Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Does Professional Gaming Have a Future?

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the fatal-one-thank-you dept.

PC Games (Games) 116

mr_sifter writes "Three years ago, celebrity gamers such as Fatal1ty were bagging millions in prizes, and TV channels were queuing up to broadcast games on TV. Professional gaming looked set for the big time. It never happened, and in the current economic crisis, sponsors and media organizations are cutting costs, resulting in the closure of many pro gaming competitions (as we recently discussed) and a down-scaling in prize money. This feature looks at whether pro gaming can bounce back, and whether it will always be a PC sport, or if pro gaming on consoles is the future."

cancel ×

116 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First! (-1, Offtopic)

naam00 (1145163) | more than 5 years ago | (#27540881)

Where's my prize?

No (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27540885)

It's just a marketing tool by PR companies. As soon as they find a better way to sell games, they'll drop it like a hot brick.

Re:No (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27542307)

Same with NASCAR. As soon as they find a better way to sell cars and engine oil, they'll drop it like a brick.

Re:No (2, Informative)

Quantos (1327889) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543507)

Racing is an incredibly effective way to sell cars.
My dad used to sell cars back in the 60's, when one manufacturer won a race on the weekend the sales for that car spiked the following week. He loved it when Dodge won the race.
As for games, I don't buy games just because others like them. I buy them because I like them. Thanks to the readily available demos. Whereas auto racing has a purpose to it's heritage, video gaming doesn't. Until that changes gamers will need jobs.

Re:No (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 5 years ago | (#27546727)

Eh, when I read the title, I assumed it was about pro gamers - e.g. professional poker players, bridge players, chess players, soccer players, football players etc.

Those are still called games, last I checked.

Mass culture not ready for ... (5, Informative)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 5 years ago | (#27540909)

... pro gaming. While you have places like Korea and starcraft, it's not the norm anywhere else.

I remember many startups like "Online athletes" years ago (defunct now) trying to create a "pro gaming" site and pay gamers for winning games, the y failed horribly.

Also there is a problem with pro gaming - the games keep changing and you can't do real "pro gaming" online because of cheaters and hackers, so you can't be sure the people you're playing against are "clean".

Gaming is also not like other sports where you stick to one game and then build an audience around that game around those rules. In the video game world everything is constantly changing.

One of my best friends plays at the WCG every year and would always be in the top 10 players but he never made any real money on it, he won prizes like computer hardware, etc. But I think it will take a leap forward in culture and technology before eSports takes off (a generation or so) when gaming is seen as something normal that most everybody does, and technology has advanced to allow more activity... in which Nintendo's Wii will be seen as just one of the first attempts.

Many competitive sports games can be really fun to watch but only if the camera work is done intelligently. Things like Orange Smoothie/other mods for Quake 3, etc, allowed people to stream live matches to the web so people could watch the match, truth be told... not all video games are exciting to watch, and this has to do with the lack designing the game and the games systems to do what traditional camera's do for televised sports.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#27540949)

Normal people don't play sport. And face it, cricket isn't *that* exciting for the uninitiated.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (0, Flamebait)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541115)

It amazes me that people are willing to pay to sit and watch some stranger play any sport. Spectator sports simply bore me, and the handful of times I've found myself stuck standing around with nothing to do but watch someone play a video game, were a special kid of purgatory.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542065)

But if the players got much more skill than you do / are innovative looking at their moves and getting ideas from them can be quite nice. Imho. Those moment don't make it necessary to see a whole match though.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27541003)

Televise racing games. Although I don't watch F1 or NASCAR or whatever, millions of other people do. Heck the visuals could actually be better than real racing.

It would be more environmentally friendly too. (Please don't shoot me!)

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

Rabbitbunny (1202531) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541099)

I'd like this idea if you mentioned TORCS.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

zygotic mitosis (833691) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541417)

Are there in-game crashes as spectacular as some I've seen clips of? Does that game exist? I might consider picking that up

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

PFI_Optix (936301) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542439)

Without the risk of real injury, drivers would be a lot less inclined to be careful. Every race would likely devolve into a big wreck. Despite what many think, NASCAR isn't about the wrecks and most people watching it aren't looking to see a big pileup every week.

