I've been gaming since before the arcade amusements to home devices transition happened. And I can safely say, online social dynamics are now more of a detriment than an enhancement to my enjoyment of this hobby, at least when it comes to Steam.

As such, I no longer accept friend requests or participate in discussions outside sharing screenshots. I play my games, review them, and share screens if something strikes me as beautiful or interesting. I no longer engage in discussions beyond that.

I bear no one ill will, but due to brigading and other behaviors today (no, I don't mean criticism - criticism is good) there's increasingly no point in trying to engage in earnest enjoyable discussion pertaining to video games.

It feels impossible to simply appreciate, discuss, or enjoy *anything* anymore, without being called a shill if you aren't hyper-critical, or without being treated to some elaborate narrative about a supposed nefarious agenda by devs, just because someone's not happy with a character design or optional feature or what have you.

The word "fan" is now treated as a pejorative, as if simply enthusiastically liking something isn't a normal behavior that's always been a thing in gaming. As if being hyper-critical is now the default initial stance and passionately enjoying things instead is frowned upon or eyed with suspicion.

I've been on the internet since its genesis. I've seen the rise of social internet content since its inception, from usenet groups to chat rooms to contemporary social media. And this is not "just how the internet has always been." Sure, there were always "flame wars" or platform tribalism, but that was something that happened among younger players and had limited impact on communities. What's happening in this era is different.

Social media & streaming have led to experiencing video games in a completely inside out way. We used to decide a game looked interesting, play it, get sucked into that experience if we liked it, pass on it if we didn't, and then only later discuss it with others. Other people's views might be informative or fun, but were not drivers of our own experiences. And they weren't used as cudgels against those with differing tastes. Everyone just did their own thing.

Now instead people form preconceptions and formulate narratives long before games even exist as final products, preemptively frame "terms of debate" long before release, then turn the entire experience of even single player games into a social phenomenon. Either in the form of collective hype if it's "good," or endless trolling and bandwagoning if it's "bad" based on whatever criterion people have collectively chosen to fixate on that week.

People pour over metrics that have nothing to do with individual enjoyment of the games themselves such as playercounts or sales as if we're investors or sports team fans instead of gamers, and ultimately spend more time arguing about games' "success" than playing them. And woe betide you if you happen to disagree with the popular narrative or value subjective granularity over it.

The social part of gaming has become a meta-game unto itself, with its own "scoring" and incentive structure, and has spawned a culture where disingenuous, hostile, hyperbolic, tactically antagonistic textual conflict overshadows playing or discussing games.

It's also spawned mass inauthentic engagement. There are literally entire groups with the dedicated purpose of flooding specific games' forums. It's gotten so bad that I can't read a post now without questioning, "Does this person even mean what they're saying, or are they just parroting a specific narrative and its associated buzzwords to troll?" And, "Wait, is this just another alt of this other troll again?"

It's impossible for an old cognitively slowing person like me to tell now. And if we respond to it at all, no matter how thoughtfully or carefully, it just grows. Truth doesn't seem to matter anymore. Context and nuance don't matter anymore. Engagement = it grows, no matter what.

It puts people who are trying to be earnest, and who concede errors when they make them, at a decisive disadvantage to people willing to tactically engage in bad faith, and who will never concede error. It makes any attempt at real conversation pointless. And people are apparently fine with that.

The internet - with exceptions - killed discourse. It put an end to empathy, any sense of common good, the ability to discern false equivalency, shared epistemic reality, proportionality, nuance, recognition of subjectivity, and just plain old good will.

Those things are viewed today as quaint. In their wake instead are pettiness, memes, schadenfreude, triumphalism, confirmation bias, and simulacra. Only outrage (real or feigned) and engagement hold value now, seemingly. The algorithms (and apparently our own brains) demand it.

We live in an era where people act like saying anything is justified, so long as it antagonizes the target of their ire. Where people will be shown demonstrable evidence that what they're saying is simply untrue, ignore it, and keep repeating the same claim ad nauseum regardless.

Where people demand authenticity and expression, but then contradict that by demanding that devs bend to their whims or advocating for them to lose their livelihoods if they don't. Where people flood forums with bizarre buzzwords or phrases they came up with over and over again - sometimes for years - bumping their own topics with alts via inauthentic "conversations" that are little more than snarky, passive aggressive "shots" at others, with the sole intention of antagonism.

Where people will demand someone explain why they enjoy a game, but then when someone comprehensively does so while also listing major criticisms they have of it, will simply ignore that they ever articulated those critiques in order to continue mischaracterizing them in bad faith as a "blind defender" of it.

People don't want critique or respectful differences of opinion. People now want others to join them in a rhetorical crusade against games and their devs. If you're unwilling to have the most disproportionate, uncharitable takes possible, you're labeled "part of the problem." You become an "opponent" in the meta-game of the internet in their eyes.

I also feel people take an enormous amount for granted. We used to fantasize about games with branching stories, open worlds, customization, playstyle tailoring, huge NPC crowds, and gorgeous 3D graphics. Now we have all of that, and people say it's awful.

People demand all the best in class strengths and tech (and none of the weaknesses) of a GTA, an Elder Scrolls, a Deus Ex, and a BG3, and the polish and software engineering acumen of an Id or Nintendo, all in the same game, at a low price point. Or else it's "slop."

I understand standards evolve. I too have criticisms. I'm critical of monetization practices, I readily note flaws and drawbacks of design decisions, I acknowledge things that disrupt my ability to enjoy an experience, I lament and criticize poor marketing and corporate design imperatives, I find some things underwhelming like anyone else, and there are some games I simply don't enjoy and pass on.

But there's a difference between criticism and animus, and many people's takes often feel entirely disproportionate and hostile now. Worse, that doesn't even touch on the more extreme rhetoric that's tolerated now on Steam, as it becomes a barely more anodyne version of 4chan. I'm not here for it. I'm in poor health and just want to enjoy games. I don't want to waste time wondering if a discussion is authentic or the latest outrage inspired by a YouTuber I've never heard of.

I'll just play my games, review, and share screens. That's it. The internet was a mistake, and the angry throngs can have it. I'll be over here enjoying what I like as I have since arcades were just pinball.