Games sub-forum

Do you class people who play games as normal?

  • Total voters
    97
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
theyneverlearn said:
If it annoys people seeing certain threads, is it possible to hide threads?
Click to expand...

That would be pretty awesome frankly, but don't think it's possible at the moment on Cafe.

If not via forum software, maybe some user scripts? Do we have some talented coders to do something like that?
 
amolbhatia50k said:
This is sport for me,

An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment:team sports such as soccer and rugby

What is your criteria for sport if we're including gaming? Anything where people compete?
Click to expand...

See it has those same elements without the physical bit and aided by computers instead. It has similar structure, coverage at a smaller scale. Fine if you don't think of it as a pure form of sport but it isn't a far fetched idea as some would like to think.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
This is sport for me,

An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment:team sports such as soccer and rugby

What is your criteria for sport if we're including gaming? Anything where people compete?
Click to expand...

Picking a definition that happens to suit your opinion doesn't mean that's the definition. Physical exertion is no longer a requirement for something to be classed as a sport.
 
Zarlak said:
Picking a definition that happens to suit your opinion doesn't mean that's the definition. Physical exertion is no longer a requirement for something to be classed as a sport.
Click to expand...
Which definition is that from?
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Which definition is that from?
Click to expand...

The International Olympic committee who organise the Olympic games, SportAccord (the umbrella organisation for for all international sports federations such as FIFA, FIDE, IFAF, WDF and de facto representative of International sport) etc.

Holding the view that it must involve physical exertion to be a sport is archaic. It's widely recognised that sports can be either physical or mental, involving competition and co-ordination, team play or solo, ruled by a governing body with sponsors and competitions at an elite level etc. Clinging to an archaic view is like grumpy old men in pubs complaining that men aren't men anymore because they shave. Things change over time, including how we perceive and define things.
 
Zarlak said:
The International Olympic committee who organise the Olympic games, SportAccord (the umbrella organisation for for all international sports federations such as FIFA, FIDE, IFAF, WDF and de facto representative of International sport) etc.

Holding the view that it must involve physical exertion to be a sport is archaic. It's widely recognised that sports can be either physical or mental, involving competition and co-ordination, team play or solo, ruled by a governing body with sponsors and competitions at an elite level etc. Clinging to an archaic view is like grumpy old men in pubs complaining that men aren't men anymore because they shave. Things change over time, including how we perceive and define things.
Click to expand...
Neither has the IOC regonized e-sport as an Olympic sport nor has SportsAccord granted IeSF membership. They have simply applied for such recognition/membership. Do you have any article/announcement confirming the same? Because until they actually get recognition from sports governing bodies, all we have left are dictionary definitions and personal opinion. The dictionary definitions I've read always include physical exertion, as has been the widely held view for eons.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Neither has the IOC regonized esport as an Olympic sport nor has SportsAccord granted Iesf membership. They have simply applied for such recognition/membership. Do you have any article/announcement confirming the same? Because until they actually get recognition from sports governing bodies, all we have left are dictionary definition and personal opinion. The dictionary definitions I've read include physical exertion, as has been the widely held view for aeons.
Click to expand...

You're moving the goalposts. I said that both accept that physical exertion isn't a necessity in classifying something as a sport which you asked for sources on. Nowhere were we discussing whether either of them classed eSports as an Olympic sport. That's an absurd stretch on your part. Considering that both have a set out criteria for what constitutes a sport, anything that meets those criteria can be discussed as such.
 
Zarlak said:
The International Olympic committee who organise the Olympic games, SportAccord (the umbrella organisation for for all international sports federations such as FIFA, FIDE, IFAF, WDF and de facto representative of International sport) etc.

Holding the view that it must involve physical exertion to be a sport is archaic. It's widely recognised that sports can be either physical or mental, involving competition and co-ordination, team play or solo, ruled by a governing body with sponsors and competitions at an elite level etc. Clinging to an archaic view is like grumpy old men in pubs complaining that men aren't men anymore because they shave. Things change over time, including how we perceive and define things.
Click to expand...

It's not really an archaic definition, the problem is that for some reason people refuse to accept that a game is perfectly acceptable and can be played in a competitive atmosphere, now since a lot of people think that games are for kids or immature beings we somehow ended up calling sports things that are games, like chess or Counter Strike.
 