My network admin loves to watch NASCAR and it's all about the nuance of the race for him. I've heard enough accounts of Jeff Gordon's wins (and losses) that I understand what it's about.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (0, Flamebait)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541203)

Gaming is also not like other sports where you stick to one game and then build an audience around that game around those rules. In the video game world everything is constantly changing.

In a word, bullshit. Quake still works. So does Doom, for that matter.

It would not be at all difficult to stick to one game and get hardcore at it. Nor would changing games present that huge of a challenge, I suspect.

Many competitive sports games can be really fun to watch but only if the camera work is done intelligently.

I don't know. I might like watching highlights -- things like Quake Done Quick, for instance -- but quite a lot of these games just wouldn't be fun to watch. Either it'd be all action, with Quake, or a lot of camping, with Counter-Strike.

Many competitive sports games can be really fun to watch but only if the camera work is done intelligently. Things like Orange Smoothie/other mods for Quake 3, etc, allowed people to stream live matches to the web so people could watch the match

"Spectator mode" was probably the best way, since unlike other sports, the entire match can be recorder in full 3D, in every detail. If you're right, and it has to do with camera work, those could always be done after the fact, though I suspect many users would greatly enjoy finding their own...

But in all honesty, I've never been one for spectator sports. Maybe it will gain an audience, but it continues to amaze me that other sports have an audience. Are geeks really the right people to ask about this?

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543979)

In a word, bullshit. Quake still works. So does Doom, for that matter.

Would you tune in to watch people play Doom in this day and age? Pac-Man still works too.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#27545813)

I would probably tune in to watch people play Quake.

In fact, so would you. Look here. [google.com]

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27541225)

You are spot on with the constant change problem. It takes very long to build an audience. Look for example at snow/skate boarding and how long it took them to get where they are now, which is still far behinde more traditional sports. Most games just don't live that long. Starcraft is a notable exception. Games are just not made to last long, because there is no money in that.

Real online games could perhaps change the picture. Games that are made to play online. They are still rather new and just start to mature. There are still lots of lessons to learn for the producers. But I think for example Quake live could be a great deal here. It does not intend to be the newest and greatest and most complex or realistic. That means it doesn't follow a trend and won't be outdated as easily. It has simple and intuitive rules (kill or die) and is just fun. And it will be easily available for almost everyone. All that places it a lot closer to real sports than almost every other modern game.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (2, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541827)

Things like Orange Smoothie/other mods for Quake 3, etc, allowed people to stream live matches to the web so people could watch the match, truth be told... not all video games are exciting to watch, and this has to do with the lack designing the game and the games systems to do what traditional camera's do for televised sports.

Well you also have to realize that the televised sports aren't all that exciting to watch. They put in a lot of time, money, and effort into the production of the televised events. They have camera's all over the field with directors choosing the shot, when to do an instant replay, etc. They have a team of people just for putting that yellow line down on the football field to mark the first down. They hire experienced sportscasters who exist largely for the purpose of describing what's going to in such a way as to make it seem more interesting and exciting.

Even if video games were otherwise viable as a spectator sport, they probably wouldn't gain in popularity until someone really put in the work to professionally produce the events like a sporting event. And who's going to do that when, as you bring up, it's such a moving target? People keep playing newer games, and even a given game might get updates which change the gameplay, so the rules of the game keep changing. The platforms keep changing. By the time you developed the systems and procedures and expertise to cover one game, years would have passed and that game would be old news.

With most current professional sports, people have been playing that particular game for at least 100 years or so. Do you think today's popular video games will still be popular in 100 years?

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541983)

The "constant" changing problem is almost null. These things are done at "live" events with hardware that isn't theirs. The only cheats they can do are exploits, and only if those exploits are clearly not mentioned in the rules.

