New term for the new breed of collectors?

[Link | 2,710]

9 hours ago, LeatherRebel5150 said:

No I think he is clearly being malicious

erry day

[ConfusedCollector | 36]

12 hours ago, fcgamer said:

Nope, it's not malicious at all. I was sitting at a 7-11 yesterday drinking a beer around lunchtime, after meeting up with the notorious Changhua storehouse guy and buying some games from him, waiting before heading down to a cultural antiques market later that day.

I was just turning things over in my head and began thinking to myself, perhaps the reason that some of the old guard gets funny about the new sort of collector and way if thinking extends further than just epeen or worry of fakes. It was then that I had a theory of sorts.

Words often have certain connotations attached to them, some that are universally recognised and others that may be more of personal taste. To me personally, when I hear "collection", I think about another word with a shared route, collectable:

"an object suitable for a collection, originally a work of fine art or an antique, now including also any of a wide variety of items collected as a hobby, for display, or as an investment whose value may appreciate."

Now the meaning for collection can even be useless garbage such as a collection of McDonald's sandwich wrappers, but due to the relationship with the word "collectable", I personally see a collection as having some sort of value, whether intrinsic, artistic, historic, investment, etc.

At this point someone will call me out and mention that modern repros can fill these voids and while I agree, it's the same reason we don't talk about people collecting prints of famous Picassos.

So I think a new term could be applied, without being condescending or an asshole, rather just to distinguish the same way that Guns n Roses and Justin Bieber shouldn't be grouped together musically, despite both falling under a large umbrella group.

Hope this clears things up a bit.

@LeatherRebel5150As for the rest, I have no issues with you. I just felt I  was just getting shat on left and right that day on the forums, after trying to be genuinely helpful, sorry if I acted poorly towards you.

So, my girlfriend collects prints of art from local artists when we go on trips. We maybe have 1 or 2 items that could be considered original paintings.  It's inexpensive and supports the artist.  I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but almost everyone on this forum collects "prints" when they are buying video games.  One could argue that prototype cartridges are the closest thing to original art if we're going down that road.

When the artist passes or stops producing the prints, a person might look to etsy for a reproduction.  It's something they like and it couldn't be obtained reasonably otherwise.  They want to look at it and appreciate it, but getting an original or originally produced print is impossible and wouldn't support the artist anyways.

So what are game reproductions? They fall into the camp of the artist is gone and it's unavailable for a reasonable sum. Someone is making a repro of it available for a reasonable amount.

Let's be real, I doubt people buying prints of artwork are on the radar of real art collectors.  An art collector that isn't toxic would probably have no problem talking about the art with someone that appreciates it but can only afford a summation of it through a reproduction.  It's about the art and what it makes you feel, not having the original brushed product (for 99% of the world).  

As it relates to emulation and downloading roms, no one is telling people that buy reproductions of artwork that they should only buy coffee table books or look at images online.  That they have no right to hang it on their wall and call themselves an art collector.  No one really cares....It's ok to buy a reproduction print.  

I don't normally engage in this type of internet argument but we label everyone anymore in society and I just don't see it as necessary in this hobby.  My two cents.

[the_wizard_666 | 1,325]

1 hour ago, ConfusedCollector said:

So, my girlfriend collects prints of art from local artists when we go on trips. We maybe have 1 or 2 items that could be considered original paintings.  It's inexpensive and supports the artist.  I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but almost everyone on this forum collects "prints" when they are buying video games.  One could argue that prototype cartridges are the closest thing to original art if we're going down that road.

When the artist passes or stops producing the prints, a person might look to etsy for a reproduction.  It's something they like and it couldn't be obtained reasonably otherwise.  They want to look at it and appreciate it, but getting an original or originally produced print is impossible and wouldn't support the artist anyways.

So what are game reproductions? They fall into the camp of the artist is gone and it's unavailable for a reasonable sum. Someone is making a repro of it available for a reasonable amount.

