Seeing as chess grandmasters have been fighting for decades to have the ultimate sport of the mind included in the Olympics and laughed at and denied time and again, despite the fact that the art of chess has much more mainstream appeal and respect than an Esport like Starcraft, I highly doubt the Olympic Committee would ever take a bid to hold an Olympic video game competition seriously. Like, ever.
They even removed highly recognized sports like baseball to 'trim down' on the number of games.
Spontaneous Pneumothorax sucks, please keep MVP sC in your thoughts. sC fighting! 힘내세요
Esports doesn't belong in the olympics. I feel like a criteria for being an olympic sport is that said activity has to last 100s of years. broodwar lasted 14 and was considered one of the top, and its already pushed aside. If anything chess should get a shot at it first because the game never changes and doesnt run on technology.
Beamer United States. August 04 2012 16:42. Posts 185
The Olympics are for traditional sports, the X Games are for more action-oriented "extreme" sports, and video games have WCG. I don't think there's any reason to mix this up.
Modern Tetris is pathetic. For those who aren't familiar with modern variants, they have been simplified so much to the point where you can basically repeat the same pattern or strategy all game long.
Now, this is impressive.
Last edit: 2012-08-04 16:49:25
OneOther United States. August 04 2012 16:53. Posts 10693
Starcraft is not a sport -> It takes multitasking skills and handeye coordination -> No physical skill such as in basketball or soccer -> But chess is a sport -> Chess is more difficult -> Starcraft is not a sport.
This discussion has been done over and over and over.
In my opinion, putting Starcraft in Olympics is an absurd idea. For one, the truth is that it simply does not take as much mental or physical training/strength at Olympics sports no matter how you get around it. Archery? Have you tried shooting an arrow? It's a very difficult sport, just because they are not sprinting at full speed does mean otherwise. Secondly, where the hell do we draw the line? Tetris? Call of Duty? Halo? NBA 2K12? Not just video games, what about rubix cube? Jenga? These all take skills and training. Just because it takes certain skills does mean it qualifies as a legitimate sport, let alone for the Olympics. Aren't the Olympics supposed to display the peak of human physical capability, bred through countless hours of training and raw talent? I mean, as much as I love Starcraft, come on now - I feel like we are arguing just to argue about it because you can pretty much make a point for how anything can qualify as a "sport." It's just dumb.
OneOther United States. August 04 2012 16:57. Posts 10693
Just from reading a little wikipedia. Chess is considered as bona fide sport, meaning out of good will.
Internationally, closest definition of a sport that is agreed apon by most competitions is from SportAccord. It basically says: 1) The game has to have an element of competition. (Check for SC2) 2) It should be in no have harmful to any living creature. (This is kind of iffy. Some sports can be harmful to players, but I think they mean that it shouldn't be about harming another creature. So, kind of a check goes here.) 3) Not rely on an equipment from a single supplier. (Fail - Blizzard) 4) Not rely on any 'luck' element specifically designed into it. (Fail - Maybe try to play without a fog of war? =) )
I think it's better that e-sports are separated from real sports, as they can be pretty harmful for some (most) people who play nonstop and pretty much suck anyway . In physical sports you can't do that. You'll get tired and it's demanding on your body.
What do you think, though?
Edit: That definition is not Olympic's definition. It's, again, SportAccord's. And I agree with OneOther.
lol so much hate on that..... I would defenetly want to see starcraft on the olympics! I will spread the word and forece everyone to join for the cause of Auir!!! Seriously? i thought everyone here wanted starcrafft to get bigger?, if it´s bigger then more prises and events, and more money for the pros ofc
I dont really like the idea of video games at the Olympics. I don't know exactly how i worded this when i was talking to one of my friends, but its like, with traditional sports, you see it all. take soccer (the foot kind, to be clear): you see the input (the player moving his leg, kicking the ball) and the output (the ball being kicked and moving across the field). you see everything that happens and can truly appreciate it. With video games, you are given the casters camera, and you only see the output of the player (the units receiving commands) with little other context.
...and i've lost my train of thought... fantastic.. it was something about alienating audiences more than drawing interest.. ill update it the post if i remember soon =\ lol
more koreans is a good thing! || Yᵒᵘ Oᶰˡʸ Lᶤᵛᵉ Oᶰᶜᵉ
HunterX11 United States. August 04 2012 17:30. Posts 853
On August 04 2012 17:11 xSilverx wrote: lol so much hate on that..... I would defenetly want to see starcraft on the olympics! I will spread the word and forece everyone to join for the cause of Auir!!! Seriously? i thought everyone here wanted starcrafft to get bigger?, if it´s bigger then more prises and events, and more money for the pros ofc
Everyone here wants Starcraft to get bigger, but there are still places where you can and places where you cannot do it. Olympics aren't the place for it. Olympics are there since forever, and even though they have evolved trough the time to add/remove sports, the main focus has always been to challenge the athletes' physical limits.