It's just not a matter of you sitting at home stroking your cock while you load up aimbot.exe and wallhack.exe for these things.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542053)

No, it's not the norm, because it doesn't exist, but it have to start somewhere.

By that logic any new TV show/games/.. would fail everywhere to because they haven't been seen there before.

And there are atleast gaming contests in other places, even if they may not show on TV.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

Kabuthunk (972557) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542447)

It annoys me that it's not more prevailant. Maybe I'm the exception to the rule, but I LOVE spectating games... oftentimes more than playing them. For any old games I'm familiar with (and sometimes ones I've never heard of before), I very much enjoy watching speed runs of it from speed demos archive, and have about 1/4 of my hard drive currently filled with said video files.

I would honestly PAY in order to see streaming video of live online play for say... Starcraft, WOW, or most anything. Well, except sports games... strangely those bore the shit out of me... much like most sports in general.

But yeah... if I had the option, I'd definitely be watching live streaming gaming. At least on the Wii, Super Smash Bros. Melee has online Spectator mode :}

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543597)

It annoys me that it's not more prevailant. Maybe I'm the exception to the rule, but I LOVE spectating games... oftentimes more than playing them.

You are the exception to the rule. It is boring. And you are actually annoyed that the rest of us don't like it? You sound like one of those European guys, furious that Americans don't care about soccer...

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

JackieBrown (987087) | more than 5 years ago | (#27544333)

I don't understand watching any game that last hours with 1 or two points scored.

Add to that, the game can end in a tie!

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (1)

QBobWatson (30044) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543195)

EA actually spent a lot of time and money making Command and Conquer 3 into a viable spectator sport with their Battlecast viewer. You can stream current matches or watch archived ones. They even have an online TV show, Battlecast Primetime, where they show some of the best matches with commentary. It's fun to watch if you've ever played the game, and I have no trouble believing a gamer could make money with that kind of forum.

Re:Mass culture not ready for ... (2, Interesting)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543543)

But I think it will take a leap forward in culture and technology before eSports takes off (a generation or so) when gaming is seen as something normal that most everybody does,

Why a generation or so? In my age bracket (40-50), the oddball is someone who does not play computer games of some sort.

The "problem" (as I see it) is the medium. How much has baseball (for example) changed in the last 50 years? Only a tiny handful of outdoor sports have gained enough popularity over the centuries to become viable professional sports.

The closest thing to a timeless computer game I've encountered is Rogue/Nethack. It is boring as hell to watch someone else play. As much I like World of Warcraft, there is no way I would pay to watch someone play it and all of the videos (with maybe one exception[1]) are fairly tedious to watch.

Your other comments are pretty much spot-on, this one, I think, is off.

[1] The video of the dwarf knocking people off a bridge in a battleground with hard packed snowballs was funny, but not sport.

Short answer: (5, Funny)

drsquare (530038) | more than 5 years ago | (#27540941)

No.

Long answer:

No, not really, outside of Korea anyway. But they eat dogs.

Re:Short answer: (0, Troll)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541143)

Third , fourth, fifth, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10 answers:

[_] Future? I didn;t know it had a present or a past? [br> [_] It's what I tell my mom every time she nags me about moving out of her basement. I say she's interfering with my "career." I'm 37. And I smell funny.
[_] Isn't "professional gaming" illegal outside of Las Vegas?
[_] If you take away professional gaming from the career pros, only losers will have professional gaming careers ... oh wait -
[_] I can't decide which is worse, being a professional gamer or being CowboyNeal'd ...
[_] "I guess I'll have to go back to day trading ..."
[_] Q: A professional gamer and a human waste of oxygen fall off a building (but I repeat myself) ... who hits the ground first? A: Who gives a fuck!
[_] Get a real job!
[_] Q. How many "professional gamers" does it take to screw in a lightbulb? A: 5, because they have very very small dicks.

Not just pro gaming. (4, Interesting)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27540965)

The economy is pretty bad and will take a long time to get fixed. When it is fixed, it's not going to be anything like the free ride a lot of people were used to in the past decade.

