EPTE-Sports is not a Sport (Armchair Athleticism) - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Zdrastochye
Ivory Coast6262 Posts
| ||
|
tuestresfat
2555 Posts
| ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
| ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
hey everyone, Philosopher wrote a nice lengthy reply to refute my article (: Opinions there would be awesome as well! | ||
|
Ballack
Norway821 Posts
| ||
|
Pimpmuckl
Germany528 Posts
| ||
|
Jeremy Reimer
Canada1033 Posts
So regular sports change, albeit more slowly. That's not a good reason to say that eSports isn't "sports". A good reason would be simply that the type of competition is different, and relies on electronic components and software as an intermediary rather than physical objects such as sticks, pucks, balls, etc. That's a big difference, and an important one. That's why the "e" is there in eSports. To make it different. To point out that it is different. People get hung up on the physical exercise part, but I think that's an emotional reaction to the age-old jocks-versus-nerds argument. But with the word "eSports", the WORD ITSELF acknowledges that it is different. It shares many parts of sports: teams, training regimens, tournaments, fans, trades, gossip, sponsorships. It does not share the SAME sort of physical effort (although pulling high APMs consistently is a form of exercise, it's not what is traditionally thought of as sports) But again, why would the physical part make it NOT sports just because it is a different form of physical activity? Look at curling. It is defined in Wikipedia as a sport: "Curling is a sport in which players slide stones across a sheet of ice towards a target area which is segmented into four rings." SPORT. Now, curling takes some physical exercise, but it's not really like other sports, is it? Yet it's defined as a sport. So the AMOUNT of physical exercise isn't what makes something a sport or not. So the AMOUNT of change in the game rules doesn't make something a sport or not a sport, because some sports change faster than others and slow or fast change doesn't make it a sport or not a sport. The AMOUNT of physical exercise doesn't make something a sport or not a sport. Otherwise, curling would not be a sport, as it has significantly less physical activity than other sports. The difference is the need for computers and software. That's the "e" part in "eSports". It's a perfectly acceptable word. | ||
|
Phil0s0pher
Australia317 Posts
In an extremely interesting and thought-provoking article, Michael Cohen over at Armchair Athleticism impressed me that I decided to write a reply. While I agree with most of the points raised by the article in question, I can’t help but not agree with the conclusion that is reached from these points. The articles’ argument is summarized as follows E-Sports is not necessarily spots, but is an accurate term to help the general public understand what E-Sports composes of Firstly let us state that the reply I am making may be somewhat theoretically involved. The arguments against Cohen are not intended to show mistaken views of another, but to form a dialogue that may be continued into the future. While I agree that the term ‘E-sports’ is primarily used as a tool to explain competitive gaming to the uninitiated, I don’t agree that e-sports is not necessarily a sports. Let us being by invoking what the use of the word ‘necessary’ may imply in this context. In order for something (x) to be necessarily something else (y), x must satisfy the conditions of y. An obvious example of this is that of the Bachelor. For William to be a bachelor, he must fulfill necessarily the conditions of being a bachelor, namely, being a unmarried, male adult. If William is a male adult, but married, he does not necessarily fulfill the conditions of being a bachelor. Similarly, if E-sports is necessarily a sport, as I wish to argue in this post, contra Cohen, then I must show that E-sports fulfills the necessary conditions of being a sport. The question for me then becomes 1. What are the conditions of something being a sport? 2. Do the E-sports group necessarily fit these conditions? Now, we may go the basic route and look up the dictionary definition of the term Sport: An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others. This can either be in a professional format or within a casual environment. Upon this definition we can presumably argue then that those games usually understood within the context of E-sports are to be understood as sports (though this too may also rely on a semantic discussion on the notion of ‘physical exertion’) However this does not satisfy my own goals for this article, nor do I think Cohen would be satisfied with that form of argument. My goal then is to go through Cohen’s own article countering his argument, while trying to provide examples and arguments for my contention. Before I begin to get in depth about the e-sports aspect of the article in particular, I want to pick up on one specific thing. Cohen begins their article by stating that comparing e-sports to professional mainstream sports can be a poor perspective that ultimately narrows and shapes it to be something that it cannot feasibly become (but may be something even more) I think can be quite true of many comparisons, but comparisons between competitive gaming (e-sports) and “traditional sports” can actually help us in encouraging development within areas of e-sports that my struggle. I think we can look at the current state of Starcraft 2 in particular, in which, to some extent, we have an over-saturation of events