On December 17 2010 12:31 Glasse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2010 11:13 Proximo wrote:On December 17 2010 10:47 TheGiftedApe wrote:
Sports are athletic competitions played by athletes. Video games don't require athletics.
Poker is considered a sport. How is the most luck based game, which requires no physical training at all, considered a sport? I feel like your definition isn't right. Well, I don't think games like football are any more or less based on luck than Poker, with Poker it's just easy to grasp that it's a game of change.
You have to realize that the difference between a goal and a miss is basically a tiny amount of wind.
Basically, a good unit of luck is 'upset possibility', how often does it happen that a player considered lesser can beat a player considered better. Football is laden with examples such as Greek and Denmark winning Euro championships and other stuff, with single matches it's even worse, it's simply extremely possible that a team which on average performs far worse beats a strong team. Of course, the luck factor is filtered out over many games, which does justify that there is also a great deal of skill involved, but the luck factor is still fairly high, not per se higher than with Poker. I mean, there are very large, complex books written about the maths and the theory of poker, so indeed, there is strategy involved. Another thing about poker is that luck is filtered out already a bit because there are multiple betting rounds.
The ultimate luckless game seems to be go at this point, because upsets simply barely happen, it makes the game quite dull. If you know the name of the players, you can determine with 90% certainty who's going to win basically.
Luck is really a large factor of many games, it's just more explicit with poker, nonetheless not less present.
The point besides is that 'sport' is a vague term, various sports do not feature competition at all, some sports are also completely solitary, squash is a sport often played alone.
Another point about a variety of sports considered 'competitively' is that you do not really play against each other. You play besides each other against the clock, or against what-ever and you compare afterwards who did best. It's often explicitly forbidden in such sports to hinder each other, such as swimming, or cycling, or a marathon. It's hardly competitive in that way I would say. Mechanically swimming would be the same if each got to swim separately and they told them afterwards who won. But not as exciting for the audience no doubt.
|
There are several things that makes e-sports diffrent from regular sports, and thing that make them very similar.
Both have comptetive aspects, are mentaly draining etc etc.
Then there are the diffrences
Sports have been around for ages, they promote physical fitness, which in todays society is very key, beeing healthy and looking good, is often the staple of a successfull indivdual. E-sports isnt associted with any of it (please dont read it as that gamers are unattractive, i hope you get my point), and pro player need to work on thier health outside their playtime, which is key to prevent diesies like carple tunnel. Also remeber that the sterotypical "gamer" until recently has been a either a fat/very skinny pale nerd, which dosnt help out much.Im not going to get into social skills, while team based sports promots these, i dont see how team based E-sports like CS wouldnt do the samething, mayby starcraft specific dosnt improve social skills, but even there you have team mates to practise and talk starts with.
Parents view
While you can say things like "our parents didnt grow up with video games, therefore they dont understand us",i dont think is true, i think parents very well could adapt to you playing games professionally, but there porblem lies with the fact that games are infact a WASTE OF TIME, just like many forms of entertainment, for 95% if us, its a waste of time, its fun, but there is nothing we can gain from it in life, other then entertainment, atleast sports will make you healthy (unless you over do it), and in somecases it will able you to get a good education, scholarships are often given to prime athletes, which is another thing parents generally promote.
so in short, parents cant understand it, because most of the time is a waste of time, and are no benefits other then entertainment, yes some goes pro, but even then you are barely makeing money to live, not more then working at mcdonalds (yes there are the uber skilled 80k USD GSL winners, but even if you get top 64? you win what 300 USD? and i doubt you get alot of cash from sponors from getting to64). Why would a parent promot this when the child can go to collage, get a good education and later a well paid job?
Why E-sports never can be rival to regular sports.
Even if E-sports gain more social acceptence, it will never, ever rival sports,why? because games are short lived, in 20 years will we be playing sc 2? no, will fotball,basketball and soccer stll exist? yes, This will be a problem, since basically every new generation of gamers are going to follow a diffrent game, so there will allways be a generational block, unlike sports, where you granfather can be as excited about a soccer game as his 12 year old grandson,
Mayby in the future there will be a really good game that can last for a long time,but i highly doubt it.
|
EPT