Pro gaming isn't going to be the only area. I expect actors and pro athletes to take a hit too.

Does it make sense to pay someone millions of dollars to play a game or pretend to be someone else in front of a camera while millions are losing their homes and jobs?

Take pro sports. Where do they make their money? Well. One way is selling tickets to games. But ticket prices have been soaring. Here's a historical look at Yankee ticket prices [riveraveblues.com] . It's really insane to think a box seat goes for $250 after season ticket discounts. That's just not something a lot of people are going to be able to justify. Same goes for merchandise.

Another way that sports franchises make money is through advertising. Both in the venue, on tv and through endorsements. Many people are spending less. They either don't have the income they used to have or they need to save more to cover the losses in their savings and retirement plans. It doesn't matter who endorses that new toy/car/carpet/whatever. People will be buying less. That means less money is going to be spent on advertising and we already started seeing advertising budgets cut.

The economy grew too high, too fast with nothing to support it. The current administration and previous administration kept pumping money into the system to keep it from collapsing. That can't go on forever. We're not going to recover from it. The best we can hope is that all this money that is being printed is being used in a way that will go into new industries that can help fill the void all these scammers created.

Re:Not just pro gaming. (3, Insightful)

KarlIsNotMyName (1529477) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541037)

Yeah, athletes and actors can take a big hit in salary and still be well paid for what they're doing (either they take a big hit, or we stop using the stupidly expensive actors for movies that could've been made a lot cheaper and a lot more profitable without them). I don't see how their roles in society are more important than that of a farmer, that actually gives us something we need to live. Or a doctor, that straight up saves lives. Same goes for the CEOs and really anyone that's worth more than 10 million dollars. No one needs more than 10 million dollars to spend on themselves, and no one needs anything near that per year. That money can buy a big house, a big car or other transportation, and the best medical treatment (though if you need expensive medical care, you're more often than not, not in a position to pay for it).

Re:Not just pro gaming. (-1, Flamebait)

JackieBrown (987087) | more than 5 years ago | (#27544365)

Exactly.

That's why the governement should regulate salarys.

Or, we can quit watching sports and overrated movies with no stories and stock holders can start holding CEO's accountable.

I prefer the 2nd solution, but in our age of class envy, I think the first is becoming more popular.

Re:Not just pro gaming. (1)

Hubbell (850646) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541239)

The best we can hope is all the money they are printing gets burned immediately otherwise you're gonna see a crash of the dollar and everyone is FUCKED, especially with the Chinese already going 'nah guys, we dont think we are gonna buy your bonds anymore cause we know you will NEVER pay us back.'

Re:Not just pro gaming. (1)

Alarindris (1253418) | more than 5 years ago | (#27545217)

Does it make sense to pay someone millions of dollars to play a game or pretend to be someone else in front of a camera while millions are losing their homes and jobs?

Yes it does when you remember that hundreds of millions of people watch. It's not like one person is paying an athlete $10 million a year, it's millions of people paying him.

Re:Not just pro gaming. (1)

coaxial (28297) | more than 5 years ago | (#27546773)

Does it make sense to pay someone millions of dollars to play a game or pretend to be someone else in front of a camera while millions are losing their homes and jobs?

Yes, since in hard economic times, people still pay for entertainment. Most famously, Hollywood made money during the Great Depression. ("Throughout most of the Depression, Americans went assiduously, devotedly, almost compulsively, to the movies." [virginia.edu] )

Baseball ticket prices? Let me quote from your link:

Meanwhile, some bloggers and fans always ask why, and for that, we turn to the market. The Yankees are selling tickets at a face value of $250 per, and they're selling out the stadium. Tickets for premium games sell on StubHub for well over that value. The market, in other words, can afford it, and the Yankees are just trying to capture their revenues.

So in conclusion, you don't know what you're talking about.