and ask, how do we maximize e-sports without incurring both player fatigue and viewer fatigue? This I can be worked out by comparing models of particular sporting codes with e-sports codes (FPS, RTS, ARTS etc), but that is a discussion for another time. The main point to get across here is that I think Cohen is to narrow in the scope of how he understands comparison. We may look at academia to show how comparisons don’t narrow scopes or specific relations, but open up broader categories of discussion. Now, Cohen is not specifically saying that E-sports is not a sport, but that it is not necessarily a sport, and to some extent, makes the allusion that E-sports goes beyond traditional sports. Cohen presents three examples that show how E-sports may sufficiently be a sport, but is not necessarily a sport. The author argues that there are three levels which allow one to understand the subculture of E-sports, these being Competitive Gaming: competitive gaming being without the spectators or much of a news media following. Essentially, it’s just the game, the players and the small community who were active or involved in the organizing of competitions. As we step further out into the second-level, we start introducing the large following of communities such as Team Liquid, the sub-reddits as well as large-scale events to connect further these online communities into a gaming expo-like setting. This is E-Sports. E-Sports is a spectacle to dress and curtain the core game and competition. The atmosphere is what is the most appealing for events such as IGN’s Pro League, North-American Star League finals and Major League Gaming which helps add flair and life to something that occurs within computer systems. The roaring fans and the enthusiastic and excited commentators are areas that help emphasize and improve the excitement of what goes in the game. These elements are found within mainstream sports and are why we title competitive gaming as E-Sports. E-sports Population Activity is an overview of how popular, active and worthwhile is E-Sports for these companies. It takes into account of the core of the game, its active teams and progamers, leagues and events as well as growth of community websites. I titled EPA as a global measurement to help identify just how popular and strong this subcultures growth is. For some games such as Tribes: Ascend and Street Fighter x Tekken, their EPA has been greatly reduced despite numerous attempts at trying to improve it (this could be for a variety of issues). Team Fortress 2, also a popular competitive game, is not as popularly viewed as Counter-Strike for other reasons. Their EPA is low and thus perhaps why companies aim to not acknowledge, improve or work towards changing that (because it isn’t realistically feasible for the company’s resources to devote towards or maybe because the company sees other more profitable ways to take advantage of their video-game product). There isn’t much to disagree with these definitions, or the way in which they are used to describe the culture of e-sports and they basically mimic the structures of the traditional sporting arena. But there may be some points of contention that can be addressed. In terms of competitive gaming this, as Cohen says really forms the core of any gaming community. Those players who seek to establish a small grass roots level of competition. However, it should also be noted that grass roots competitions are the lifeblood of any professional gaming league. Millions of dollars is spent on little leagues, Junior Rugby, Cricket, Basketball and Soccer to encourage boys and girls to take up these sports. A question that the e-sports community needs to address, and one that I hope to address later in this blog series is how does the community respond to grass roots endeavors? Furthermore Cohen states that E-sports itself (apart from competitive gaming) can be understood in terms of the glitz and glamor, the ability to show off the core gaming community. It is the internet that allows for this aspect of the e-sports community to take off, it is forums such as teamliquid.net, reddit and twitter which fuel the growth of e-sport. I don’t disagree with that statement, I think it is fundamentally true that without the internet and without the use of social media, e-sports would not have grown to the place it is today. What I am skeptical about is that Cohen thinks that the spectacle of e-sports is why we title competitive gaming as e-sports. I don’t think this is correct, I think Cohen has neglected the similarities between competitive gaming groups and grass roots sporting communities. The third level takes on an extremely complex issue, but an important one that should be addressed and that is the interaction of gaming companies within E-sports. I won’t deal with this specific aspects here but of the complex and intertwining issues that need to be addressed within it, I will however say that I think the EPA measurement that Cohen introduces is a good way to begin such a process. Let us move on to the final aspect. If both E-sports and traditional sports follow this similar structure, the question is why isn’t e-sports a sports? According to Cohen Because the game changes. The core game mechanics improve, change, and are biased towards one side or another….. These varied factors help keep the game fresh, new and entertaining. It displays unlimited possibilities that surpass that of sports on a basic ruled level. The above statement is perhaps the most controversial aspect of the piece. Cohen argues that E-sports aren’t sports because of the evolution of the