I’ve been a part of the online gamer community for quite a few years now, I’ve been gaming through two edition transitions, and I’ve made a few observations. In my very first post, I mentioned how a gamer’s game and edition preference is a lot like political party affiliation, for better or for worse. Well today I’m expanding that thought.
The edition cycle is a lot like the election cycle. The few months after a new leader takes center stage is a time of intense debate as euphoric supporters duke it out with disgruntled dissidents to define new policies and political dynamics. Then everyone settles into those new policies and life goes on for a few more-or-less quiet years. But inevitably the Man makes decisions that offend some of his constituency -- everybody makes mistakes, and you can’t please everyone anyway. Eventually discussions become more prevalent and more heated, as dissent escalates. Some constituents start noticing policy problems, some just want a change of political scenery. And then someone decides it’s time for a big change, and we start all over again.
It’s no wonder that we complete a lap on the edition treadmill every few years. It’s not anyone’s fault; it’s not necessarily even bad. It’s simply a convergence of circumstance and psychology. History is cyclical, and nothing will change that fact short of a drastic change in the communal condition.
This has all happened before, and this will all happen again.
I also wrote about the cycle of gamer psychology in my blog today, but I figured this much text would be enough for most forumites.