There will be a few jobs (4, Interesting)

grizdog (1224414) | more than 5 years ago | (#27540989)

Piloting drones for the military, or one of those rovers on the moon or another planet, or submersibles used for underwater repairs or construction or treasure hunting, or robots that work with bombs or hazardous materials, and things like that. It's not professional gaming, but gaming will prepare you for those jobs at least as well as anything else will

Re:There will be a few jobs (2, Interesting)

Weedhopper (168515) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543787)

It's not just stuff like this. There's an obvious digital divide in the OR. You can tell the difference between people who can quickly and intuitively grasp the difference between camera angles and on screen manipulation and those who don't. Age is a huge factor.

How big a future and where, is more to the point. (1)

EWAdams (953502) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541067)

It already has a future in Korea. Does it have one in the USA? Possibly. How big? Not very. Americans like their athletics real.

It's probably about the level of, say, American Gladiator: a viable niche at best.

Re:How big a future and where, is more to the poin (1)

jalefkowit (101585) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541135)

Americans like their athletics real.

Two words: pro wrestling.

Re:How big a future and where, is more to the poin (1)

badasscat (563442) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542517)

Americans like their athletics real.

Two words: pro wrestling.

Even pro wrestling is "real" in that the moves they're performing are real. When a guy jumps off a ring corner 20 feet into the air and does a backflip down on top of another guy, that's real. And without a lot of training and a lot of practice, you're looking at serious injury or worse without proper training.

You can debate the difference between a "game" and a "sport" but for me, it really comes down to the risk of physical injury. A big reason (though not the only reason) people like sports is because they like to see athletes perform physical feats that they themselves cannot. It's all about pushing the body to its limit. "Games" don't have that. They can still be interesting to watch, but for other reasons. You don't watch a chess match hoping to see a 99 yard touchdown pass or a slam dunk. On the other hand, the audience for watching "games" is inherently much smaller than the audience for sports, because there's less raw excitement.

Professional gaming is what it says - a game, not a sport. It will never be more popular than, say, watching two people play chess. People are just inherently more interested in watching other people perform physical tasks - video gaming is in the second person, you're watching someone manipulate some other character that doesn't really exist, and it's that virtual character that appears to be doing all the work and taking all the risks. It's not a sport and it'll never be popular for that reason.

Re:How big a future and where, is more to the poin (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27546221)

Shitloads of people watch poker on television. The differentiating factor isn't physical activity. It's the sense of jeopardy.

Re:How big a future and where, is more to the poin (1)

triffid_98 (899609) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542931)

Not true. Most of our big sports stars have been using cheats and gobbling powerups for years!

Americans like their athletics real.

Re:How big a future and where, is more to the poin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27543623)

I think by "real", he meant meatspace.

Not for now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27541069)

The issue is not enough people care and only the top few dozen could make a living out of it (assuming 14 hours a day and keeping your reflexes permanently as younger ppl come through). With a professional sport like football you don't need that, you can be the 2000th best player in the world and still make a lot of money somewhere... if you're the 2 thousandth best player in quake/sc you'll end up on welfare. 99% of pro gamers would make more money now and in the next 10 years at least just playing as hobby and getting a mcjob during the day.

Of course (3, Insightful)

evilNomad (807119) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541107)

As long as someone is willing to sit and watch someone play a game, why wouldn't there be basis for a pro-gaming? Would you like to advertise directly to 1.000.000 16-25 year old males that play a lot of games, and buy a lot of hardware? Well then pro-gaming is where it is at, and you can get some really cheap well targeted advertising. When the advertising dollars are there, the rest is easy.

Re:Of course (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541199)

long as someone is willing to sit and watch someone play a game, why wouldn't there be basis for a pro-gaming? Would you like to advertise directly to 1.000.000 16-25 year old males that play a lot of games, and buy a lot of hardware? Well then pro-gaming is where it is at, and you can get some really cheap well targeted advertising. When the advertising dollars are there, the rest is easy.