Let's be real, I doubt people buying prints of artwork are on the radar of real art collectors.  An art collector that isn't toxic would probably have no problem talking about the art with someone that appreciates it but can only afford a summation of it through a reproduction.  It's about the art and what it makes you feel, not having the original brushed product (for 99% of the world).  

As it relates to emulation and downloading roms, no one is telling people that buy reproductions of artwork that they should only buy coffee table books or look at images online.  That they have no right to hang it on their wall and call themselves an art collector.  No one really cares....It's ok to buy a reproduction print.  

I don't normally engage in this type of internet argument but we label everyone anymore in society and I just don't see it as necessary in this hobby.  My two cents.

I couldn't have said it better myself dude!

When I started collecting in the '90s, games were abundant, cheap, and easily obtained.  Even the rarest of the rare could be had for next to nothing because nobody gave a crap.  As the hobby grew into more of a mainstream market, demand skyrocketed.  As such, so did the prices.  What was easily a manageable hobby in the late '90s/early 2000 on a minimum wage salary (not a whole hell of a lot...back then it was $5/hr CDN, with about a 65 cent exchange rate) has since got to the point where the barrier to entry is a LOT higher.  As such, the market for bootlegs (including repros, as they are simply bootlegs under a different name) has increased alongside the collector's market.  Thing is, you don't  need the original to enjoy the game.  Some people want a large collection of individual carts, but can't afford the legit thing.  While I don't condone the practice, I understand the appeal of someone wanting something on their shelf that looks, feels, and plays legit, even if it doesn't hold any real value.  Sure, you can play the game via emulation, or a Power Pak or Everdrive or whatever, but there's an appeal to having it on the shelf in a singular format that a ROM on a computer simply doesn't have.  So why are so many collectors hell-bent on ostracizing those who can't afford to break into the hobby, or who didn't get in before it was cool?  There are a myriad of reasons someone might choose a repro over a legit copy.  There are, however, no reasons to attack their choice.

[Tanooki | 4,933]

Haha I love that collecting prints comparison.

You can get the original off the artist (prototype), or an original print (first run games in the period), and then you get the unauthorized copies you find hanging in cheap frames in medical offices (your 1:1 copies some love to bitch about now.)  You get the same value out of either, if you're into it for the aesthetics of the print on the surface(what it looks like in your hand) or its artistic internal meaning(the game on the board/chips) you'll get your value all the same.  Some will bitch about the doctors office copy being a cheap poster paper knockoff, largely others won't give a shit because they can enjoy the subject matter along the spectrum.  That's an impressive comparison there I wish I had thought of.

[fcgamer | 4,723]

9 hours ago, ConfusedCollector said:

So, my girlfriend collects prints of art from local artists when we go on trips. We maybe have 1 or 2 items that could be considered original paintings.  It's inexpensive and supports the artist.  I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but almost everyone on this forum collects "prints" when they are buying video games.  One could argue that prototype cartridges are the closest thing to original art if we're going down that road.

When the artist passes or stops producing the prints, a person might look to etsy for a reproduction.  It's something they like and it couldn't be obtained reasonably otherwise.  They want to look at it and appreciate it, but getting an original or originally produced print is impossible and wouldn't support the artist anyways.

So what are game reproductions? They fall into the camp of the artist is gone and it's unavailable for a reasonable sum. Someone is making a repro of it available for a reasonable amount.

Let's be real, I doubt people buying prints of artwork are on the radar of real art collectors.  An art collector that isn't toxic would probably have no problem talking about the art with someone that appreciates it but can only afford a summation of it through a reproduction.  It's about the art and what it makes you feel, not having the original brushed product (for 99% of the world).  

As it relates to emulation and downloading roms, no one is telling people that buy reproductions of artwork that they should only buy coffee table books or look at images online.  That they have no right to hang it on their wall and call themselves an art collector.  No one really cares....It's ok to buy a reproduction print.  

I don't normally engage in this type of internet argument but we label everyone anymore in society and I just don't see it as necessary in this hobby.  My two cents.

While I agree with almost what you are saying, your post misses the mark, and actually goes along with what my original post was saying.

