This is happening more and more often these days, the non-gaming public is growing into a misinformed and moronic group of society. They can't understand, or accept, change and cannot grasp the concept of video games being more of an adult male thing than a child’s thing. "Xboxes" aren't toys and if they are treated like that, then they've been misused. They are a form of interactive entertainment that has taken advantage of technology and helped evolve a new pastime that can interact with socialising and relaxation. Kate Muir is a mother who obviously doesn't observe her children enough and who doesn't understand the concept of evolution. But chances are that even after all of my blabbering on, I still haven't got my point across. I might go out now and instigate a fight. Or I could just play with my toys.
"A sinister cabal of superior writers."
Article comments
1 - DJ
Dude I loved your article and loved your point.. Proof read first because a couple grammer mistakes make you seem silly being so picky on muir.
Also.. she said Manatee, as in the big animal... not "Man-teen"
Keep it up bro, and don't stop thinking.
2 - Gaetano
She said Man-teen a few times ;) I quoted directly
3 - Brendan
Seriously, kudos on the article my good sir. You get your point across fine.
There is no right or wrong way to live ones life. Simply the way one would -like- to live.
4 - Lisa McKay
Perhaps she's making an ass of her editor for allowing her to include the word "Xboxes" in her article instead of "Xbox's".
I'm curious as to why you think it's proper to pluralize a noun by using an apostrophe. In this case, Muir and her editor are right. The plural form of Xbox is Xboxes.
5 - Gaetano
I'm curious as to why you think it's proper to pluralize a noun by using an apostrophe. In this case, Muir and her editor are right. The plural form of Xbox is Xboxes.
It's not proper, but in the case of the word "XBOX", which is nor an abbreviation or word, XBOX's is a more stylistic choice than "XBOXES". Same situation with "CEO's". You wouldn't put "CEOES" or "cameraes". The apostrophe is purely a stylistic choice. Surely you can admit "XBOXES" just doesn't look right. When I wrote for the Herald Sun in Melbourne, Australia XBOX was always pluralized using "XBOX's"
6 - Lisa McKay
Perhaps they do things differently down under. I never learned that proper grammar was a matter of "stylistic choice."
Of course we wouldn't pluralize CEO by writing CEOES. We would, however, do so by writing CEOs. CEO is an acronym, and you would pluralize it by adding an "s", not by forcing it to look like a possessive noun when it's not. Xbox is in fact a word, in this case a proper noun.
In fact, if you peruse Microsoft's website, you'll see that they pluralize it "Xboxes" as well.
7 - Matthew T. Sussman
"Same situation with "CEO's". You wouldn't put "CEOES" or "cameraes""
CEOs; cameras
8 - Gaetano
Lisa, perhaps you're trying to point out errors in my own grammar because you're unable to understand and/or agree with my point, which seems to have taken a back seat to my stance on how to write XBOX in a plural sense. Maybe my next article should be about how video-game writers are far too often criticized for the way they write instead of what they write.
9 - Christopher Rose
Actually, I think your next article ought to be about the importance of correct grammar and spelling in aiding comprehension but am not sure you could actually write it!
Luckily I am an editor too, so I'm going to go in and fix the errors that have slipped through in this one.
10 - El Bicho
Why would you criticize Muir's mechanics, but then expect your own to be ignored?
11 - Gaetano
Don't expect anything.
12 - Ken Edwards
Wow I missed this entire lively conversation. While I have seen the term "Xboxes" used before, generally not in an article written for a web site/magazine. "The Xbox is a toy" would have been the way for her to write it.
13 - Tam Hoang
Well I won't get into the debate about spelling and grammar, but I do want to say that I thought this is a very interesting article and you do a good job of taking the counter point. Two points I had:
"But the games addiction is only a symptom of the extended childhood of the 21st-century hominid. Marriage, families and children are being delayed for as long as possible, replaced by conspiratorial flat mates and microwave gastropub ready meals. Italian men stay at home with their mother; the British and Americans want to lead a life like an endless episode of Friends."
Maybe this coming from a purely Westernized perspective, but to me the idea of families and marriage being delayed in today's society reflects more of a desire to pursue different educational, vocational and purely personal endeavors before being 'tied down' to a family responsibility. I think it's a bit of a crass generalization to say people are trying to lead a life as if it is an endless episode of Friends. And maybe she mentioned this in her article, but the delay of families and marriage, I would argue, has as much to do with the increasing empowerment of today's women to pursue their own intellectual interests as they continually push the boundaries previously set in the decades before.
The second point I had is that I do think the explosion of video gaming into mainstream acceptance and really into adult circles really stems from the kids that played the original Nintendo and Atari are simply growing up and bringing their old past times with them. I think on that point she is correct, but I think it remains to be seen how that plays a role in this generation's development.
Well done.
14 - Dean Edwards
First of all I am no relation to Ken.
Secondly your article is first rate. They way your arguement is brought across is excellent I fully agree with your points and your arguement as a whole. Congratulations a journalist that has the intelligence to look past the predetermined etiquette of society and basically say ' just because we're nerds doesnt mean that we're over weight spotty teenagers who watch pronography' And for that I thank you.
On a negative point, call it constructive criticism but you basically spend half your arguement ridiculing Muir, more of your argument should have been spend on expanding your views and opinions.
Nice work.
Who cares about your grammar, as you can tell mine isn't perfect its about what you write not how you write!