Advertising is dying. Look at how decimated the newspapers and magazines are, as ad dollars dry up. The "new media" are going to have the same problem, because, as more and more people get directly connected, and search gets better, people won't need advertising to find what they want. They're already "ad-blind." When I mentioned this to a friend, he asked if gmail still carried ads, since he hasn't noticed one in ages. No, he doesn't use ad-blocking software - he just doesn't notice the ads ... guess google succeeded in their goal of making ads "less intrusive".

Quick test - name the sponsors or products of ANY of the last 5 ads you saw ... you probably can't. As search engines get better, all advertising becomes worth less - so even google contains the seeds of its' own destruction [slashdot.org] .

Your "million kids" example? Kids want what their friends have. Always has been that way - always will be.

Re:Of course (1)

EMeta (860558) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541467)

Ahh, but compare the decline in advertising by the gaining appeal of gaming. And advertising still pays for thousands of television channels and radio stations quite successfully. In my childhood, video games were extremely nitch. In my kids', it will be difficult to find kids who don't play some form of interactive electronic game at least monthly. As video games continue to get more diverse, this trend will only continue. And the nitch of people who are crazy serious about gaming will only increase as well. These are people with disposable income that work very well for advertisers. It's just a matter of when.

Re:Of course (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542171)

Nonsense. Advertising in all its' forms is on the way out in terms of effectiveness. Case in point - 2 years ago, the 2nd-largest advertiser in the entire world was GM. That worked out to be really "effective", didn't it?

People aren't "crazy about gaming" - they're "crazy about a specific game." Advertising to them isn't going to get them to drop their craze for another any more than advertising to slashdot users is going to get them to switch to joeblowtechnewsfornerds.

There are many products that advertising just doesn't work for. You can advertise the shit out of your Chrysler car, but people will stil want a Toyota Camry, because we all know Chrysler has only 2 weeks to live, and Toyota builds quality cars.

Word of mouth beats advertising dollars every time - and when everyone's connected, everyone has access to word-of-mouth, and all advertising will be seen as just astro-turfing by paid shills. Sure, that means that a lot of businesses that are based on dishonesty (manipulating people to buy something because it's "supposed" to be better when it isn't) will die off. I have no problem with that. The current die-off in the print business is just the first step. Funny thing about inflection points - people don't realize they're living through one until years later. We've lived through inflection (or tipping) points with general computing (63 years - ENIAC) and cell phones (36 years - April 3rd, 1973), the global network is at least as big a change, and may take just as long to mature, and the end result will leave a lot of blood on the floor. We may actually end up with "truth in advertising" being the only option.

Re:Of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27541823)

Quick test - name the sponsors or products of ANY of the last 5 ads you saw ...

VirtualGirlHD and Fleshlight

As much future as professional watching porn (3, Interesting)

Jafafa Hots (580169) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541133)

Just imagine... professional porn watching, and you can tune in and watch your favorite porn watchers watch porn. And, the professional stamp collector watching channel - exciting action, watching those philatelists lick hinges. Why, soon EVERY leisure activity can be a spectator sport. Watch people read the latest exciting novels, watch them watch movies. Watch people watching people watching people watch TV!

Hey here's an idea for a new show - Guitar Hero Hero Hero! Watch someone pretend to watch someone pretend to play guitar!

Re:As much future as professional watching porn (1)

Jafafa Hots (580169) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541149)

Ok I'm joking, truth is I love watching people play video games, I just got tired of reflexively slapping quarters down on the edge of my HDTV screen to reserve the next game.

Re:As much future as professional watching porn (2, Funny)

jshackney (99735) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542041)

Geez, I'm starting to feel bad that I paid an extra $19.95 a month for the new DirecTV Paint Drying channel.

Pro Gaming tied to the gaming market (1)

mseeger (40923) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541153)

Hi, it will depend on the gaming market in general: Complex, PC based games favour professional gaming. Casual games on the Console are hardly done in a professional way. CU, Martin

Re:Pro Gaming tied to the gaming market (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541335)

There isn't a separation between console gaming and PC gaming, like there was in the old days. Where have you been for the past decade? It isn't like 1989 when consoles sported a huge number of 2D side scrollers and a goodly portion of PC gamers were a bunch of wargamers and roleplayers playing PC games with hex and/or grid maps.

