The original statement that we wrote the article on, four months ago, that started the thread did. But this one didn't:
That came from you. And to repeat myself for the second time, in order to show that it's ridiculous, or that video games can't be sport, you'd need to define "sport" so that it encompasses all things you consider "sport", then explain how all video games are excluded from that definition.
Yes, and I'm asking you for yours that includes all forms of sports that you think are sports but excludes all forms of video games from being sports.
In order for you to know - and clearly state - that video games cannot be sports, you must already have your own definition of sports that excludes video games. You must know what a sport is, in order to know that a video game is not it. You must know what qualities that something must possess and what criteria it must meet to be filed under sport.
You seem really rather reticent to just simply say what a sport is for you. I did it in my very first post to you.
you know, when you break it down, most sport evolved from hunting training games that existed across cultures during the early time of civilised man.
These games would have involved physical training, communication and awareness skills, and probably a team element also, as humans were pack hunters in a sense. Evidence of these original sports exists, not just in modern tribal cultures, but through ancient sports like the Indian Kabaddi, or the tribal canoe and running race held on Easter Island.
These games provided proving grounds for the best of the tribe; the most physically fit and capable hunters were more valuable to their society, and therefore more important. However the hunt and warfare itself are variable, it seems imprudent to try and measure your skills against your competitor when you might be hunting a completely different prey, in a different environment, to when your rival proved himself.
So, you create a repeatable, controllable scenario where the aptitude of prospective leaders/hunters/mates/blood sacrifices (see: Aztecs) can be measured against a known quantity. I.e how many points one can score, games one can win, keepups one can do with a severed head (hello again Aztecs). This has a direct value to the society in question, it is not just a passtime used for self improvement or posturing, it would have had a genuine effect on your position in society.
This is the basis of nearly every sport in the world, in my opinion, and is also the reason some competitive pursuits are not considered sports, such as Chess. Chess players put in an immense amount of time and training to their craft. The game essentially has no variables so absolute knowledge of the situations that can arise is essential for high level play. It requires a great deal of dedication, skill and poise to reach the highest levels in Chess, but no one is arguing that Chess players are athletes or that Chess is a sport. It is a game. A very, very good game with a watertight meta.
I would argue that competitive video games don't share these traits. The games themselves are revolving doors, so those at the 'top' of a certain game are sometimes just those who have found it first, or have yet to move on to the latest craze. The focus is almost always on the individual (though there are individual sports of course) and true teamwork and communication is a massive outlier in any game. It is also not necessarily true that devotion to improving ones skill will translate to success, as the gun you just spent a month becoming amazing with, could be nerfed and have its characteristics changed at any point, forcing you to readjust to a new meta, and at a disadvantage to those who simply study and exploit the meta. Anyone familiar with, or who has for some reason spent time watching, any competitive MOBA will understand this.
I think part of the problem people have when I say e-sports aren't sports, is that they assume I have no respect for top tier players of video games, or that I think there shouldnt be a career or money on the table for them. That's not the case, for the same reason I still respect a Chess grandmaster. It is a skill and craft that takes effort to improve, but this doesn't equate to being an athlete.
To summarise, e-sports do nothing to emulate the role of sports in our society. The best players are those who understand the game and what is possible within it. The best athletes are those that are naturally showcased by the repeatable experiments we put them through to make that determination. That's the difference for me, and I'm aware this is a clunky post so please point out my gaps so I can explain my viewpoint further. I backed out of severa l points as the tablet I'm writing on is not conducive to backing out of a post, finding a source or example, and returning to writing.