[fcgamer | 4,723]

9 hours ago, ConfusedCollector said:

Let's be real, I doubt people buying prints of artwork are on the radar of real art collectors.

Even in your analogy post you are dividing the types of art collectors into different subjects, and even calling one subset "real" art collectors, implying that another subset isn't real.

9 hours ago, ConfusedCollector said:

 Let's be real, I doubt people buying prints of artwork are on the radar of real art collectors.  An art collector that isn't toxic would probably have no problem talking about the art with someone that appreciates it but can only afford a summation of it through a reproduction.  It's about the art and what it makes you feel, not having the original brushed product (for 99% of the world).  

I think it's likely that many of those buying the reproduction carts aren't on the radar of those collecting the originals, either, aside from any concerns from those trying to avoid overpaying and being duped by counterfeits, for example.

8 hours ago, the_wizard_666 said:

So why are so many collectors hell-bent on ostracizing those who can't afford to break into the hobby, or who didn't get in before it was cool?  There are a myriad of reasons someone might choose a repro over a legit copy.  There are, however, no reasons to attack their choice.

I don't think anyone is attacking their choice at all, and similar to the Confused Collector's post, all I'm seeing and hearing is about snobbery and hostility and what not, though it completely misses the point. I think this analogy is better:

Do you like watching football?

Now here are some possible answers:

1. I like watching high school football.

2. I like watching university football.

3. I like the atmosphere and tailgating, but I don't give a rat's ass about the game.

4. I like watching NFL.

5. I'm the football equivalent of those who only go to church on Christmas and Easter, i.e. I'll only watch the Superbowl.

6. I like watching football in the pub or on TV only

7. Oh you mean American football? I only like what you guys call soccer.

8. I like playing football, but dont like watching it.

Etc etc etc.

These things all fit into the category of "liking to watch football", buy some one that enjoys one of these might not enjoy the rest, similarly someone might enjoy them all.

Despite these all relating to football, they would and should be grouped as different entities, different hobbies. Video games should be no different.

The people buying those types of games likely aren't the same ones on here, who likely aren't the same ones buying million dollar N64 games. There is crossover between different groups, for sure, but in the end, it's different hobbies, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

A jazz musician and a rocker can admire each other's abilities, and even perform together, but at the end of the day, they are likely to be in different circles, listening to different music, whilst hanging around with different people.

So while I'm all for inclusion and respect for how and what people want to play or collect, whether it's ROMs or old fakes or repros or legits or sealeds, at the same time to suggest that they're all part of the exact same hobby is a bit disingenuous, and that's why we have (respectful) terms to group the subsets.

[a3quit4s | 4,097]

This thread reeks of that NA we’re better than you and we know it attitude. 

We are all people buying games, the reason doesn’t matter. As far as I’m concerned the more people interested in the hobby the more likely we are to uncover cool shit. 

Classifying people based on their reason for buying is pretty useless.  

[fcgamer | 4,723]

53 minutes ago, a3quit4s said:

This thread reeks of that NA we’re better than you and we know it attitude. 

We are all people buying games, the reason doesn’t matter. As far as I’m concerned the more people interested in the hobby the more likely we are to uncover cool shit. 

Classifying people based on their reason for buying is pretty useless.  

There you are, missing the point just like everyone else,!!!

What is wrong with there being different hobbies that all involve video games, look at the scenario with football above!!!

It's so stupid, it's like the idea in Taiwan that every white person has to be friends with one another, just because we share the same skin tone, are a minority, and live in the same city...

Investors looking solely to earn cash aren't in the same hobby as historians, looking to preserve history, who aren't in the same hobby as gamers, just looking to play good games, who aren't in the same hobby as...

It's an ignorant idea, that ultimately divides people and starts fights, trying to force everyone to accept each other under one umbrella. Different but respect is a much better way

 

[fcgamer | 4,723]

17 hours ago, Link said:

erry day

Yeah sure says the guy that pops in here to stir the pot, then jumps out again, nothing constructive to say

[Reed Rothchild | 9,526]

8 hours ago, a3quit4s said:

This thread reeks of that NA we’re better than you and we know it attitude. 

