The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
I support "pro-gaming" where one might be able to make a living playing video games, but I do NOT think of that as being an athlete.
Nascar isnt a sport either than right? Or Poker? Or Fishing?
Sorry but theres money to be made, and Id rather us nerds get a chance at doing what we love for a profit.
No poker is not a sport at all and neither is gaming.
From the dictionary:
sport - anathletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc.
It is the same reason the Olympics have denied repeated attempts to get chess in because it is a game and not a sport.
It is critical to realize this isn't a dig at non-sports. Many games can take a lot of skill to do well in and that should be recognized at a professional level. However, they should not EVER be called sports because they are GAMES. You don't just start calling dogs elephants because you think there is more importance attached to the word elephant. You use the proper term for the proper things.
You're missing the point. Baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, American football, football, and etc. are also just games you don't automatically change their ruling when they go to the "professional" level. These things require physical endurance while games like chess, checkers, We qui (go), and certain video games require high amounts of mental processing.
Playing video games is not A sport
People may play then FOR sport, but that does not make it A sport.
/endthread.
sport (spôrt, sprt)
n.
1.
a. Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively.
b. A particular form of this activity.
2. An activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively.
3. An active pastime; recreation.
4.
a. Mockery; jest: He made sport of his own looks.
b. An object of mockery, jest, or play: treated our interests as sport.
c. A joking mood or attitude: She made the remark in sport.
5.
a. One known for the manner of one's acceptance of rules, especially of a game, or of a difficult situation: a poor sport.
b. Informal One who accepts rules or difficult situations well.
c. Informal A pleasant companion: was a real sport during the trip.
6. Informal
a. A person who lives a jolly, extravagant life.
b. A gambler at sporting events.
7. Biology An organism that shows a marked change from the normal type or parent stock, typically as a result of mutation.
I do believe that a video game does fit one of the following definitions for sport. Look at definition 3. an active pastime.
But when you call gaming , "e-sport" you aren't using definition #3 are you now?
Originally posted by xAPOCx Playing video games is not A sport
People may play then FOR sport, but that does not make it A sport.
/endthread.
Maybe that's why they are called "e-Sports".
However, video games don't use a brain-computer interface, so the players are still using their eyes, ears and hands to play the games. It does require some physical exertion on the part of the participants, and it does require some level of skill. Players do compete, and there are winners and losers.
e-Sports fits into the definition of "sports". At least until they work out a brain-computer interface. Then it no longer really requires physical exertion.
Other definitions for "sport" include "diversion; recreation; pleasant pastime", so really, a lot of stuff can be included.
**
I had to edit the posts out because the editor made a mess of all the different fonts and colors.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
[quote]Originally posted by xAPOCx [b][quote] Originally posted by Mtibbs1989 [quote] Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
Originally posted by JIUBHUNNY420
Originally posted by Four0SixNo offence to gaming, but puke."e-Sports" is NOT on par with actual athletes.I support "pro-gaming" where one might be able to make a living playing video games, but I do NOT think of that as being an athlete.
Nascar isnt a sport either than right? Or Poker? Or Fishing?Sorry but theres money to be made, and Id rather us nerds get a chance at doing what we love for a profit.
No poker is not a sport at all and neither is gaming.From the dictionary: sport - an [color=#00ff00]athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc. It is the same reason the Olympics have denied repeated attempts to get chess in because it is a game and not a sport. It is critical to realize this isn't a dig at non-sports. Many games can take a lot of skill to do well in and that should be recognized at a professional level. However, they should not EVER be called sports because they are GAMES. You don't just start calling dogs elephants because you think there is more importance attached to the word elephant. You use the proper term for the proper things. [/quote] You're missing the point. Baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, American football, football, and etc. are also just games you don't automatically change their ruling when they go to the "professional" level. These things require physical endurance while games like chess, checkers, We qui (go), and certain video games require high amounts of mental processing. [/quote]Playing video games is not A sport
People may play then FOR sport, but that does not make it A[/color] sport.
/endthread.[/b][/quote]
Maybe that's why they are called "e-Sports".