Also, Starcraft is a game of limited information and luck that can never be perfectly balanced, unlike all the other Olympic sports. The champions are real champions and if they win a gold medal one year, you expect him to do very well 4 years after. In Starcraft, it's not the case. No matter how good you are compared to your opponent, there is always the off chance that he beats you by using a risky strategy and using luck to try and win. It's a really bad thing for something with a scale as big as the Olympics'.
Of course, as the game mature it's gonna be better (like BW), but that chance factor is still gonna be there, and even in BW you can see players like Flash be beaten by a bad player.It's not something that disturbing when you have tournies every month, but when you have to play one tournament every 4 year, it's gonna be a shame if a top tier progamer does bad because he got unlucky or it just wasn't his day. Also, there is the fact that a lot of progamers may not even last 4 years in this business, so progamers attending the Olympics only once may be very anti-climatic.
thezanursic Slovenia. August 04 2012 17:36. Posts 2806
On August 03 2012 09:09 Fischbacher wrote: This is never going to happen for StarCraft II and not for years and years for e-sports in general. Here is why: To get into the Olympics, the first step is to have an International Federation with affiliated national federations in many countries across most (if not all) continents. The International Federation must be of significant importance - essentially for StarCraft we would need a KeSPA-like organization but that has worldwide jurisdiction. Not something I foresee happening anytime soon. The closest thing to an international body eSports has is the International eSports federation (IeSF) but they couldn't even get South Koreans to take part in a tournament they organized in South Korea. For the records, the IeSF is currently recognized by the Olympic Council of Asia but not by any other branches of the Olympic moment. Second step is to get said International Federation to be recognized by the IOC (International Olympic Committee) as the proper governing body for the sport. For this to realisticly happen you need about 50 national federations across 5 continents. Third step, you need at /least/ 100 national federation across 5 continents to even be eligible to apply to become part of the games. The restriction is much lower for the Winter Olympics, but as the Winter Olympics require the event to take place on ice or snow eSports is not eligible. Fourth step, petition the IOC's executive board to be shortlisted as a potential sport. This process is actually a huge hurdle. For 2020, the shortlisted sports are Baseball/Softball, Squash, Roller Sports (Roller blade speed skating), Sports Climbing, Wakeboarding and Wushu (modern Kungfu). Some sports like Bowling and Chess have been trying to get over this hurdle for years with no success. Fifth step, hope and pray one of the current 28 sports gets dropped. Sixth step, hope and pray your sport replaces on of the sport(s) to get dropped. Seventh step: wait seven years until your sport is held at the Olympics for the first time.
Oh, and there is the issue of gender equality. No new event can be added if it isn't gender inclusive. Beyond all other issues, including the lack of a credible IF and the fact that eSports is arguably way too volatile to be included into a quadrennial event, the lack of female competitors in eSports really would hurt any bid. Essentially unless we get to a situation where 30-50% of credible programmers are female any bid would need to include female-only events in equal number to male-only events, and the extremely shallow tallent pool of such events would probably tank any bid anyway.
Point is, if we see eSports at the Olympics it won't be for at least another 20 years, if everything goes absolutely perfectly. Going perfectly includes: 1. a credible eSports federation that has real power over MLGs, IPLs, KeSPA, Gom, et cetera sometime two years ago. 2. a sudden and dramatic rise in the number of quality female progamer and either a. female progamers becoming regular challengers and winners in big eSports events or b. a near-equal number of female-only events to coincide with the number of current de-facto male-only events. 3. A regular world championship organized by the credible eSports federation. 4. Inclusion into the regular Asian Games (indoor Asian Games is nice but pretty much meaningless) and Pan-Am games. 5. eSports programmers being subject to regular and random out of competition and in competition drug testing (yes, requirement to even be considered for the Olympics, no matter the sport).
Also, an eSports bid would probably need to be for eSports in general, with events being "categories" of games that would be filled by the most popular game of the quadrennial that fits into the category. That's the only way to get arround how volatile eSports is. So essentially at every Olympics there could be a specific number of events for RTSs, FPSs, racing games, MOBAs, fighets, et cetera but those slots might be filled by different games every time.
