5 ms·

Long term, I think esports are going to be fine. However, I think it's too early for them to really take root and embed themselves into any sort of mainstream

by Verdex 4y ago

Long term, I think esports are going to be fine. However, I think it's too early for them to really take root and embed themselves into any sort of mainstream or stable culture. Physical sports have been around since forever and even if we're talking about some of the biggest games around at the moment we're talking about things like football which was invented in 1863. Plenty of time to shake out all the details such that everyone understands the game and some stability evolves. Not only are videogames much newer, but the medium is up to the whims of large corporations with a history of making crazy decisions just to squeeze another dime out of the consumer. Give it a couple of generations and I'm sure it'll earn it's place and become a staple of lazy sunday afternoons.

HDThoreaun 4y ago
This is the correct take I think. So much of sports is about tradition and routine. Esports needs the build up that base of "I watched this league every sunday with my dad growing up and he watched with his dad when he was growing up" etc. to be taken seriously. Will probably take another 40 or so years, and esports will continue to improve in the meantime too. Importantly this requires long lasting games. Currently most people switch the game they watch every 5 or so years. Having a long lasting league that can create generational fandoms requires a game that can be enjoyed for a lifetime. MOBAs might satisfy that, remains to be seen, but that type of commitment is absolutely a pre-requisite.
- midiguy 4y ago
  On this note, I think people underestimate how intrinsically important things like our relationship to our physicality, and face-to-face contact are to us as human beings. Just in the last few decades have virtual worlds/networks/games been seriously present in our lives, and I feel like a wager has already been made that our lives will continue to become virtualized ad infinitum. I think we are starting to witness the human limits of this notion with corporations like Meta pushing virtual shit no one wants, and game companies trying to force competitive scenes unsuccessfully. Video games are rad, and watching them can be rad, but 'esports' feels like a forced experiment.
wasabi991011 4y ago
I was thinking along the same lines, but on the other hand, will specific video games be able to have as much staying power as physical sports? The way I envision longevity playing into the sports industry is by having generational playing and viewership, with parents teaching their children about the game rules, playing with them, and explaining while watching a broadcast game. It's not the only way people get into (traditional) sports watching, but I believe it is the main underlying word-of-mouth mechanism. However, with videogames being driven so much by graphical improvements, gameplay evolution, and other trends, will there ever be an eSport which stays in vogue for long enough? Quick research on eSports: Tetris is the oldest at 30 years (for the World Championship version), still a popular game with a competitive scene. Smash Bros Melee is 20 years old and very popular as an eSport, as well as StarCraft with a lesser but still decent viewership as I understand, though Quake and Street Fighter 2 from around that time are not drawing much viewership (nor casual popularity). 20 years ago was also the appearance of CounterStrike which is massively popular, but has had multiple titles, with only the latest version of 10 years ago still being played. All other major eSports are from that time period of 10 years ago or newer as far as I see.
thefaux 4y ago
Physical sports also have a purpose that esports cannot adequately address: the need to discharge physical energy and aggression. There is something primally satisfying in defeating someone in say basketball that cannot be matched in my experience by non-contact activities.
- TulliusCicero 4y ago
  While that's true, there are also advantages to being non-physical: * You can play way, way more of the game on a daily/weekly basis because you don't really have to worry about endurance/recovery in the same way. * With a few clicks you can grab opponents and teammates of comparable skill near-instantly, at any time, whereas finding a game for a given sport is much more beholden to schedules and other logistical difficulties. I suspect eSports works better for the long tail because of that second point: much harder to develop a critical mass when people have to be local. If you think about how many different sports vs competitive video games you could find a match for with modest effort in the coming week, video games would probably win by a least an order of magnitude, maybe two orders.
- silisili 4y ago
  My main argument against esports is somewhat similar, though in a different direction. It's odd to me to watch something anyone can do, with minimal investment. Why watch when you could just play? With baseball, football, or basketball, I'd have to not only find a field or court and a bunch of willing participants, but also be in good enough shape to run a bit. Watching Esports is essentially watching someone sit at a computer - something anyone can easily do. I don't mean to discount whatever skill is involved in being a good player, only talking about barriers to entry.
  - lmm 4y ago
    The barrier to entry for football is very low. Someone brings a ball, put down a couple of markers for each goal, and there you are; kids play street games all the time. Being out of shape might stop you playing well, but it doesn't stop you playing. Even owning a gaming PC at all is a much higher barrier (a lot of people watching esports will be doing so on phones).
the_duke 4y ago
I think you have provided an argument against eSports: a popular sport is "timeless" and is played for generations. Games are ephemeral. It's very rare for a game to be popular for more than 10 years. There might be popular franchises like Counterstrike, but they are still different games that will eventually be replaced by something better. That means you can't build up the same history, traditions and attachment.
- lmm 4y ago
  Starcraft is something close to timeless; I'd bet there are some second-generation players around by now.
  - midiguy 4y ago
    It will take a few more generations to say for sure. Hasn't interest in the RTS genre waned significantly since the 2000's?
  - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
    A year or two ago I was reading about a 17 year old SC player who was creating new strategies that were being effective. tetris for sure is having the same thing. And while I don't watch SC, I do watch tetris. It's a guildy nerd-pleasure of mine, if you will, but I can tell you the events aren't huge nor glamorous and it doesn't take away from the m at all. But I think I would consider both to be timeless at this point.
- jmcgough 4y ago
  League of Legends has been around for over a decade and is still in a really healthy state because it's continued to change and get better over time - every season brings pretty significant updates and new champions. The history, traditions and attachment are there - Faker, CLG vs TSM, etc. Honestly think we'll still all be playing Minecraft, League of Legends and Fortnite in a decade or two.