However, video games don't use a brain-computer interface, so the players are still using their eyes, ears and hands to play the games. It does require some physical exertion on the part of the participants, and it does require some level of skill. Players do compete, and there are winners and losers.
e-Sports fits into the definition of "sports". At least until they work out a brain-computer interface. Then it no longer really requires physical exertion.
Other definitions for "sport" include "diversion; recreation; pleasant pastime", so really, a lot of stuff can be included.
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
Edit: As a prior poster claimed, it is likely a money grab, as Athletes pay more for visas.
[quote]Originally posted by xAPOCx [b][quote] Originally posted by Mtibbs1989 [quote] Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
Originally posted by JIUBHUNNY420
Originally posted by Four0SixNo offence to gaming, but puke."e-Sports" is NOT on par with actual athletes.I support "pro-gaming" where one might be able to make a living playing video games, but I do NOT think of that as being an athlete.
Nascar isnt a sport either than right? Or Poker? Or Fishing?Sorry but theres money to be made, and Id rather us nerds get a chance at doing what we love for a profit.
No poker is not a sport at all and neither is gaming.From the dictionary: sport - an [color=#00ff00]athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc. It is the same reason the Olympics have denied repeated attempts to get chess in because it is a game and not a sport. It is critical to realize this isn't a dig at non-sports. Many games can take a lot of skill to do well in and that should be recognized at a professional level. However, they should not EVER be called sports because they are GAMES. You don't just start calling dogs elephants because you think there is more importance attached to the word elephant. You use the proper term for the proper things. [/quote] You're missing the point. Baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, American football, football, and etc. are also just games you don't automatically change their ruling when they go to the "professional" level. These things require physical endurance while games like chess, checkers, We qui (go), and certain video games require high amounts of mental processing. [/quote]Playing video games is not A sport
People may play then FOR sport, but that does not make it A[/color] sport.
/endthread.[/b][/quote]
Maybe that's why they are called "e-Sports".
However, video games don't use a brain-computer interface, so the players are still using their eyes, ears and hands to play the games. It does require some physical exertion on the part of the participants, and it does require some level of skill. Players do compete, and there are winners and losers.
e-Sports fits into the definition of "sports". At least until they work out a brain-computer interface. Then it no longer really requires physical exertion.
Other definitions for "sport" include "diversion; recreation; pleasant pastime", so really, a lot of stuff can be included.
They're called e-sports because a PR person wanted to make them sound better to the general public because too many people have a stigma against game. It isn't like the Oxford English group sat down and had a lengthy panel to come up with the term e-sports, some guy just used it.
Yes, bad dictionaries will always offer 10 different definitions so someone can find #6 on the list that someone vaguely fits how they want to use the term. Then there is also the main definition and how the word is used in society. A sport is an athletic game, simple as that. And no, there is nothing athletic about playing video games and this is from someone who thinks professional gaming should be bigger than it is.
People just have to get over their stigma that "Game" means something for kids so they don't want the things they like to be labeled that way. Wasting time trying to skew the definition of sport so you can feel better about gaming is a true waste of time as it will never actually be a sport.
I think ESPORTS have their place in being a huge thing, however I would not put them in the same exact category as actual sports. They should co-exist, but not be the same.
[quote]Originally posted by xAPOCx [b][quote] Originally posted by Mtibbs1989 [quote] Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
Originally posted by JIUBHUNNY420
Originally posted by Four0SixNo offence to gaming, but puke."e-Sports" is NOT on par with actual athletes.I support "pro-gaming" where one might be able to make a living playing video games, but I do NOT think of that as being an athlete.
Nascar isnt a sport either than right? Or Poker? Or Fishing?Sorry but theres money to be made, and Id rather us nerds get a chance at doing what we love for a profit.
No poker is not a sport at all and neither is gaming.From the dictionary: sport - an [color=#00ff00]athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc. It is the same reason the Olympics have denied repeated attempts to get chess in because it is a game and not a sport. It is critical to realize this isn't a dig at non-sports. Many games can take a lot of skill to do well in and that should be recognized at a professional level. However, they should not EVER be called sports because they are GAMES. You don't just start calling dogs elephants because you think there is more importance attached to the word elephant. You use the proper term for the proper things. [/quote] You're missing the point. Baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, American football, football, and etc. are also just games you don't automatically change their ruling when they go to the "professional" level. These things require physical endurance while games like chess, checkers, We qui (go), and certain video games require high amounts of mental processing. [/quote]Playing video games is not A sport
People may play then FOR sport, but that does not make it A[/color] sport.
