I’m sure that you are already aware of the fact that eSports in general are expanding day by day. What are your thoughts on the whole eSports scene and the topic of playing for pay?
"eSports" is a joke. These are "eGames" right now, and nothing more. To segue nicely: baseball is a sport and softball is a game. There's still a LONG way to go before the scene grows into something that even the most generous of us could actually describe as a sport while keeping a straight face. All the hype and Angels in the world won't change that any time soon.
As far as "making a career of it" goes, I think Makaveli's covered most of that in just the past few days with his posts here, and anyone who's still buying into the myth should go and read those. My personal opinion is that it'll happen eventually but there's an awful lot of infrastructure development that needs to take place first.
What do you see for the future of eSports?
Years and years of mediocre games; dishonest or inept organisations; naive gamers, and generally just one huge clusterfuck where everything that can be wrong is. Essentially, a similar path to that taken by most pastimes when people first turned them into commercial endeavours. Some NEVER get beyond that: baseball's been around for over a century and all it's managed to do is go from exploitation to collusion (look it up :P) to Selig's current fraudulent tenure. Thanks to Don King, heavyweight boxing is about as genuine as a WWF title match.
I really hope gaming can get past that stage from the path it's on now, but I have serious doubts. I think that in many ways the best thing that could happen would be an implosion of the "serious" scene and a return to its roots, out of which something decent will hopefully emerge with the "first generation" gamers by that time in a position to take the management and organisational roles. The current beasts look an awful lot like evolutionary dead ends, but they're still too big to be killed and the resources they consume are blocking the advancement of the newer species. They need to die off before any real progress can be made.

arQon pretty much nailed it back in 2003 http://www.esreality.com/?a=longpost&id=328105&page=1

:o

That post has to be put in context, which is that CPL was still around and those said issues started arousing right at that time.

Secondly, I think those years and years already have passed. Sure we quake players don't get to experience it that much, but "esports" is waaaaaay bigger than what it ever was and there's been huge improvements on all those matters and more.
http://i.imgur.com/6UZPqi5.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/KxjQWWi.jpg

For instance the dishonest and/or inept organizations already died off, due to their own mistakes. Also teams are way more professional than what they were at that time, plus twitch and personal donations and sponsorships help players be not as dependent on them. Heck some franchises have even established themselves for over a decade, such as CS, Dota, SC and LoL is on that path too, which is a first on this hobby now becoming a career choice for some.

11 years ago I wouldn't have conceived the idea of seeing ads on the subway of my third world country about a videogame tournament (LoL), or just a couple days ago I went to a videogame themed pub that was streaming ddk casting counterstrike. Even more importantly than all that, right now not only the very first in the world can a reasonable living out of "esports", but up to the top200 in each main game if they are smart enough.

I don't know much about the other titles, but competitive CS in terms of qualifying as a proper sport now is arguably an even bigger joke than it was back in 2003.
Of course, with Valve's community funding there is more financial security than crooked tournaments like CPL provided back then, but not only are there still professionality issues with event organisers, now there is serious incentive for players to be dishonest and get corrupted. Cheating and match-fixing scandals have hit the scene numerous times only in the past few months. Betting became a thing and is handled entirely by a third-party monopoly that has shown an ugly face on various occasions.

There is also no infrastructure whatsoever. No governing body, no overarching rules and regulations, no planned seasons or events, barely any accountability or transparency, no protocols for the detection and prevention of cheating, not even an unanimous list of definitions for what "cheating offenses" exactly are or how to deal with them once you think you have encountered one.

Bigger organisations are getting into the game and numbers are through the roof, but I guess the lesson to be learned from this and from looking at established sports is that once they hit a critical mass of inherent money flow and varied points of interests, they are bound to get corrupted to a degree or another. I doubt it will be different with video games and most of what we are seeing these days reinforces that doubt.

That's why I like Quake. It and its scene are too hardcore to go huge commercially. It is competitive because the players try hard for the love or elitism that is in the nature of the game.
Monetary motivation on the other hand is kind of paradoxical for the competitive progress of a game; on the one hand it should make things infinitely more competitive because players are more dedicated on all levels possible. On the other hand it also almost systematically must create anti-competitiveness because "winning" is no longer the sole objective but just another variable in an economic plan forged by people that have nothing to do with the guy sitting in his bedroom spending his time playing the game he likes.