JPRouve said:
It's really an archaic definition, the problem is that for some reason people refuse to accept that a game is perfectly acceptable and can be played in a competitive atmosphere, now since a lot of people think that games are for kids or immature beings we somehow ended up calling sports things that are games, like chess or Counter Strike.
Click to expand...

The International Olympic Committee recognises Chess as a sport.

I think the problem here is not things being classed as a sport, it's peoples personal opinion when they disagree. Like they know better, like they get to decide what a 'real' sport is. If they don't like it then it's worthy of scorn etc. In reality their outdated opinions are irrelevant. People can move with the times or sit in the past it's up to them.
 
Moonred said:
See it has those same elements without the physical bit and aided by computers instead. It has similar structure, coverage at a smaller scale. Fine if you don't think of it as a pure form of sport but it isn't a far fetched idea as some would like to think.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but the question is how relevant is the physical element. If we're removing that, it opens a whole pandoras box. Television game shows and realities shows often fit the minus-physical exertion-definition of a "competition involving skill viewed by spectators".
 
Zarlak said:
The International Olympic Committee recognises Chess as a sport.

I think the problem here is not things being classed as a sport, it's peoples personal opinion when they disagree. Like they know better, like they get to decide what a 'real' sport is. If they don't like it then it's worthy of scorn etc.
Click to expand...
You're getting all defensive for no reason. Noone is spitting venom here.

I've never considered e-sport as a sport and I'm interested in the debate. You gave me associations that apparently do recognize it as such, when they actually , don't. The fact that IOC recognizes Chess doesn't automatically meant they will recognize e-sport. There's a process and they have to prove their bid to be worthy.

I don't get to decide. Obviously I don't, but neither do you. I mean, we could decide whether we consider it as a sport for ourselves, of course, but that's a different matter.

JPRouve said:
It's not really an archaic definition, the problem is that for some reason people refuse to accept that a game is perfectly acceptable and can be played in a competitive atmosphere, now since a lot of people think that games are for kids or immature beings we somehow ended up calling sports things that are games, like chess or Counter Strike.
Click to expand...
I frickin' love gaming. Always been a gamer and always will be. So the issue of frowning upon professional gamers isn't even part of the equation for me. Heck, I'd love to do it for a living. The contention, for me, is whether it is to be clubbed as a sport with the usual games that qualify as sports.
 
Can a mod move this into a new thread or something? I just realized this is the Admin forum :lol:
 
Zarlak said:
The International Olympic Committee recognises Chess as a sport.

I think the problem here is not things being classed as a sport, it's peoples personal opinion when they disagree. Like they know better, like they get to decide what a 'real' sport is. If they don't like it then it's worthy of scorn etc. In reality their outdated opinions are irrelevant. People can move with the times or sit in the past it's up to them.
Click to expand...

The definition of sport includes the terms physical or athletic activities. For some reason, probably PC reasons, we decided to add E-games, Chess or Mahjong in it ,even though they are clearly not sports and like I said the reason behind it, is probably because these activities are perfectly respectable and bring their own challenges but don't benefit from the good image that the word "Sport" brings to a game.

There is no real sports and fake sports, there are games who are sports and games who are not sports, when a games isn't based on athletic prowesses it's not a sport and there shouldn't be any problem with that.
 
JPRouve said:
The definition of sport includes the terms physical or athletic activities. For some reason, probably PC reasons, we decided to add E-games, Chess or Mahjong in it ,even though they are clearly not sports and like I said the reason behind it, is probably because these activities are perfectly respectable and bring their own challenges but don't benefit from the good image that the word "Sport" brings to a game.

There is no real sports and fake sports, there are games who are sports and games who are not sports, when a games isn't based on athletic prowesses it's not a sport and there shouldn't be any problem with that.
Click to expand...

This is the crux of the matter. This statement is not true. Times have changed and sport is no longer regarded as something that has to be athletic. It's why the ridiculous horse thing where they make horses dance is classed as a sport despite people thinking it isn't one, due to the (apparently) insane levels of coordination and skill it takes to get the horse to perform that way in tandem with the competitive aspect etc. It wasn't a PC reason that Chess was classed as a sport, it's because when you look at what elements constitute a sport, it exhibits them. Things like Mahjong are not not sports because it's Mahjong, that would be a ridiculously simplistic and naive way of looking at it but people do. The reason Mahjong is not a sport is because nobody plays it at a competitive level, it isn't ruled by a governing body etc. It's only played recreationally.

