For example, one of the most iconic images of gaming in the ’90s and ‘00s were LAN parties. A bunch of people taking their computers/consoles to events or friends' houses to play games like Doom, Halo, Quake, Unreal, etc...

There [in the Global South], unless you came from a wealthy background, it’s likely that you instead went to places called LAN houses, Cyber Cafes, Locadora de Jogos, PC Bangs, Game Clubs, etc. There, you would pay hourly to play, either on PC or consoles. In US media it’s an image often associated with Korean e-sports, but it’s far more present globally than LAN parties ever were.

Even within the U.S., LAN parties were never that common. The images have become romanticized in recent years, but back then for every LAN party there were dozens, if not hundreds, of “hey such and such got that new game, let’s go over other house and play it on their [insert 90’s console].” The rose-tinted glasses have caused people to see them as more prevalent and important than they actually were.

Overall, this is something I’ve thought about, mostly in the context of mobile gaming, although the Western core bias isn’t surprising. Sure, there’s a lot of slop in the mobile space, but there’s no shortage of slop in the console or PC gaming space either. It seems that’s just a rationalization for the underlying reason, that the demographics of mobile gaming aren’t the real gaming demographic.

Same deal with youth gamers. I find it wryly ironic when zoomers and younger millennials complain about Roblox not being real gaming, it’s brainrot for gen alpha kiddies. Meanwhile, I’m old enough to remember when their beloved Minecraft was the not serious, no point “game” for the young’uns and not a game for real gamers.

The games industry, and by extension gaming journalism only concerns itself with the global north's signifiers and the average global north's gamer's experiences because they are the ones bringing in the money. Just like cinema, all they care is the domestic sales, while everything else is an afterthought.

A different business model from the US, adapted for a different reality than that of the US. It sounds obvious, but for years free-to-play was vilified as something uniquely evil — while gatekeeping online games behind owning a PC and paying $60 plus expansions plus subscription was the morally superior way. A stance obviously taken by people who could afford all that.

F2P games are still seen as lesser today among elitist anglo gamers.

I must say I chuckled when the author put lan party and purchased games in the same sentence.

In my particular experience sharing pirated games was 99% of the point of a lan party.

In a way it only reinforces the author's point, everybody had a different experience that is alien to the people who weren't there. Attempting to make it all fit into a single narrative will erase most of it.

The largest movie industry in the world for probably like two decades now has been Nigeria. Have you ever watched a movie from Nigeria?

IDK, I feel like the crux of this articles argument is "Anglophone Gaming Press primarily focuses on games actually released, or played widely within the Anglophone Games Market. And this is necessarily insidious for... reasons >.>"

It just doesn't strike me as a particularly compelling issue. Even if the gaming market is becoming increasingly international in scope (Which is a good thing!), language barriers do still represent a real barrier for communication, and frequently either inform, or dictate genuine differences in how two cultures, or sets of cultures, are going to develop. Until we all decide to speak Esperanto (or Mandarin) that's likely going to remain the case in the future.

Furthermore, while gaming markets are today international, they don't have international origins. They each grew up around particular regional industries (especially so in computer games development), and those origins still impact the development trends of particular national games industries to this day. If the author wants to write a book specifically about the history of gaming in Brazil for Anglophone audiences to gain a better perspective on international games development, then they should do that! It would most likely be a positive addition to the current discourse.

I just don't get why they took it so personally, that the Anglo Gaming Press & Academia would focus primarily on the parts of gaming history that are most relevant to it's own development.

I remember this dude. He's the dude who wrote/edited that massive tome on the history of CRPGs.