Quakefoo is Quakefoo no matter which platform it's on. You could do competitive gaming with SOCOM on a PS2 or Team Fortress on platform-foo, or even competitive gaming with some 2D game like Street Fighter or one of the many downloadable PSN/XBox Live games.

Re:Pro Gaming tied to the gaming market (1)

mseeger (40923) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541595)

Hi,

you tie the two arguments together while i meant them to seperate:

  • Casual gaming ist bad for pro gaming as casual gamer will not be as interested in Pro Games as e.g. some real time strategy players will be. So he will less likely be an audiance and an customer for advertised goods. This true for console as well as PC gamers.
  • PC gaming is more tied to modding and additional gadgets than the console is. If i look into Mediamarkt (something similar to Fry's here in germany), than PC addons beats Console addons in the league of rack space by a factor of 10. So PC gamers are a better audiance for advertisement around games than Console gamers are. This seperation of the two markets will continue to exist. This true for complex games as well as casual games.

My arguments are targeting the financing of "Pro Gaming" as this will be the focal point for its future. I hope that clarifies my position.

I neither meant to imply or suggest that PC games are better/more complex/superior than Console games. IMHO the Console will win over 90% of the game market in the long term.

Sincerely yours, Martin

Ultimate Gamer (2, Interesting)

Ferret96 (1293480) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541177)

The Spike Channel is trying to capitalize on this with the show "Ultimate Gamer". I saw one episode and the show seems more like MTV's Real World than any real gaming competition. While that kind of show doesn't appeal to me, I think I can see what they are trying to do. How do you create a delivery system around a game that makes it interesting to watch? With sports you can go to the field or watch it on TV and in either circumstance you are watching something that is dynamic that engages your attention. However, with video games, all the action is on a screen whose images are usually suited for only viewing one side of what's going on (Blue Team only, or Red Team only). There are way to switch back and forth between the players, but that hardly is smooth. Also I don't know about you but watching my friends play Halo 3 is nowhere near as fun as watching a ball game.

I seriously doubt it, few activites allow it (2, Informative)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541227)

While you MIGHT want to link pro-gaming with pro-sports, the simple fact is that very few sports can be done on a pro-level. Especially the kind of pro-level that hands out small fortunes in prize money.

I read a story just recently about a dutch soccer player who played for one of the smaller but still big enough to matter teams, who in between matches worked as a constructor and now does once again. Okay, so his team wasn't in the top, but still, soccer is HUGE and he could NOT earn enough with the sport to make it his full time occupation.

The top darter in holland drives a tram. I am sure there are many other examples of sports that are at times aired on tv, where an individual might even be famous and they still need an ordinary day job to pay the bills.

You also have to consider the audience. Yachting attracts big sponsers because the people who watch it spend big money. Is gaming like that? Would you slap down several thousand bucks for a seat at a programing event? Did you buy the new X-fi soundcards? Gamers are two markets anyway, the geeks and the new MTV crowd. Cater to one and you loose the other. Doesn't happen with soccer. The geek gaming crowd isn't going to spend a fortune on a branded item. They know the deal and will get something cheaper instead. The MTV crowd? They got lots more to spend it on, you are competing with all other entertainment and mobile phones and clothes for their money.

So no, I don't think pro-gaming has a future, it will always be like one of those small sports where sometimes someone gets their 15 minutes of fame and if they are smart make enough to live comfortably for the rest of their lives but equal to say Soccer or baseball or whatever is your countries big sport. No.

Savepoint (1)

MrKaos (858439) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541257)

Whenever you get set-up well in a game you save. Let's just hope these guys used that good practise when it came to their prize money

A little bit besides the question (1)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541295)

Are there any taped matches with English commentary? I remember watching a starcraft 2 game(demo) a few months ago and the commentator's energetic way of reporting on the game made me curious about it.