/endthread.[/b][/quote]
Maybe that's why they are called "e-Sports".
However, video games don't use a brain-computer interface, so the players are still using their eyes, ears and hands to play the games. It does require some physical exertion on the part of the participants, and it does require some level of skill. Players do compete, and there are winners and losers.
e-Sports fits into the definition of "sports". At least until they work out a brain-computer interface. Then it no longer really requires physical exertion.
Other definitions for "sport" include "diversion; recreation; pleasant pastime", so really, a lot of stuff can be included.
They're called e-sports because a PR person wanted to make them sound better to the general public because too many people have a stigma against game. It isn't like the Oxford English group sat down and had a lengthy panel to come up with the term e-sports, some guy just used it.
Yes, bad dictionaries will always offer 10 different definitions so someone can find #6 on the list that someone vaguely fits how they want to use the term. Then there is also the main definition and how the word is used in society. A sport is an athletic game, simple as that. And no, there is nothing athletic about playing video games and this is from someone who thinks professional gaming should be bigger than it is.
People just have to get over their stigma that "Game" means something for kids so they don't want the things they like to be labeled that way. Wasting time trying to skew the definition of sport so you can feel better about gaming is a true waste of time as it will never actually be a sport.
Can I muddle your quality post with a comment about how "e-sport" and "epeen" start with the same letter?
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
What issue? It's to their benefit financially. Do you think they care who uses which definition or social comparison? The visa players can now ask for is for groups, making the transition into the US for these events easier...at a slightly higher price.
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
First off all they did was say that people can have travel Visas to get into the country in order to compete in tournaments.
Second off, we put way too much value on sports as it is. In reality NBA, NFL, etc. does NOTHING for advancing or improving society and instead pays some people 50 million dollars to run up and down a field while those who struggle to find cures for cancer get paid little.
So with sports you have some guys who are good at an athletic game and get paid obscene amounts of money to play those games (instead of curing cancer, advancing society, saving lives, rescuing people from burning buildings, you know all of that meaningful stuff). Why wouldn't someone who is good at a video game also get put on the same level as those who are good at an athletic game?
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
What issue? It's to their benefit financially. Do you think they care who uses which definition or social comparison? The visa players can now ask for is for groups, making the transition into the US for these events easier...at a slightly higher price.
What issue: Pro-gaming =/= sports...thought I had been clear on my position.
Did you just use a "pay to win" argument concerning obtaining visas? US government as a cash shop?
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
First off all they did was say that people can have travel Visas to get into the country in order to compete in tournaments.
Second off, we put way too much value on sports as it is. In reality NBA, NFL, etc. does NOTHING for advancing or improving society and instead pays some people 50 million dollars to run up and down a field while those who struggle to find cures for cancer get paid little.
So with sports you have some guys who are good at an athletic game and get paid obscene amounts of money to play those games (instead of curing cancer, advancing society, saving lives, rescuing people from burning buildings, you know all of that meaningful stuff). Why wouldn't someone who is good at a video game also get put on the same level as those who are good at an athletic game?
Your argument reads like this to me:
"You value athletes too much. You should fix that by elevating more groups to this status."
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
What issue? It's to their benefit financially. Do you think they care who uses which definition or social comparison? The visa players can now ask for is for groups, making the transition into the US for these events easier...at a slightly higher price.
What issue: Pro-gaming =/= sports...thought I had been clear on my position.
Did you just use a "pay to win" argument concerning obtaining visas? US government as a cash shop?
Umm no. Using the simple fact that if there is something the government can do to make extra money, it will. Where does P2W even come up? That issue you have is not the governments job to define.
It saw a way to introduce an amendment to their visa distribution with an increase in revenue. The sheer amount of players for LoL and these events were just too tempting not to do this, imo.
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
First off all they did was say that people can have travel Visas to get into the country in order to compete in tournaments.
Second off, we put way too much value on sports as it is. In reality NBA, NFL, etc. does NOTHING for advancing or improving society and instead pays some people 50 million dollars to run up and down a field while those who struggle to find cures for cancer get paid little.
