Yes, I agree. But a lot of it depended on the definition of a sport, so I don't think it was as stupid a question as you seemed to be sarcastically implying earlier.

Quote from Scarecrow

if they think that people who are in professional competitive gaming don't train hard, sweat, and ache,

they are wrong

No one who knows about gaming would argue that they don't train hard. The actual line of thought for some people is whether it should be defined clumped together with rugby and soccer as a 'sport' or if an entirely new category should be opened for competitive interactive e-games.

I think it's an ignorant question. Like you said anyone that knows about gaming wouldn't argue it.

And I know this is arguing semantics but: Sport
1) An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.

When you get down to it, soccer, starcraft. Both games.
If soccer is a sport, competitive starcraft is too.

I think drawing the delineation at virtual vs non-virtual is silly.

i mean, keep in mind that any e-sport can be played by a computer much better than any human ever will, without breaking the game.

I'm confident that most expert chess players could beat a computer, since the game is more judgement-based than it is reflex-based.

But the same argument could be made if we were able to make robots that were really good at soccer.


Honestly I think it's because CSGO doesn't have the same appeal or excitement, since the game isn't as physically draining or dangerous.

Computers absolutely suck at games that aren't solvable. Anything that can't be broken down into 'best move is x' for a computer makes the computer really struggle to win at that game. Not any esport will be playable by a computer better than a human.

If we had remote control robots playing football would that be an e sport?
Any virtual / non virtual line gets a lot more unclear once we add another layer of interaction.

Quote from Skeletonxf

Computers absolutely suck at games that aren't solvable. Anything that can't be broken down into 'best move is x' for a computer makes the computer really struggle to win at that game. Not any esport will be playable by a computer better than a human.

exactly. All the bot has to do to win a CSGO tourney is just to buy a Desert Eagle, patrol the map and hitscan headshot everyone.

Same with League of Legends or whatever. He'll just lock on and hit you always and adjust for your movement to always hit you with perfectly calculated damage.

So Cook, are you saying they are sports? Or that they aren't?

Quote from Jutsu

I think it's an ignorant question. Like you said anyone that knows about gaming wouldn't argue it.

Anyone who knows gaming wouldn't argue that people put work into it. But like Exilement said, it all depends on your definition of what 'sport' is.

I agree that E-sports are sports, but you're completely off base that it is an ignorant question. It was a legitimate question that needed to be asked and answered.

This entire section of SP is slightly out of my brain's league of computing. I'm gonna stay off this side of the internet for a while, my head hurts already from reading /r/philosophy and this is making it worse. Thanks for answering the question, though.

Quote from Chaotic Penguin

This entire section of SP is slightly out of my brain's league of computing. I'm gonna stay off this side of the internet for a while, my head hurts already from reading /r/philosophy and this is making it worse. Thanks for answering the question, though.

Don't let people discouraging you get you down. Your topic was a good one and we got good discussion out of it. People will insult you to make themselves feel bigger, and even I'm guilty of this from time to time but keep your chin up and keep debating here and you'll fit in soon.

I get'cha. But my head still hurts though.

Quote from Captain Cook

I'm confident that most expert chess players could beat a computer, since the game is more judgement-based than it is reflex-based.

Haven't computers been outpacing actual chess players ever since Deep Blue managed to beat Kasparov (the world champion) in 1997?

Most Grandmasters have still notched victories over computers. Computers of that time at least. I'd be surprised if we couldn't invent a computer now that could beat a human every single time. It could use sheer mathematical probability to beat a human.

Quote from Nish

Most Grandmasters have still notched victories over computers.

not anymore. in 2008 a mobile phone won a high level chess tournament two years in a row without losing a game (several draws, though) and reached the grandmaster level.

Yeah that was actually the gist of my second sentence. We're able to pack so much intelligence into a small machine now and they should be able to beat humans easily.

By the very definition of a sport, the ones given by Merriam-Webster, Dictionary.com, AND Oxford , E-Sports are not sports, and they never really will be. People are literally changing the definition of a sport, and acting as if it's subjective. Saying E-Sports is a sport is honestly a way to try to sugarcoat the fact that you play games all day. Many people try to compare playing video games all day to play a sport. Team coaches have boasted about how players on their team practice for more hours than a football player. If people think playing a game for 4 hours is the same as playing football for 4 hours, I denounce them as intellectual human beings and they deserve to feel eternal suffering. Just because something is competitive doesn't mean it's a sport.

Chess isn't a sport, but it's a very respected, competitive game.
It's gaming. That's all it is.

Quote from Externus

Chess isn't a sport, but it's a very respected, competitive game.

Chess is a recognized sport of the International Olympic Committee and international chess competition is sanctioned by the World Chess Federation (FIDE), which adopted the now-standard Staunton chess set in 1924 for use in all official games.