We are all people buying games, the reason doesn’t matter. As far as I’m concerned the more people interested in the hobby the more likely we are to uncover cool shit. 

Classifying people based on their reason for buying is pretty useless.  

 

[the_wizard_666 | 1,325]

8 hours ago, a3quit4s said:

This thread reeks of that NA we’re better than you and we know it attitude. 

We are all people buying games, the reason doesn’t matter. As far as I’m concerned the more people interested in the hobby the more likely we are to uncover cool shit. 

Classifying people based on their reason for buying is pretty useless.  

You mean the shit that made me go AWOL so frequently?  Yeah, I'm feeling a lot of that here too.  Thankfully it's confined to only a couple of discussions, rather than the entire fucking forum like it was there.

[fox | 1,667]

The Reproletariat must be taught their place

[ExplodedHamster | 404]

3 hours ago, the_wizard_666 said:

You mean the shit that made me go AWOL so frequently?  Yeah, I'm feeling a lot of that here too.  Thankfully it's confined to only a couple of discussions, rather than the entire fucking forum like it was there.

Yup, drove me away, too. Seriously, who gives a shit what other collectors want to collect? And it was the same 3-5 topics repeatedly lol.

[T-Pac | 7,542]

As long as categorizing doesn’t equate to stereotyping, I don’t see what’s wrong with coining terms for different types of collector. 

In the retro-gaming hobby, we already categorize ourselves as gamers, collectors, homebrewers, etc. None of these labels are inherently demeaning, separative, or mutually exclusive unless someone misuses them based on pre-existing biases. So I don’t see why subcategories would be much different, but maybe I'm misunderstanding something here...

In skateboarding, we love subcategories. Tech skaters, stair skaters, freestylers, etc. It’s a reflection of the hobby’s broadness, and it allows people to hone in on their particular areas of interest and branch out into multiple others.

-CasualCart

[fcgamer | 4,723]

1 hour ago, CasualCart said:

As long as categorizing doesn’t equate to stereotyping, I don’t see what’s wrong with coining terms for different types of collector. 

In the retro-gaming hobby, we already categorize ourselves as gamers, collectors, homebrewers, etc. None of these labels are inherently demeaning, separative, or mutually exclusive unless someone misuses them based on pre-existing biases. So I don’t see why subcategories would be much different, but maybe I'm misunderstanding something here...

In skateboarding, we love subcategories. Tech skaters, stair skaters, freestylers, etc. It’s a reflection of the hobby’s broadness, and it allows people to hone in on their particular areas of interest and branch out into multiple others.

-CasualCart

Agree 100%

[tidaldreams | 654]

inb4 the lock

[the_wizard_666 | 1,325]

1 hour ago, tidaldreams said:

inb4 the lock

Gloves has already been here.  It hasn't been locked yet.  And as long as it stays civil, I doubt it will get there.

[ConfusedCollector | 36]

19 hours ago, fcgamer said:

Even in your analogy post you are dividing the types of art collectors into different subjects, and even calling one subset "real" art collectors, implying that another subset isn't real.

I think it's likely that many of those buying the reproduction carts aren't on the radar of those collecting the originals, either, aside from any concerns from those trying to avoid overpaying and being duped by counterfeits, for example.

I don't think anyone is attacking their choice at all, and similar to the Confused Collector's post, all I'm seeing and hearing is about snobbery and hostility and what not, though it completely misses the point. I think this analogy is better:

Do you like watching football?

Now here are some possible answers:

1. I like watching high school football.

2. I like watching university football.

3. I like the atmosphere and tailgating, but I don't give a rat's ass about the game.

4. I like watching NFL.

5. I'm the football equivalent of those who only go to church on Christmas and Easter, i.e. I'll only watch the Superbowl.

6. I like watching football in the pub or on TV only

7. Oh you mean American football? I only like what you guys call soccer.

8. I like playing football, but dont like watching it.

Etc etc etc.

