Why 20 year old gamers are better than 50 year old gamers.

[OneKartVita]

Shadow1980 said:
I'm 36, so I split the difference. The NES was released when I was 5, and I got one of my own when I was 8. The 16-bit era occupied my pre-teen and and early teen years. I got a PS1 and N64 after I got my first job when I was 18. Three generations and another 18 years later, and here I am (rock me like a hurricane).

So, I'm young enough to where I probably have another 40-60 years of gaming in me, but old enough to have been able to experience most of the history of gaming since the 2nd gen & the Golden Age of arcade games.

Your gaming history is just as epic as your graphs!  

 

ebw said:

OneKartVita said:

I was having an argument with my friend over which age group of gamer was the best.  He was saying the older the better because they've experienced so many more gens than younger gamers.  

But I countered that with,  if you're 50,  you might only have 5 more gens of gaming left where as I'm in my twenties and I've a hell of a lot more.  I don't think you can argue with that.  

Edit: apologies to any old fogies this makes sad :'(

Of course one can argue with this specious empty logic.  You can't say "X is better than Y" because of future accomplishments that X may or may not achieve.  If gens are getting more spaced apart in time, then old gamers still win because they will experience more gens by the time they die.  By your argument, a fetus is the greatest gamer in the world.  Sorry, but that is a really weak counter.

Fetus master race FTW!  

 

You're right about gens getting longer but what I really mean is a period of time.  I was just using gens because people think like that.  What I really mean is the younger generation in their 20's have experience a number of the best gens and still have a ton of years to play.  

 

The over 50 crowd don't.  I know which I'd rather be.