games themselves. But I wonder whether Cohen falls into the trap they warned us of at the start of the article. I think at this point Cohen’s definition of sport has become so narrow that it can’t transcend its own being. Sport, because of what we think it is, cannot ever transcend into something else. The discourse on what a sport is, cannot be challenged if we accept Armchair’s point here, I say we should disregard this point and go back to the point on comparative analysis. This point was that such analyzes are useful as long as they don’t attempt to constrain us in any way. Furthermore, I don’t think the points made by Armchair about E-sports necessarily deter it from being labeled a sport. They write The core game mechanics improve, change, and are biased towards one side or another Yes this is a completely agreeable statement, but it neglects the fact that the core mechanics of sports change all the time. If we watch Football, Soccer, Cricket, Basketball or Tennis games from 50 years ago we will see a different style of play, a different mechanic of how to approach strategy and etc. I may here be confused by the way Cohen uses the term mechanic (I understand it as basically the tools of the trade). Let us take an example. Cohen writes n StarCraft, you have three asymmetrical races that have their pros and cons, in ARTS games such as DotA, you have a multitude of heroes that interact with one another differently. For FPS games, a variety of guns also means countless approaches towards taking down your opponent. As such, I think Cohen is using the term in the way I understand it, that is as a tool or the ‘means of production’ of the game. Now if we take this understand we can also apply it to traditional sporting games as well. In Australia, where the game of cricket is extremely popular, the ‘means of production’ of a Cricket game are a bat, a leather ball, and a cricket pitch. If you ever watch a cricket match you’ll notice the commentators talking a lot about the pitch or the type of cricket bat that the player is using. How he uses such tools in the game. Cricket pitches in Australia are extremely different to those in India, Sri Lanka and the West Indies for various reasons and they change according to weather and maintenance. Game Patches, Hot fixes and alike all work the same way as Cricket pitches or football fields. They are the place which the game takes place and whoever understands the patch, pitch or field better also has a better chance at winning. We can understand the developers as the people who look after the patch, pitch or field. I’m deeply skeptical of the assumption that Blizzard tries to influence game play, I think this may be false. I’d rather like to say that they try to do something to the ‘field’ that will increase the chances of something else happening. Others have talked about ‘changing rules’ and such, but I think the discussion on mechanics is much clearer by talking about tools in the way I have done above. Finally Cohen writes The reality is that E-Sports will always be a “you’re either in or you’re out” sort of pond and because most current adults have grown being out of video-games or not as competitively involved with it, most are definitely out. However, as the digital age encompasses more generations and old values start to shrink, the accessibility and acceptance of video-games and potentially E-Sports is bound to expand. Most sports tend to be “you’re either in or you’re out” types of affairs. Sports are also deeply rooted in nationalistic tendencies, when a country tends to do well in a sport that sport would have a certain following within that country. Cricket of course is a good example in Australia, but so is Soccer. Until the 2006 Soccer World Cup in Germany, the sport was hardly mentioned in the media, was not a big sport at grass roots, but then Australia suddenly started doing reasonably well and now , 7 years on, we have a reinvigorated A-League and a well supported Soccer team. When mOOnGLaDe, the Australian Starcraft player, when to the WCS in Shanghai we actually saw a couple of articles in national newspapers about E-sports, even though he didn’t win, there was something about having an Australian participate which made some (not many) people look up. I want to end this on a positive note. I think I have successful shown contra Cohen’s arguments that E-sports can be considered a sport, I think it is wrong to understand ‘mainstream’ sports as the definition of sports, Sports come and go, they evolve and die out. The definition of sports should always be in a state of flux trying to determine itself. Perhaps the next stage in this determination is the advent of E-sports, perhaps E-sports has already reached its Nadir. I want to mirror something that Cohen did say that, E-sports has the potential to expand beyond limits that anyone thought imaginable. But we need to do this as a community, we need to expand grass roots exposure and show Adults and kids alike that video games are cool and they are a sport. | ||
|
Redox
Germany24794 Posts
No matter what word you put onto it, it doesnt change the nature or entertainment value of competetive gaming one bit. edit: I guess the poster after me said it better lol. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18835 Posts
| ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