Sport is not a particular activity. Sport is the manner in which an activity is conducted. Football is not a sport when you play heads and volleys with your mates on the street, nor is golf a sport because I go to the driving range occasionally. Everything can be played as a game, as recreation, and can also be played in a competitive and sporting manner if done at a high enough level, meeting criteria that would deem it to be a sport. Some people find it difficult to accept that because it changes what they know and believe, but that's a local issue to that person.

amolbhatia50k said:
Yeah, but the question is how relevant is the physical element. If we're removing that, it opens a whole pandoras box. Television game shows and realities shows often fit the minus-physical exertion-definition of a "competition involving skill viewed by spectators".
Click to expand...

It doesn't, there are additional criteria that these things do not hit.
 
JPRouve said:
The definition of sport includes the terms physical or athletic activities. For some reason, probably PC reasons, we decided to add E-games, Chess or Mahjong in it ,even though they are clearly not sports and like I said the reason behind it, is probably because these activities are perfectly respectable and bring their own challenges but don't benefit from the good image that the word "Sport" brings to a game.

There is no real sports and fake sports, there are games who are sports and games who are not sports, when a games isn't based on athletic prowesses it's not a sport and there shouldn't be any problem with that.
Click to expand...
I agree with that.

Zarlak said:
You're moving the goalposts. I said that both accept that physical exertion isn't a necessity in classifying something as a sport which you asked for sources on. Nowhere were we discussing whether either of them classed eSports as an Olympic sport. That's an absurd stretch on your part. Considering that both have a set out criteria for what constitutes a sport, anything that meets those criteria can be discussed as such.
Click to expand...
I'm actually not. I looked for an IOC "definition" first and there's no such thing. So as far as definitions go we have the usual ones which always have physical exertion. With regards to IOC, it's about recognition. And by some criteria they have included Chess. I don't know what the criteria was, but they have. Will they include E-games? We have no idea. Whatever exemption they allowed Chess on the basis of, may either not apply to E-gaming, or might be negated by other failed parameters. I'm just saying we have no present basis for calling it a sport, other than personal opinion. The major associations as of now don't see as such, nor do definitions.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
I agree with that.


I'm actually not. I looked for an IOC "definition" first and there's no such thing. So as far definitions go we have the usual ones which always have physical exertion. With regards to IOC, it's about recognition. And by some criteria they have included Chess. I don't know what the criteria was, but they have. Will they include E-games? We have no idea. Whatever exemption they allowed Chess on the basis of, may either not apply to E-gaming, or might negated by other failed parameters. I'm just saying we have no present basis for calling it a sport. The major associations as of now don't see as such, nor do definitions.
Click to expand...

The simple fact that the IOC classify chess as a sport is proof that physical exertion is not a necessity. That's a simple fact. If physical exertion or athletic prowess was a necessity then anything that did not include it wouldn't be recognised. There is no getting around that. You may not know what the criteria was, but that's irrelevant as you do know what the criteria wasn't - physical exertion.

Also you're moving the goalposts here again, nobody here has claimed or attempted to claim that the IOC recognise eSports as a sport. If you can find me a post that says that then I'll apologise, but nobody did say that. You're just moving the goalposts. All that's being said is that the definitions used by these federations (for example the SportAccord definition is that it be either primarily physical, primarily mental, primarily motorised, primarily coordination based or primarily animal supported with elements of competition, not rely on an element of luck, not pose any undue risk to the health and safety of the athletes or participants and should not rely on equipment that is provided by a single supplier) do not include physical exertion as a requirement in order to classify something as a sport and therefore things that you wouldn't have considered as a sport before due to a very limited definition can now be considered as such if they meet this criteria.
 