So with sports you have some guys who are good at an athletic game and get paid obscene amounts of money to play those games (instead of curing cancer, advancing society, saving lives, rescuing people from burning buildings, you know all of that meaningful stuff). Why wouldn't someone who is good at a video game also get put on the same level as those who are good at an athletic game?
Your argument reads like this to me:
"You value athletes too much. You should fix that by elevating more groups to this status."
Close at least. It is "You seem to be putting athletes up on some pedestal yet can't see how anyone else could view another activity in the same light".
What makes sports so amazing and important that another competitive game can't get the same visa privileges?
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
What issue? It's to their benefit financially. Do you think they care who uses which definition or social comparison? The visa players can now ask for is for groups, making the transition into the US for these events easier...at a slightly higher price.
What issue: Pro-gaming =/= sports...thought I had been clear on my position.
Did you just use a "pay to win" argument concerning obtaining visas? US government as a cash shop?
Umm no. Using the simple fact that if there is something the government can do to make extra money, it will. Where does P2W even come up? That issue you have is not the governments job to define.
It saw a way to introduce an amendment to their visa distribution with an increase in revenue. The sheer amount of players for LoL and these events were just too tempting not to do this, imo.
1 group gets to "pay" to expedite the process. Argument there for "Pay to Win", mostly just trying to be clever.
The US government spends billions of dollars a day. The projected revenue of this move is nominal. I am a fan a small government, so any time I see a money grab, by my government, I get riled, and expect ulterior motives. Frankly it irks me that they have time to do this kind of crap, but not lets see....deal with doubling interest rates on student loans.
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
What issue? It's to their benefit financially. Do you think they care who uses which definition or social comparison? The visa players can now ask for is for groups, making the transition into the US for these events easier...at a slightly higher price.
What issue: Pro-gaming =/= sports...thought I had been clear on my position.
Did you just use a "pay to win" argument concerning obtaining visas? US government as a cash shop?
Umm no. Using the simple fact that if there is something the government can do to make extra money, it will. Where does P2W even come up? That issue you have is not the governments job to define.
It saw a way to introduce an amendment to their visa distribution with an increase in revenue. The sheer amount of players for LoL and these events were just too tempting not to do this, imo.
1 group gets to "pay" to expedite the process. Argument there for "Pay to Win", mostly just trying to be clever.
The US government spends billions of dollars a day. The projected revenue of this move is nominal. I am a fan a small government, so any time I see a money grab, by my government, I get riled, and expect ulterior motives. Frankly it irks me that they have time to do this kind of crap, but not lets see....deal with doubling interest rates on student loans.
Still sore you paid so much for a sub-par education when in Austria (for example) it would've cost you 10 times less for twice the value?
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
First off all they did was say that people can have travel Visas to get into the country in order to compete in tournaments.
Second off, we put way too much value on sports as it is. In reality NBA, NFL, etc. does NOTHING for advancing or improving society and instead pays some people 50 million dollars to run up and down a field while those who struggle to find cures for cancer get paid little.
So with sports you have some guys who are good at an athletic game and get paid obscene amounts of money to play those games (instead of curing cancer, advancing society, saving lives, rescuing people from burning buildings, you know all of that meaningful stuff). Why wouldn't someone who is good at a video game also get put on the same level as those who are good at an athletic game?
Your argument reads like this to me:
"You value athletes too much. You should fix that by elevating more groups to this status."
Close at least. It is "You seem to be putting athletes up on some pedestal yet can't see how anyone else could view another activity in the same light".
What makes sports so amazing and important that another competitive game can't get the same visa privileges?
So tabletop wargaming? Lots travel internationally for tournaments? Shall they too be sports? Shall we let Old people get travel visas to play Bocce Ball?
Where you and I separate is this: You want every thing to be the same so no one can excel and be better than others. I want diversity to be glorified. I think it is great when different people are great at different things. I don't want to be lumped in with everyone else.
I like pedestals. They allow one to see, at a glance, who or what is the best in their said category. I would like to see more pedestals. Not just pushing everything onto the same one. Gaming can have it's own. Sports can have their own. Science can have its own.