"Sport" isn't clearly defined. Heck "game" isn't clearly defined either...there are confusing boundaries for many words, and its uncertain when one word's meaning fades into that of another word. Language is naturally somewhat ambiguous, because no one defines things so precisely from the outset - sport has always been understood in terms of our common sense. No one actually goes to the dictionary to reaffirm what they believe sports are, it is just something that is understood in broad terms through popular usage; as with many other words, their definition is determined primarily by context. Therefore, I think that trying to ascertain what should or shouldn't be considered a sport on such a technical level, when the term itself is unclear and meant to be understood only in broad terms, is an exercise in futility. Moreover it doesn't serve any meaningful purpose to rebrand e-sports as sports except to make people feel accepted amongst the masses who watch sports. This is completely unnecessary, and to be frank, an embarrassing sign of weakness that you need other people to view what you do as being equivalent on some level to what they watch in order to garner their respect (or maybe even your own self-respect). We don't need technical arguments examining why e-sports should be considered a type of sport. "Electronic sports" is a simple, straightforward term that everyone can understand, in that most of the action/game play is happening in a computer over a network, rather than in physical reality. I feel like people are so ashamed of how society views them, that they want to avoid these clear definitions of what their interests clearly entail, and instead go into semantic arguments to try to explain how what they do is technically just like what people who play football do. I think its fine to point out that people need to have the same level of focus or commitment that those people who play traditional sports have. But that's why we call it an e-sport...it is implied by the word "sport" contained within, that there is intense competition and training required. Explaining this by making comparisons to physical sports is totally superfluous. | ||
|
Goibon
New Zealand8185 Posts
What i think is interesting, and probably quite important though, is the impact that this topic does have on the industry. The comment about eSports writers is a good one. When they open with this preface about trying to describe eSports, at least in my cynical eyes it comes across as them trying to justify eSports. I hate that, it really rubs me the wrong way and sometimes comes across as needy, desperate, uncertain, insecure, defensive, and overall from a position of weakness, rather than one of confidence and strength. I've no doubt the people writing these things love eSports and have the passion, just don't frame it from such a weak position. If someone has a bias, and you fuel that with your initial premise, you've already lost them. You've told them that even you, the mouth piece of that which they're uncertain about, aren't even confident in your subject matter. I think the continuation of this debate in turn forces people to succumb to this uncertainty. It also invites others to debate it too, and never get further than "lol its not real sports", rather that focus on the greatness that eSports does have regardless of whether its a sport or not. I would like people to be able to embrace eSports for what it is: professional gaming competition, rather than trying to define it and measure it against other accepted sports like a little kid trying to fit in with the big cool kids. What i think we want isn't a definition or a label, but acceptance. We want our pie to get bigger, we want more people to be involved so we can maybe some day have eSports globally look like what it was in Korea. I'm not gonna talk about how we can do that, because i have no effing clue and this isn't what this topic is about. But i think when we try and define and justify eSports in this 'is it a sport' debate, we weaken our position, we dilute or stray away from the message, and we get people arguing against each other when we could instead be focusing on all the definite positives and how to capitalise on and present those to a wider audience. Furthermore if we are defined as a sport, this doesn't make people accept us. I don't accept curling or synchronised swimming or horse racing or motorsport as sports, and i wouldn't accept eSports just because they were considered sports too. But i can accept that it (and those other things i mentioned) is elite competition and that's more important than being labelled a sport or not. The WWE / UFC comparison was interesting. I think we can learn a lot from there, and the comparisons between how those businesses operate compared to real sports. I think that's a really interesting topic, how they market their fighters as stars and fights can be chosen as much based on merit as they are on drawing power. eSports does that to some extent too. But i won't go into that as we're off topic enough but i like that you brought it up. Comparisons are very useful if we use them properly and i think those are great ones to look at. I don't want to poop on people who do enjoy this topic as one of debate. Debating is fun for a lot of people i'm just not one of them because quite frankly i hate the internet. I just wish this wouldn't be viewed as an important debate that we need to entertain for the health of eSports or anything, but rather just a fun, almost pedantic one that people can riff back and forth with in their spare time. I know it does interest people, and that's fine. I just don't think it helps, and to some extent i think it's harmful when it influences how we present ourselves to a wider audience. As an aside, i just read rad's post and i think i'm pretty much saying what he said, kinda funny  | ||
| ||
