Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Garside, 21 Aug 2006.
Way to go...
Interesting but I do not feel that it fits the classification of sport.
But then I define sport differently to everybody else it seems. The way I see it is essentally anything you can have a "game of" to me isn't sport (ie: Football, Golf, Tennis, Squash). They are all technically games and that is what they should be classified as.
Sure perhaps people may be paid to play them and thats good for them, They are officially a pro and what ever game it is they play.
The title of sport should be reserved only for the likes of track and field style events imo (running, long jump, swimming etc.)
But thats just my take on it
Yeah that's my thinking, just did a little dictionary.com search for sport and the bit that gets this for me:
" 1. Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively.
2. A particular form of this activity.
An activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively."
I have gamed at different levels and do sport for uni (rowing) but i wouldnt say theyre not similar enough for gaming to be counted as a sport. Their only similarity is that theyre both competitive but you can be competitive with someone at just about anything- (note the guiness book of records!)
Just my 2p
no no no. gaming shouldnt be classified as a sport. To me its the avoidance of sport if anything.
wikipedia even insists sport includes physical activity. Cluedo is more of a sport than computer games.
If darts can be viewed as a sport then so can video gaming.
Technically it is physical activity, you have to move your mouse and push buttons, thats a physical activity, it is competative and there are professional events.
But then again, if you had a professinal marbles tournament, you could also classify that as a sport.
Making gaming a sport will only encourage LESS activity in todays youth and god knows they are inactive enough as it is on a whole.
When asked what they want to be when they grow up kids will say "A professiional gamer!" instead of "A carpenter!" or "A lawyer!"
It is a sport. The Olmypics recognizes Archery as a sport, why not Video Games? Certainly Video games require much more hand, eye, and intellect then Archery.
Link to Olympic Archery
First, sorry for the long post.
I don't think computer gaming should be classified as sport, though I tend to approach this from a slightly different angle. The factor that usually arises in this discussion is the presence of physical activity - just about all the dictionaries agree on that element. So, using physical activity, let's take a pastime that is generally agreed as sport: Track and field. Track and field also exists in the electronic realm as a computer game. Are they the same? Real life track and field obviously involves a great amount of physical activity. As Veles pointed out, pressing a mouse button technically is physical activity. Perheps, then, it is the level of physical activity required. Running a 400 meters uses a great deal more energy than quickly pressing a button to make a computer model run the same distance.
But then, Veles also mentions Darts and Marbles, both considered by many people to be sport. Lobbing a dart or shooting a marble takes relatively little energy. Perhaps more than clicking a mouse button, perhaps not. Darts and Marbles, however, have that other element: finesse, or dexterity. The counterargument, of course, is that you have to have hand-eye coordination to successfully compete in computer games. Although you technically need hand-eye coordination to aim the crosshairs and click the button at the right moment, the real-life version of any game certainly requires a greater amount of skill. Consider the last time you threw darts or shot marbles. Was there a heads-up display or crosshairs indicating the direction of the throw/shot, to make aiming easier? Was there a meter indicating the neccesary force to throw the dart/shoot the marble?
What about RTS or first-person shooters? Consider their real-life equivalents (war-games, paintball, etc). The strategy element is probably very similar. Of course, running around on a field is generally a lot harder than pressing the forward arrow to make your guy move. Shooting a real gun involves more finesse and a greater handling of kickback than aiming a crosshairs on your screen and pressing a button to shoot. Plus, in the real word you don't have the option to turn down the resolution to make aiming easier.
The other very important factor is the learned skill of the game. After only a couple days, I had honed my skills on the Playstation golf course. Most professional golfers have been playing for years upon years, and still have trouble putting a 3-iron shot 2 feet from the hole. I think the same holds true for most sporting arenas.
To sum up, I think the physical element is more involved than the simple presence or lack thereof. It is generally required, but there is almost always an element of finesse, using those fine motor skills. Finally, you have to consider the learned or developed skill of the game. I can't remember to last time I missed a 3-foot putt on the Playstation. The only computer I can think of that resembles real sport is Dance Dance Revolution, but even then I'm not entirely convinced.
If they want to make computer gaming more legitimate (as opposed to "just a bunch of guys playing video games"), more power to them. I hope they succeed in their cause. But to campaign to have computer games recognized as sport is just silly.
Lots of people referr to the dictionary for the term sport. Please don't forget the dictionary is constantly changing. New words and meanings to each word are added every single year. Just a few weeks ago there was an article on here about the term "Google".
It's all about change. Not many people can accept it, but it will happen. What's wrong with making Video Games a professional sport? People get paid to play basketball, football, and countless other sports. Don't hate if someone gets paid for playing games or a sport. Don't fight the change, work with it and it will work for you.
If you have to compare Marbles to Video Games, Video Games win hands down. Much more intellect involved in video games without a doubt.
And if you really think it takes you a week to become a master of a competitive game then you're just kidding yourself. Notice i used the term, "Competitive Game". Golf is not played at any known Video Gaming tournment.
Ever attempted real life archery? If you have can you honestly say that there is no difference in required physical skill than playng say an archery sim?
I will tell you this I have tried my hand at archery, bowling, darts, table tennis, football (american and otherwise)...well pretty much every concieved game and not one would I say takes as much skill or more skill to play electronically than it does in real life.
I think your truely dillusional and uneducated if your of the honest opinion that electronic gaming, in any fashion, requires the same physical skill as the real life version.
If you are referring to the physical attribute of a sport, the only "Physical" movement involved in Archery is the twist of your wrist and a pull of your arm. Also, I never said it was easy.
So your saying that playing an archery sim is just as difficult as real life archery?
True, I'll admit that to play a video game competitively, you must play for more than a week to get the full gist of the game. But, I still posit that any computer-version of a game takes considerably less time to master.
Like I said in my post, I take no exception to the group's desire to bring more legtimacy to competitive computer gaming. But I reject the idea that computer gaming is sport. I believe game and sport can be mutually exclusive.
Twice now you've mentioned the intellect required to play games. Please explain how more intellect is required of computer marbles than real marbles.
Marbles is not a know competitive game at any known Video Game tournment.
I guess many of you here are generalizing that videogame tournments host sims of Archery, Marbles, and other such sports. Marbles or "Simulations" is not played at any known video game tournment. Try Counter Strike and WarCraft 3, those games speak for themselves.
ah but wat games would be in the "sport?" this is the problem, cod, and coduo, hl2, cs,css, quake? which games? when somes get left out they will bitch and moan. if poker is a sport, gaming is a strenous sport.
What is "sporting" about Warcraft 3 and/or Couter Strike?
Here's my compromise: Setup a seperate commitie/council/board whatever to oversee electronic gaming. Let it become a nationally organized pasttime. With leagues and all that jazz. Just keep the word(s) "sport", "sporting", "sportsmen" or anything of the like AWAY from it. Call them what they are gamers. Just dont classify it as a sport.
Yeah i found that to be a hard to answer question also. What games would be comsidered a sport? Especially since new versions of each game are released every two or so years.
I never assumed that it was. Also, I addressed the FPS and RTS genres in my first post. I asked you to explain the intellectual requirements to play computer marbles because you made the following claim:
As I've stated before, a person may play Counter Strike competitively, but being paid and being competitive does not make it sport. I feel the same way about Chess and Poker. Games? Yes. Competetive and possibly difficult games? Yes. Sport? No more so than Monopoly.
Separate names with a comma.