Zarlak said:
This is the crux of the matter. This statement is not true. Times have changed and sport is no longer regarded as something that has to be athletic. It's why the ridiculous horse thing where they make horses dance is classed as a sport despite people thinking it isn't one, due to the (apparently) insane levels of coordination and skill it takes to get the horse to perform that way in tandem with the competitive aspect etc. It wasn't a PC reason that Chess was classed as a sport, it's because when you look at what elements constitute a sport, it exhibits them. Things like Mahjong are not not sports because it's Mahjong, that would be a ridiculously simplistic and naive way of looking at it but people do. The reason Mahjong is not a sport is because nobody plays it at a competitive level, it isn't ruled by a governing body etc. It's only played recreationally.

Sport is not a particular activity. Sport is the manner in which an activity is conducted. Football is not a sport when you play heads and volleys with your mates on the street, nor is golf a sport because I go to the driving range occasionally. Everything can be played as a game, as recreation, and can also be played in a competitive and sporting manner if done at a high enough level, meeting criteria that would deem it to be a sport. Some people find it difficult to accept that because it changes what they know and believe, but that's a local issue to that person.



It doesn't, there are additional criteria that these things do not hit.
Click to expand...

Actually it is, since sports can be played in casual and organized way, sports are just athletic games there is nothing else that defines them. Your definition is wrong because it's based on something that does not define a sport, a sport doesn't require any competition and there is no reciprocal, a competition doesn't create a sport.
 
JPRouve said:
Actually it is, since sports can be played in casual and organized way, sports are just athletic games there is nothing else that defines them. Your definition is wrong because it's based on something that does not define a sport, a sport doesn't require any competition and there is no reciprocal, a competition doesn't create a sport.
Click to expand...

Sport is defined in detail by many federations. It's not simply a sport because it's athletic. Jogging is not a sport but athletics is, working out is not a sport but Olympic weightlifting is, going for a bike ride is not a sport but cycling is. It becomes a sport when a distinction is made between recreation and competition along with other criteria.
 
Last edited:
Zarlak said:
The simple fact that the IOC classify chess as a sport is proof that physical exertion is not a necessity. That's a simple fact. If physical exertion or athletic prowess was a necessity then anything that did not include it wouldn't be recognised. There is no getting around that. You may not know what the criteria was, but that's irrelevant as you do know what the criteria wasn't - physical exertion.
Click to expand...

Zarlak said:
the definitions used by these federations (for example the SportAccord definition is that it be either primarily physical, primarily mental, primarily motorised, primarily coordination based or primarily animal supported with elements of competition, not rely on an element of luck, not pose any undue risk to the health and safety of the athletes or participants and should not rely on equipment that is provided by a single supplier) do not include physical exertion as a requirement in order to classify something as a sport.
Click to expand...
Cheers for this response as it clears a few things up.

We have a lot of definitions to conclude what is a sport and what isn't. There's dictionary definitions (numerous) and then there's of course how it is treated by the sporting associations. IOC at the end of the day governs Olympic sports and is one such source. And you are correct, for the IOC, physical exertion is not an absolute necessity, as per the recognition of Chess. Same with SportAccord. They've granted Chess membership and included "primarily mental" as part of their definition. So the logical conclusion would be that for these two physical assertion is not an absolute requirement.
 
Xbox gaming is a sport. Lol. I wonder would the physical education teacher line up a load of xboxes to play Fifa on sports day

Would they fcuk. Give over you lot
 
golden_blunder said:
Xbox gaming is a sport. Lol. I wonder would the physical education teacher line up a load of xboxes to play Fifa on sports day

Would they fcuk. Give over you lot
Click to expand...

No he wouldn't as it is called Physical Education. But they might propose to conduct an e-sport competition if they are not too stuck up.
 
Twigg said:
What constitutes a 'proper body'?
Click to expand...
You know, an official sports body rather than a bunch of nerds on the Internet

I'm a big gamer but no way would I kid myself that it's a sport. Competive gaming is how I'd classify the competitions
 
rcoobc said:
If it helps, pro gamers are said to have reaction times of fighter pilots but bodies of chain smokers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...ns-of-pilots-but-bodies-of-chain-smokers.html

So, I'd go with yes it is a sport. If bowling, snooker, darts and company are anyway.

There is a positive and negative aspect to it, although the negative aspect isn't necessary.
Click to expand...

It improves hand and eye coordination too but that's not a reason to say it's a sport.

Gaming is entertainment, it's part of the home entertainment industry.
Therefore it's not moving to the other sports forum, or a sub of that. It belongs in the entertainment forum
 
Status
Not open for further replies.