3 ms·
> "pursue rationally unjustifiable interests" I disagree of how you define rationality here. If someone feels it serves them fine to play 14 hours of a game, i
by soneca 7y ago
> "pursue rationally unjustifiable interests"
I disagree of how you define rationality here. If someone feels it serves them fine to play 14 hours of a game, it seems perfectly rational for me. Especially in the case that you mentioned, where they were playing before any big money was on the table. It means they liked, despite a lot of people judging them with an air of superiority.
- rapsey 7y agoIt is objectively irrational. The ones who made a lot of money are 1%. The rest wasted their youth pursuing an impossible dream. They sacrificed their social development and their future job prospects.
- soneca 7y agoNo it is not. If someone is playing 14 hours of a game that is not even giving a lot of money (not even to any 1%, which is the initial situation mentioned before DOTA was big), then obviously they are not doing that for the money.
- dx87 7y agoYou'd be suprised. It's not uncommon to see players that only play that much because they want to become a pro player, but in the end they never make it, or qualify to 1-2 tournaments. The lucky ones end up making money from streaming, but a lot depend on their parents or girlfriend's for a place to live since they don't make enough money to live off of.
- soneca 7y agoI think we are talking about two very different things. I am talking about bus ticket collectors and you are talking about gamers playing pro games giving millions of dollars in prizes. edit: I re-read my previous comment and I am not sure I could make it more clear. if a game does not gives money prizes at all, the ones who are playing it are not playing for the money.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- trenning 7y agoIf you work 8 hours a day and sleep 8 hours a day play a video games 14 hours a day, well the math doesn't work to being rational for an adult