The US government spends billions of dollars a day. The projected revenue of this move is nominal. I am a fan a small government, so any time I see a money grab, by my government, I get riled, and expect ulterior motives. Frankly it irks me that they have time to do this kind of crap, but not lets see....deal with doubling interest rates on student loans.
Whether it is nominal or not, it's still a step to make more.
I still don't see a big deal on them doing this, other than people wanting to polarize the two sides.
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
What issue? It's to their benefit financially. Do you think they care who uses which definition or social comparison? The visa players can now ask for is for groups, making the transition into the US for these events easier...at a slightly higher price.
What issue: Pro-gaming =/= sports...thought I had been clear on my position.
Did you just use a "pay to win" argument concerning obtaining visas? US government as a cash shop?
Umm no. Using the simple fact that if there is something the government can do to make extra money, it will. Where does P2W even come up? That issue you have is not the governments job to define.
It saw a way to introduce an amendment to their visa distribution with an increase in revenue. The sheer amount of players for LoL and these events were just too tempting not to do this, imo.
1 group gets to "pay" to expedite the process. Argument there for "Pay to Win", mostly just trying to be clever.
The US government spends billions of dollars a day. The projected revenue of this move is nominal. I am a fan a small government, so any time I see a money grab, by my government, I get riled, and expect ulterior motives. Frankly it irks me that they have time to do this kind of crap, but not lets see....deal with doubling interest rates on student loans.
Still sore you paid so much for a sub-par education when in Austria (for example) it would've cost you 10 times less for twice the value?
I tired to pick an example that would be non-controversial. My bad. I can argue against socialism if you like, but that is for another forum.
I support "pro-gaming" where one might be able to make a living playing video games, but I do NOT think of that as being an athlete.
Nascar isnt a sport either than right? Or Poker? Or Fishing?
Sorry but theres money to be made, and Id rather us nerds get a chance at doing what we love for a profit.
No poker is not a sport at all and neither is gaming.
From the dictionary:
sport - anathletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc.
It is the same reason the Olympics have denied repeated attempts to get chess in because it is a game and not a sport.
It is critical to realize this isn't a dig at non-sports. Many games can take a lot of skill to do well in and that should be recognized at a professional level. However, they should not EVER be called sports because they are GAMES. You don't just start calling dogs elephants because you think there is more importance attached to the word elephant. You use the proper term for the proper things.
You're missing the point. Baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, American football, football, and etc. are also just games you don't automatically change their ruling when they go to the "professional" level. These things require physical endurance while games like chess, checkers, We qui (go), and certain video games require high amounts of mental processing.
Playing video games is not A sport
People may play then FOR sport, but that does not make it A sport.
/endthread.
sport (spôrt, sprt)
n.
1.
a. Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively.
b. A particular form of this activity.
2. An activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively.
3. An active pastime; recreation.
4.
a. Mockery; jest: He made sport of his own looks.
b. An object of mockery, jest, or play: treated our interests as sport.
c. A joking mood or attitude: She made the remark in sport.
5.
a. One known for the manner of one's acceptance of rules, especially of a game, or of a difficult situation: a poor sport.
b. Informal One who accepts rules or difficult situations well.
c. Informal A pleasant companion: was a real sport during the trip.
6. Informal
a. A person who lives a jolly, extravagant life.
b. A gambler at sporting events.
7. Biology An organism that shows a marked change from the normal type or parent stock, typically as a result of mutation.
I do believe that a video game does fit one of the following definitions for sport. Look at definition 3. an active pastime.
I agree with this. The best players in the world have insane skill and deserve to be recognized for it. Though to be honest, I would've preferred if StarCraft II got more attention than LoL. I've never liked LoL.
Comments
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
But when you call gaming , "e-sport" you aren't using definition #3 are you now?
Maybe that's why they are called "e-Sports".
However, video games don't use a brain-computer interface, so the players are still using their eyes, ears and hands to play the games. It does require some physical exertion on the part of the participants, and it does require some level of skill. Players do compete, and there are winners and losers.
e-Sports fits into the definition of "sports". At least until they work out a brain-computer interface. Then it no longer really requires physical exertion.
