• EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Also, there’s the cost and community aspect of games. For the price of a movie ticket and popcorn, I can buy a game that I can play with friends for easily dozens of hours instead of us silently sitting next to each other for an hour or two.

      With the increasing death of third places and the increasing cost of existing outside, video games have become their own sort of third place for people to get together and just hang out.

  • Xenny@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I’m a millennial but same.

    Movies suck ass right now. And honestly videogames too.

    Videogames have replay value though so I can stick to the good ones from the past.

    Movies have rewatch value up to a point.

    Make a movie we want to see and we’ll watch it.

    • flameguy21@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      A lot of AAA games may suck right now but there’s so many awesome indie games that it’s hard to care.

    • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      To me it’s even simpler than that. Games are by design more engaging than movies, so I chose to play games.

    • SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I wouldn’t even say that movies suck right now, I just have a hard time giving attention to something for 2hrs straight with no form of interactivity.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m rapidly approaching 40, but I’m there too.

      Most “normal” people see watching a movie or playing a game as a passive experience, you’re “doing nothing.”

      For me that couldn’t be more wrong. I almost never “just” watch a movie or show, that’s wayyyy too passive for me. Playing a game is engaging, you may not be physically running around, but you absolutely are “doing something.”

      • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        That’s what I’ve been saying for years. It’s an entirely different activity that happens to involve blankly staring at a screen

  • Lad@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’ve never been a movie person, always preferred video games. Besides, many video games are like movies these days, but you interact with them.

    • TheFriar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      I mean, games are like interactive movies now. RDR2? Cyberpunk 2077? They’re great fiction and you get to be the main character. I was never a gamer, I would play here and there but could never play more than like an hour a day. Now? Especially the two games I mentioned, it blew my mind how much I could play those games. They’re excellent pieces of media.

  • 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I wonder if this might be related to the idea that modern media consumption habits are potentially trashing people’s attention spans

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      No, it is just human nature to want to do things they find more engaging. For most people games are more engaging than movies which are more engaging that books. Younger people are just more likely to have experience with all three.

      • 9point6@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m not sure it can just be that though, millennials have experience of all three too, why does the trend apparently exclude them?

        I will sometimes pick a game, sometimes a movie, sometimes a book—all can be equally engaging IMO

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Took way too long to find it in the actual report (page 12 of https://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Essential-Facts-2024-FINAL.pdf)) but it is 63% Gen Z, 55% Millenials, 33% GenX, and 14% Boomers. Nothing is being “excluded”.

          And the trend makes sense. GenX and older Millenials were the tipping point where games went from “for losers” to “for everyone”. But also? GenX and Millenials have families and careers. Playing a game gets a lot more difficult when you have kids swarming around whereas putting on a movie is something the whole family can enjoy. Same with just not wanting to touch a computer “of any form” (and ignoring that your streaming box is also a computer…) after a long day of work.

        • rigatti@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Gaming was more popular and more accessible when Gen Z was growing up, so probably more of them developed a preference for it.

        • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          The article doesn’t mention Millennials at all, but the video game market jumped over the box office before Gen Z was old enough to play games.

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah. Its immediate gratification.

        You can get into a cod or fortnite game in less than five minutes from boot to boots on the ground. You can get into a fight in an open world game in even less time. And so forth.

        If you aren’t into the (delightful) love story? The (extended cut) Fall Guy is 20 minutes to the first stunt and about 45 minutes to the first fight scene. Personally? I think the movie would have benefited from even more time with Ryan Gosling just crying to some t swizzle in the car but it (like Drive, another spectacular Gosling film that nobody but me likes) was marketed as an action movie and people are going to just take out their phones or their gameboys if you make them wait that long.

        Its similar logic to “I don’t have time to watch a 90 minute movie tonight. So instead I’ll watch six episodes of a tv show”

        • snooggums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          I think instant engagement is a better description than instant gratification. Some books, movies, and games can pull off quick engagment but a lot have a gradual buildup as well. A gradual buildup with audio, visual, and active participation is just easier to become engaged quickly.

          Some games do have rapid engagement on subsequent plays like you mentioned, although I would say COD has a pretty slow engagement for me when it starts up after an update and makes me watch those short background clips I don’t care about. Much slower than the cold open on good comedy shows or the opening scene of Jurrasic Park.

  • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    Millennials grew up with some pretty awesome movies. Gen Z and Alpha grew up with some pretty awesome video games. Makes sense.