relevant, and video games are becoming more relevant, but not anywhere close to TV. At least not yet.
Fair enough, but I still don't think "You know this movie/series?" "I've heard about it" really qualifies as striking up a decent conversation. Small talk at best.
People often make small talk about relevant things. My point is the near-universal ability to do that with popular TV shows is what makes them more acceptable than video games.
Tbh people who start "flame wars" are just not very good at making arguments. Insulting your "opponent" instead of disproving their argument is just petty and helps no one.
with games like pokemon go becoming such social hits and the fact that games have become much more popular over the years to the point that it would be rare to find a home without at least one gaming console, i still cant believe that garlog is so vehemently driven to deny that gaming/video games is/are socially relevant. i dont watch tv for the most part. maybe im just not a person by garlog's standards
Well yeah, exactly, but a lot of people don't realize that disagreeing with someone doesn't mean you get to insult them or hate on them. That's not how a productive discussion starts. A productive discussion starts with you trying to find out why that person has a different opinion and/or try to disprove that opinion using your knowledge/experience. Or maybe find out if there was a misunderstanding, which happens sometimes since only a few people here are native English speakers.
"i still cant believe that garlog is so vehemently driven to deny that gaming/video games is/are socially relevant."
It's not as though they aren't relevant at all, they're just much less relevant than TV, and aren't seen as a socially involved activity because of it. This is the case in general, not an absolute statement.
"i dont watch tv for the most part. maybe im just not a person by garlog's standards"
General statements don't necessarily apply individually.
you think games arent seen as socially involved? then i think you may just be either misinformed or maybe that is just how things are where you are from
You pretty much can, though, as television itself is popular enough that even people outside of a very popular show's demographic will likely still know about that show.
"in a few decades even older generations will be used to gaming, thus making it a subject as wide as the TV."
Maybe, but that's irrelevant to what we're talking about.
Well, more like acquaintances and extended family, but why not random people? The picture is clearly speaking in general, not about specific demographics.
"there are few people who talk to those who do not share common interest."
I talk to a lot more people who don't play video games, than people who play them. It's still a relatively niche hobby.
"using the term "social relevance" is incredibly broad."
Yes, just like how the picture is speaking very broadly.
"gamers talk to gamers, and that is their social group."
Gamers don't only talk to gamers, that would be ridiculous.
"therefore games are socially relevant to them"
To them, but not in general.
"also television is world-wide."
So are video games.
Yes, and the point is *most* random strangers won't know what your talking about because, in general, anime isn't socially relevant.
"i could then go up to someone i know is into it and they would share my interest."
Obviously.
"another example of "social relevance" within a specific demographic.
Sure, but we're not talking about specific demographics.
This right here is exactly what I'm talking about. That's what makes TV in general socially relevant.
"So yes, television is a very wide medium indeed, but that doesn't mean you can talk to everyone about everything."
Well obviously not absolutely everything. Again, I'm talking about TV in general.
I don't think any anime has become anywhere near relevant to society in general since maybe The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya. Books and movies are generally socially relevant, and video games are becoming more relevant, but not anywhere close to TV. At least not yet.
It's not as though they aren't relevant at all, they're just much less relevant than TV, and aren't seen as a socially involved activity because of it. This is the case in general, not an absolute statement.
"i dont watch tv for the most part. maybe im just not a person by garlog's standards"
General statements don't necessarily apply individually.