That's why I like Quake. It and its scene are too hardcore to go huge commercially. It is competitive because the players try hard for the love or elitism that is in the nature of the game.

If only half of the people who claim they love Quake could see it like this, we would be so much better off.

- I don't think the whole "esports" discussion makes sense. People like specific games. Some more than 1 but very few like the WHOLE of esports.

Yes, but on that remark these days the term esports makes more sense than it ever did, since nowadays there's very few games that are head and shoulders above the rest (at most 5 are in a circuit), whereas back in the day there were more than 10, maybe 20 at the top at one point.

- Games change all the time to be completely different. Sports do not. There is no applicable history to be built if they change often, so I think it will be hard to build a lifetime fan like you would in a sport.

This point is sooo important, yet no developer acts in such fashion. There isn't a single videogame that's played competitively on the spotlight and that relatively continuous to have the same rules over time. When watching football a 60 year old person is watching the same game he used to watch 40 years ago, but in esports no game lasts for more than five.

Of course we know quake live is very similar to quake 3, but the game left esports in 2011.

I think its always been a top few games. I only ever watched Quake though and the odd CS final. The rest are meaningless to me.

Even within Quake we have multiple game modes which is one of the major reasons its failed. Sure we might be able to watch other game modes, but really most have their preferences so again it splits the audience.

Sports do not change?

American Football and Futbol originated from the same sport, which is now a third sport entirely on its own.

Granted it took almost a century...

Everything evolves of course, but "esports" can change is main game from one year to the next and as a result every top player can suddenly change.

This means it is more like a reality TV season than a sport, and the history side of things (so important in traditional sports) ends up meaning nothing.

Hence my last line :P

We will see though. LoL is so incredibly popular that it might have some staying power simply because of how popular it is.

LoL is considerably different than what it was back in 2009. For instance un the second to last patch they changed the very roots of the game, to the point it isn't the same "sport" anymore.

I stopped playing for that reason. Can't care enough to re-learn how to play.

I meant the brand.

The game still works in the same way as it was before the new SR hit. There are just minor nuances that have changed with this patch, just as always when a meta-changing patch hits the game.

That's the patch I'm referring to, the new SR. Now I only comprehend all the rules in ARAM lol.

Do you really feel that way? I haven't played LoL since mid 2014 and just recently picked it up again.

So my understanding of the game when picking it up again was at the point where we had this super boring Mundo-Maokai Top meta with Ziggs and Syndra/LeBlanc pushing waves in mid all day while bot lane pretty much consisted out of Jinx/Lucian/the occasional ADC X if both of them were banned/picked with a Leona/Thresh/Nami/Braum support and Lee Sin, Elise or Jarvan in the jungle.

Honestly not much has changed, bot lane looks the same because Lucian/Jinx and Tristana still dominate with Leona/Thresh still being the most valuable supports. Jungle has seen some small changes in the way it is played because they have redone it completely (neutral creeps and item wise), however the amount of changes they had to make when compared to how the meta has changed because of it is just rediculous. Mid lane went back to being the way it was during S3 finals with Zed being top pick and other Mids just trying to stay even with him and bring more to the teamfight portion of the game (I mean even Riven is back in mid these days).
Top Lane has some new faces with Shivana and Jayce but the core gameplay up there still has not changed.

So sure they made a lot of changes (new map visuals, jungle layout, changes to smite, changes to jungle items, changes to items in general, changes to spawntimes for minions/neutrals, changes to map objectives, changes to towers, etc. etc.) but it did not have as much impact on the way team comps are picked and lanes are played out right now, it just mixed and matched the metas from S3 and S4 together.

To put one example, remember that when the game was released ad carries went mid. To put another, in the said patch they changed how towers and bases work, the main objectives of the game.