Other definitions for "sport" include "diversion; recreation; pleasant pastime", so really, a lot of stuff can be included.
**
I had to edit the posts out because the editor made a mess of all the different fonts and colors.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
My issue is with the govt. placing the same value on e-sports as NBA, NFL, MLS, FIFA, World Cup Rugby, yadda yadda.
Edit: As a prior poster claimed, it is likely a money grab, as Athletes pay more for visas.
They're called e-sports because a PR person wanted to make them sound better to the general public because too many people have a stigma against game. It isn't like the Oxford English group sat down and had a lengthy panel to come up with the term e-sports, some guy just used it.
Yes, bad dictionaries will always offer 10 different definitions so someone can find #6 on the list that someone vaguely fits how they want to use the term. Then there is also the main definition and how the word is used in society. A sport is an athletic game, simple as that. And no, there is nothing athletic about playing video games and this is from someone who thinks professional gaming should be bigger than it is.
People just have to get over their stigma that "Game" means something for kids so they don't want the things they like to be labeled that way. Wasting time trying to skew the definition of sport so you can feel better about gaming is a true waste of time as it will never actually be a sport.
Played-Everything
Playing-LoL
Can I muddle your quality post with a comment about how "e-sport" and "epeen" start with the same letter?
I do feel you have a spot on observation.
What issue? It's to their benefit financially. Do you think they care who uses which definition or social comparison? The visa players can now ask for is for groups, making the transition into the US for these events easier...at a slightly higher price.
First off all they did was say that people can have travel Visas to get into the country in order to compete in tournaments.
Second off, we put way too much value on sports as it is. In reality NBA, NFL, etc. does NOTHING for advancing or improving society and instead pays some people 50 million dollars to run up and down a field while those who struggle to find cures for cancer get paid little.
So with sports you have some guys who are good at an athletic game and get paid obscene amounts of money to play those games (instead of curing cancer, advancing society, saving lives, rescuing people from burning buildings, you know all of that meaningful stuff). Why wouldn't someone who is good at a video game also get put on the same level as those who are good at an athletic game?
What issue: Pro-gaming =/= sports...thought I had been clear on my position.
Did you just use a "pay to win" argument concerning obtaining visas? US government as a cash shop?
Your argument reads like this to me:
"You value athletes too much. You should fix that by elevating more groups to this status."
Umm no. Using the simple fact that if there is something the government can do to make extra money, it will. Where does P2W even come up? That issue you have is not the governments job to define.
It saw a way to introduce an amendment to their visa distribution with an increase in revenue. The sheer amount of players for LoL and these events were just too tempting not to do this, imo.
Close at least. It is "You seem to be putting athletes up on some pedestal yet can't see how anyone else could view another activity in the same light".
What makes sports so amazing and important that another competitive game can't get the same visa privileges?
1 group gets to "pay" to expedite the process. Argument there for "Pay to Win", mostly just trying to be clever.
The US government spends billions of dollars a day. The projected revenue of this move is nominal. I am a fan a small government, so any time I see a money grab, by my government, I get riled, and expect ulterior motives. Frankly it irks me that they have time to do this kind of crap, but not lets see....deal with doubling interest rates on student loans.
Still sore you paid so much for a sub-par education when in Austria (for example) it would've cost you 10 times less for twice the value?
So tabletop wargaming? Lots travel internationally for tournaments? Shall they too be sports? Shall we let Old people get travel visas to play Bocce Ball?
Where you and I separate is this: You want every thing to be the same so no one can excel and be better than others. I want diversity to be glorified. I think it is great when different people are great at different things. I don't want to be lumped in with everyone else.
I like pedestals. They allow one to see, at a glance, who or what is the best in their said category. I would like to see more pedestals. Not just pushing everything onto the same one. Gaming can have it's own. Sports can have their own. Science can have its own.
Whether it is nominal or not, it's still a step to make more.
I still don't see a big deal on them doing this, other than people wanting to polarize the two sides.
I tired to pick an example that would be non-controversial. My bad. I can argue against socialism if you like, but that is for another forum.
And i will say this just one more time...
A sport and FOR sport are two different things.
Gaming is no more a sport than poker.
So, it really isn't.
edit: nvm. "eSport" so it's not a real sport