These things all fit into the category of "liking to watch football", buy some one that enjoys one of these might not enjoy the rest, similarly someone might enjoy them all.

Despite these all relating to football, they would and should be grouped as different entities, different hobbies. Video games should be no different.

The people buying those types of games likely aren't the same ones on here, who likely aren't the same ones buying million dollar N64 games. There is crossover between different groups, for sure, but in the end, it's different hobbies, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

A jazz musician and a rocker can admire each other's abilities, and even perform together, but at the end of the day, they are likely to be in different circles, listening to different music, whilst hanging around with different people.

So while I'm all for inclusion and respect for how and what people want to play or collect, whether it's ROMs or old fakes or repros or legits or sealeds, at the same time to suggest that they're all part of the exact same hobby is a bit disingenuous, and that's why we have (respectful) terms to group the subsets.

You're moving the goal posts because you can't make a coherent argument.  You start the thread using the term amassers to put a group of people down. Then pretend like it's tongue in cheek when people call you out.   

[ConfusedCollector | 36]

20 hours ago, fcgamer said:

While I agree with almost what you are saying, your post misses the mark, and actually goes along with what my original post was saying.

My post does not support your argument in any way.  Reread it.

[Dr. Morbis | 2,088]

7 minutes ago, the_wizard_666 said:

Gloves has already been here.  It hasn't been locked yet.  And as long as it stays civil, I doubt it will get there.

fcgamer is in this thread........

(Hint: look at the primary poster in the last two locked topics on this forum )

Edited November 10, 2021 by Dr. Morbis

[ConfusedCollector | 36]

5 hours ago, CasualCart said:

As long as categorizing doesn’t equate to stereotyping, I don’t see what’s wrong with coining terms for different types of collector. 

In the retro-gaming hobby, we already categorize ourselves as gamers, collectors, homebrewers, etc. None of these labels are inherently demeaning, separative, or mutually exclusive unless someone misuses them based on pre-existing biases. So I don’t see why subcategories would be much different, but maybe I'm misunderstanding something here...

In skateboarding, we love subcategories. Tech skaters, stair skaters, freestylers, etc. It’s a reflection of the hobby’s broadness, and it allows people to hone in on their particular areas of interest and branch out into multiple others.

-CasualCart

I think the issue I have is that it's not respectful in any way. OP is trying to make a distinction that elevates some collectors over others.  

[fcgamer | 4,723]

1 hour ago, ConfusedCollector said:

You're moving the goal posts because you can't make a coherent argument.  You start the thread using the term amassers to put a group of people down. Then pretend like it's tongue in cheek when people call you out.   

Nope, I'm not moving the goal posts.

I stated my rationale, it was just one term I thought of that would be neutral, if someone has a better choice than please share it.

[fcgamer | 4,723]

1 hour ago, ConfusedCollector said:

I think the issue I have is that it's not respectful in any way. OP is trying to make a distinction that elevates some collectors over others.  

It only elevates some over others if you or others choose to do that.

Acoustic guitar, Spanish guitar, and electric guitar are all different, is one elevated over the other?

Is watching an NFL game elevated over watching a high school game?

There shouldn't be elevation, they're just different things.

If you are trying to promote elevation of one or the other, thats strictly your problem and something you should address, possibly starting with an attitude change.

[fcgamer | 4,723]

1 hour ago, Dr. Morbis said:

fcgamer is in this thread........

(Hint: look at the primary poster in the last two locked topics on this forum )

Just let me alone, first posting old pictures of me and now this.

Seriously, grow up or something.

[inasuma | 1,203]

I get the feeling folks on this thread are reading deep into the terminology being used in the OP. “Divide” is inherently a strong word but at the end of the day we’re talking about video game enthusiasts with a mixture of activities within one singular hobby: video games.

I don’t consider these “divisions” to be sub-hobbies or even sub-groups. Obviously that can breed resentment and stereotypes. But I don’t think I’d accuse @fcgamerof creating that atmosphere here; seems more like the intention didn’t match the explanation.