by Verdex 4y ago

HDThoreaun 4y ago

This is the correct take I think. So much of sports is about tradition and routine. Esports needs the build up that base of "I watched this league every sunday with my dad growing up and he watched with his dad when he was growing up" etc. to be taken seriously. Will probably take another 40 or so years, and esports will continue to improve in the meantime too. Importantly this requires long lasting games. Currently most people switch the game they watch every 5 or so years. Having a long lasting league that can create generational fandoms requires a game that can be enjoyed for a lifetime. MOBAs might satisfy that, remains to be seen, but that type of commitment is absolutely a pre-requisite.

midiguy 4y ago
On this note, I think people underestimate how intrinsically important things like our relationship to our physicality, and face-to-face contact are to us as human beings. Just in the last few decades have virtual worlds/networks/games been seriously present in our lives, and I feel like a wager has already been made that our lives will continue to become virtualized ad infinitum. I think we are starting to witness the human limits of this notion with corporations like Meta pushing virtual shit no one wants, and game companies trying to force competitive scenes unsuccessfully. Video games are rad, and watching them can be rad, but 'esports' feels like a forced experiment.

wasabi991011 4y ago

I was thinking along the same lines, but on the other hand, will specific video games be able to have as much staying power as physical sports? The way I envision longevity playing into the sports industry is by having generational playing and viewership, with parents teaching their children about the game rules, playing with them, and explaining while watching a broadcast game. It's not the only way people get into (traditional) sports watching, but I believe it is the main underlying word-of-mouth mechanism. However, with videogames being driven so much by graphical improvements, gameplay evolution, and other trends, will there ever be an eSport which stays in vogue for long enough? Quick research on eSports: Tetris is the oldest at 30 years (for the World Championship version), still a popular game with a competitive scene. Smash Bros Melee is 20 years old and very popular as an eSport, as well as StarCraft with a lesser but still decent viewership as I understand, though Quake and Street Fighter 2 from around that time are not drawing much viewership (nor casual popularity). 20 years ago was also the appearance of CounterStrike which is massively popular, but has had multiple titles, with only the latest version of 10 years ago still being played. All other major eSports are from that time period of 10 years ago or newer as far as I see.

thefaux 4y ago

Physical sports also have a purpose that esports cannot adequately address: the need to discharge physical energy and aggression. There is something primally satisfying in defeating someone in say basketball that cannot be matched in my experience by non-contact activities.

TulliusCicero 4y ago
While that's true, there are also advantages to being non-physical: * You can play way, way more of the game on a daily/weekly basis because you don't really have to worry about endurance/recovery in the same way. * With a few clicks you can grab opponents and teammates of comparable skill near-instantly, at any time, whereas finding a game for a given sport is much more beholden to schedules and other logistical difficulties. I suspect eSports works better for the long tail because of that second point: much harder to develop a critical mass when people have to be local. If you think about how many different sports vs competitive video games you could find a match for with modest effort in the coming week, video games would probably win by a least an order of magnitude, maybe two orders.
silisili 4y ago
My main argument against esports is somewhat similar, though in a different direction. It's odd to me to watch something anyone can do, with minimal investment. Why watch when you could just play? With baseball, football, or basketball, I'd have to not only find a field or court and a bunch of willing participants, but also be in good enough shape to run a bit. Watching Esports is essentially watching someone sit at a computer - something anyone can easily do. I don't mean to discount whatever skill is involved in being a good player, only talking about barriers to entry.
- lmm 4y ago
  The barrier to entry for football is very low. Someone brings a ball, put down a couple of markers for each goal, and there you are; kids play street games all the time. Being out of shape might stop you playing well, but it doesn't stop you playing. Even owning a gaming PC at all is a much higher barrier (a lot of people watching esports will be doing so on phones).

the_duke 4y ago

I think you have provided an argument against eSports: a popular sport is "timeless" and is played for generations. Games are ephemeral. It's very rare for a game to be popular for more than 10 years. There might be popular franchises like Counterstrike, but they are still different games that will eventually be replaced by something better. That means you can't build up the same history, traditions and attachment.

lmm 4y ago
Starcraft is something close to timeless; I'd bet there are some second-generation players around by now.
- midiguy 4y ago
  It will take a few more generations to say for sure. Hasn't interest in the RTS genre waned significantly since the 2000's?
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  A year or two ago I was reading about a 17 year old SC player who was creating new strategies that were being effective. tetris for sure is having the same thing. And while I don't watch SC, I do watch tetris. It's a guildy nerd-pleasure of mine, if you will, but I can tell you the events aren't huge nor glamorous and it doesn't take away from the m at all. But I think I would consider both to be timeless at this point.
jmcgough 4y ago
League of Legends has been around for over a decade and is still in a really healthy state because it's continued to change and get better over time - every season brings pretty significant updates and new champions. The history, traditions and attachment are there - Faker, CLG vs TSM, etc. Honestly think we'll still all be playing Minecraft, League of Legends and Fortnite in a decade or two.