Did I mention it's not happening anytime soon, if ever?
On August 03 2012 07:36 llamasrule1214 wrote: Eh, while this is a interesting idea, i feel like its kinda disregarding the tradition of the Olympics, physical competition among the best in the world, and E-Sports doesn't really have that feeling. Being a high level swimmer myself, I know from a first-hand POV that the work ethic needed to be even remotely OK at any sport is ridicioulous, both mentally and physcially, one must push themselves, but E-Sports like sc2 doesn't have the physical component. The Olympics, imo, should be a place of the world's physical best only. just my 2 very biased cents.
While i agree with the notion that Olympics are for more physical sports than SC, its kind of hard to argue that being able to move your hands as fast as the best Starcraft players on the planet do, averaging 200+ epm, isn't physically demanding. While it isn't as hard as running, swimming, jumping etc. it's not like anyone can just have 200+ epm while doing all the thinking required to play sc, let alone move their hands that fast for that long.
Working one's thumbs and hands over a keyboard, with excellent hand-eye coordination, is a skill that I'd love to have.
It doesn't deserve a spot at the pinnacle of human physical prowess.
I don't understand your logic. Working one's thumb and hands over a bow with excellent hand eye coordination is called archery. It's in the Olympics. Does that deserve a spot at the pinnacle of human physical prowess?
Equastrian events are kind of borderline, imo. The horse should get the medal. I wouldn't be sad if they left the Olympics.
The horses do get medals at the Olympics :-P
This post needs to be added to the OP
Zoesan Switzerland. August 04 2012 18:53. Posts 140
On August 04 2012 16:53 OneOther wrote: Starcraft is not a sport -> It takes multitasking skills and handeye coordination -> No physical skill such as in basketball or soccer -> But chess is a sport -> Chess is more difficult -> Starcraft is not a sport.
This discussion has been done over and over and over.
In my opinion, putting Starcraft in Olympics is an absurd idea. For one, the truth is that it simply does not take as much mental or physical training/strength at Olympics sports no matter how you get around it. Archery? Have you tried shooting an arrow? It's a very difficult sport, just because they are not sprinting at full speed does mean otherwise. Secondly, where the hell do we draw the line? Tetris? Call of Duty? Halo? NBA 2K12? Not just video games, what about rubix cube? Jenga? These all take skills and training. Just because it takes certain skills does mean it qualifies as a legitimate sport, let alone for the Olympics. Aren't the Olympics supposed to display the peak of human physical capability, bred through countless hours of training and raw talent? I mean, as much as I love Starcraft, come on now - I feel like we are arguing just to argue about it because you can pretty much make a point for how anything can qualify as a "sport." It's just dumb.
Shooting probably takes less physical prowess than Starcraft 2 as evidenced by 80 year olds having medals and it's an olympic sport. I think the biggest reason why it shouldn't be an olympic sport is because there is no e-sport that has survived longer than 14 years which is 3 olympics, which means no stability.
Apex United States. August 04 2012 20:09. Posts 3607
Video games aren't stable enough to be in the Olympics. BW, the hallmark of long-lasting pro-scene games, only managed to last 14 years. Put that in comparison with archery, track and field, etc., and they pale in comparison in terms of longevity.
When the Olympics happens only once every 4 years, coupled with the fact that pro video games lack the ability to endure for longer periods of time because of numerous factors (hard to keep consistent interest, developers pushing new sequels to supersede old ones), you're going to get a game that's just not stable enough to even include in the Olympics.
It's not going to happen and nor do I want it to happen.
I'm not one to argue whether or not SC2 is a sport or not, infact, I believe it is. However, Olympics is based off of an old sporting event that took back in Ancient Greek times which took place thousands of years ago. I know they have added lots of different sports to it which weren't pertaken during the Greek times but all of those Sports aren't commercialized products. Video Games also don't fit under the Olympic Spirit, adding games such as Starcraft 2 to the Olympics will only dent the Olympics upon elders and people who aren't familiar with E-Sports. You could argue that the concept of that is wrong in terms of ethics, but realistically people aren't ready to see Starcraft 2 as a sport within the Olympics.
It's just not realistic, and in my opinion it never will be because the game is owned by a private company.
Store
OneOther United States. August 04 2012 16:53. Posts 10693
. In physical sports you can't do that. You'll get tired and it's demanding on your body.![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/eNXPC.jpg)
