Interesting link, albeit pretty much content-free. I'm going to have to assume two things:

1) "gamers" were actually CS students on the BSc or MSc track.
2) "gamers" didn't have the attitude "lets fuck big pharma if they give us a chance"

Here we have a crowd developing a revolutionary financial solution and the prevailing attitude is: fuck accountants and the GAAP-horse they rode on. I think I know how that is going to end: they lawyer will tell them that the only words they are allowed to speak are: "Yes, your honor!". It is very much similar to the new drivers who only learn how to drive after they had to stand before the judge.

I haven't worked with anyone from entertainment industry background for many years. But from the past I remember well that there were clear distinction between at least two groups:

A) those who could persuasively discuss the drawbacks and benefits of duo-quaternions and 4-by-4 homogenous matrices.
Z) those who had very twitchy fingers and traded rants: "OpenGL rules and you are paid MSFT shill!" vs. "DirectX rules and you are SGI troll!".

Do you (or any one else here) have an idea or suggestion how the game development community separates wheat like (A) from the chaff like (Z)?