In response to "The Fallacy of the Fanboy" from The Escapist Forum: Good article, but herein lies the reason why I agree with Holkins on his stance.
You can NOT change people's minds over the internet in 90% of all cases. Full stop.
Why? Because most people like their egoes too much and of what they believe is to be right...to be right.
Holkins knew, right away, that Ebert would never even begin to consider picking up a controller and actually giving it a try before talking about it. It is true, he later admitted with humility, that he should really not have spoken about games at all given his lack of experience, but he reasserted that he would never even give it a chance to change his opinion either in the very same statement.
What Holkins said was that this kind of assertiveness over the internet does not work in almost any instance. Because most people who get drawn into forum arguments are people who like to imagine, that their opinions actually matter! Hence the only satisfaction they have is derived from arguing their point, not conceding it and you know...actually change their point of view, as you have said.
The only way to convince people in our position would be indeed through having them experience it IRL. But that won't happen over the internet, ever. Only if you were to meet them in person would this become possible.
That's why I really agree with Holkins more. It's pointless and not worth the effort to try to change things over the internet. However, it is not so pointless to try and change them IRL - that is another matter entirely.
I don't think that the fanboy is a fallacy. It's a term usually used in a negative way to describe someone, normally a young adult male, who shows great passion and knowledge about something they grew obsessed with as a child like comic books, Star Wars or video games and most importantly doesn't show much emotional maturity or knowledge in other areas. Someone who is just a fan has the passion and knowledge but is also able to distance themselves from the subject thanks to having a little more wisdom and knowledge gained from other sources.
It's not a polite term and is rudely used in inappropriate ways. I don't think that having "fanboys" take hold of the debate and act in a way that influences the ways that games are heading is an especially healthy thing. They argue mostly for things that exclude new or younger fans and lock the developers into creating very conservative content. Things that satisfy their urge to see the same few favourite things over and over again but in ways that are less accessible to outsiders.
The thing about some defences of games is that they show both key characteristics of fanboyism. The unbridled passion is off the chart. Games have to be good for children because they defined my childhood. Games have to be art because I care about them so much and being art is a good thing, right? The defences lack the wisdom of knowing when to pick fights and respecting boundaries. They often lack real knowledge about, for example, what art means to different people and how little or how much being classed as art actually means.
In response to "Punching the Baby Seal of PC Gaming" from The Escapist Forum: Whenever I see a written-piece on how many awful experiences people have gaming on their PCs, I put the blame squarely on them.
I have been PC gaming for 10 years. In that time I've had one hard drive die on me. That's one major problem. No game has caused my computer to spontaneously combust, or has crashed so many times it's unplayable, or ever presented a problem - should one occasionally arise - that I could not fix with a bit of time and use of Google.
If it doesn't work, chances are it's your fault.
Wow, some people really aren't getting this article are they? Comedy, guys, comm-uh?-dee. Exaggerating a fairly regular complaint for the sake of laughter, with a possible side-effect of providing social commentary? Anyone?
I really liked it, the pathos especially - what the PC fanboys aren't seeing is that Chuck is one of them. Against all his better judgement, all his common sense, against his instinct for self-preservation (let alone seal preservation) he will return to PC gaming. If that's not dedication, affection, motivation, then what the hell is? Only a true interest in something can inspire such vitriol. Me, I couldn't give a shit about overclocking (whatever the hell that is), how clean my freaking drives are (seriously?), and all that jazz because when it comes to PC gaming I'm the one with the COLD DARK HEART. I'm sorry Chuck, but you're in love!