I get the first example but that shit changed in late S1 already and the overall meta of Tank/Bruiser Top, Tank/Bruiser Jungler, AP Carry or AD Assassin Mid, ADC bot with a Support has been the same for almost four years now and there is pretty much nothing that could change this meta now (because the actual map and champion design encourages it). The towers still work the same way they did before the new SR hit, same thing with the base structures. Only new things in there are the shield given by T2 towers (makes siege and push comps a bit more difficult to pull off) and the new laser-beam on T3 towers. What also made the base siege component of the game work a tad differently is the way Barron buff works. But all in all these changes only altered the flow of the game a little, they did not put it on its head.

Why not just call it competitive gaming rather than esports?

Problem solved.

It probably has to do with how an athlete is defined for legal purposes.

Which is what?

"Gaming" sounds related to gamble.

And nowadays these "esports athletes" even get working visas.

Athlete sounds related to sports. And that's not accurate. Virtual athlete makes it slighly more clear that it's a computer/videogame.

"competitive" makes it more clear that it isn't about gamling

Sure, competitive gaming is similiar to something like archery or dart in it's physical aspects. But this virtual element clearly distinguish it from other sports.

video doesnt work with uk vpn

Might have to torrent it.

Its not the best thing ever anyway

To hell with esport, I want bullseye to come back on the box!



This show is the perfect example of how someone can take something I don't give a crap about, and make it fun.

man, i thought they were going to do it.

what a shame.

We picked Quake to stream because that's what we played and enjoyed. It is annoying to have passed up opportunities to play CS, Original DotA and Smite in the past but such is life. I don't care to watch other people compete in specific games I haven't previously invested time in myself, sometimes I don't care to watch other people at all if it's a horrible show with awful commentary. I guess that can be related back to traditional sports too.

"Games change all the time to be completely different. Sports do not. There is no applicable history to be built if they change often, so I think it will be hard to build a lifetime fan like you would in a sport."

In response to this I would say we're only now starting to hit the point where graphics improving would make no significant difference to the experience. People hate on Call of Duty rehashing the same game over and over but I do think that's part of the appeal, a new game every year. The players transition from game to game too, it's just how the show highlights them. Obviously it's not done right for CoD (PC at least), but CSGO (I guess DotA2 also) is a good example of how bringing graphics to the standard of today but with familiar feel can work.

I would define competitive gaming as a sport in the mental sense, physical to some extent too but it's not really been proven. I'd put money on the few overweight competitive players seeing their game improve along with their own health, but then there will always be the unhealthy competitive player as that's the nature of sitting around on your chair playing video games for many.

I'll tell you why it's like real sports. Many players are essentially being paid to lose in a lot of these top games. I remember the days when it's top 3 or nothing... oh wait we're still there! :D

.

Do you realise how fit motorsport drivers/riders are? It's not like they just get in a car and drive, there's immense g-forces and probably a load of other shit I don't understand.

This.

.

Why?

.

Those wheelchair people at the paralympics must be pissed that they don't do sport.

.

man, you are actually retarded

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/fo...980337.stm

.

Never skip neck day.

Assuming that the classification of sport is defined by the level of physical fitness of the competitors.

To paraphrase: 'The problem that has lead to a bunch of people that I don't agree with thinking of competitive gaming as a sport is another, more internationally respected bunch of people that I disagree with recognising chess as a sport. Therefore gaming, chess, pool, snooker and darts should not be regarded as sports, because my opinion is more important to me than theirs is.'

since athlete is a person who is proficient in sports and other forms of physical exercise by definition there is no such thing as cyber athlete and term itself is a nonsense

Subthread:

'Might watch later but there's been talk about it again because of the Winter X Games. My views:

1. Gaming isn't a sport. It's something you can be competitive in...similar to chess, poker & organised hacking (CTF or some shit)
2. I agree with the snowboarders who said that the fact CS:GO is at Winter X Games is a fucking joke.

The problem that has lead to esport turds proclaiming sport status is because they made the mistake of classifying chess as a sport. Their argument is that if chess is a sport then gaming should be. This is a valid argument but chess shouldn't be a sport....instead they should declassify the following (and more I've missed): Chess, Pool, Snooker, Darts

I'm on the fence about F1/other car racing '


^^Not one mention of the word 'athlete'.



However, the word 'cyberathlete' is not bound to the same definition as 'athlete'. From Collins English Dictionary:

'cyberathlete'

noun

a professional player of computer games

Yeah man after 600ups I start to feel a little faint in CPM too.