Links would be most welcome.

Re:A little bit besides the question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27541399)

gomtv.com has english commentary for 2-3 tournaments of pro korean starcraft, and it webcasts live. the commentary is by Nick "Tasteless" Plott, and incidentally he is also the reason i got into starcraft. i hadnt even played the game until i had seen a few VODs with his commentary.

Re:A little bit besides the question (2, Informative)

pathotron (1360117) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541429)

www.gomtv.net is the english version of the site.

Re:A little bit besides the question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27541923)

teamliquid.net -----> the ultimate English-language resource for anything related to Starcraft progaming. There is quite a lively community.

English commentaries -----> Go to youtube channels 'VioleTAK' and 'klazartSC'

wcg ultimate gamer sucks in many ways some of the (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541405)

Wcg ultimate gamer sucks in many ways some of the big ones are

> Why is this on SCI-FI and not G4 or spike tv?

> Some of games they picked so far and joke of some of the Real Life Challenges.

> reality show type setup / rules that takes away from being about who is really the best at the game and may even keep some real good players but really bad looking ones out of the show.

> XBOX 360 only come on fps games are not the best on that system and most of good people with mouse + keyboard and not the xbox controller.

> Where are the RTS games let see they suck on the XBOX mainly with the xbox controller ( mouse + keyboard is the way to go with RTS games) so they can't have them even know they ARE BIG WITH PRO GAMING.

> Contestant talking about throwing games is a NON joking way.

> why paintball and not laser tag?

> This so bad that you have to keep watching it to see what they will do next.

> and many more smaller ones.

Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (5, Insightful)

dr_wheel (671305) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541411)

A little background about myself: I spent the better part of my teens and early 20's playing at a high competitive level in games like Quake and Counter-Strike. I've won semi-major events; I was even on a few teams with notable CPL/WCG winners. You could say that I was right on the cusp of becoming a pro gamer.

There are a few reasons that I didn't go "pro" like a budding career and the fact that only the very cream of the crop players actually made enough money at the time to consider pro gaming a worthwhile endeavor. I knew I wasn't the best player around, and carting myself around to places like the CPL to finish in the bottom half of the top 10 or top 5 didn't make any sense to me. Working a steady job and earning a living from 9-5, 5 days a week, did.

Back then, I watched a lot of demos of other players and teams. You know what? I hated it. It felt like homework to me. When I attended lans, I rarely watched or was interested in spectating matches.

Why? Because gaming, especially at the highest levels, is way more fun when you are actually playing. Gaming, to me, is all about the adrenaline rush that you get when you're storming a base, or grabbing quad damage, or fighting back to win a round when it's 1v3. Spectating, to me, is for losers. Spectating is what I did back in high school when I lost a round of Street Fighter II and had to sit and wait for my turn in a rotation of friends.

I have probably said it here before, but it bears repeating. Pro gaming relies on sponsorship which, in turn, relies on spectators. And gaming is a is a poor spectator 'sport', or at the best, a niche market.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542871)

I've never understood the spectator part of any real sport either.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (1)

dr_wheel (671305) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543033)

'I've never understood the spectator part of any real sport either.'

That's an entirely different discussion. Major sports are exciting (imo) because they show us the very limits of what we are capable of physically. I watch and enjoy many different sports from baseball to (American) football to tennis and even motorsport.

Watching a human being hit a 100mph fastball, knowing that if he were to blink his eyes he wouldn't even see it coming across home plate, or seeing a wide receiver grasp a football by the tips of his fingers and haul it in while maintaining his footing in-bounds, or watching a driver make a perfectly timed pass at 180mph... these are special and amazing feats, in my mind.

Again, I know it takes a good deal of skill to play video games at a high level. It takes the highest level of concentration and reflexes, much like real professional sports. But it just isn't visually impressive... at all.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27545695)

Watching a human being hit a 100mph fastball, knowing that if he were to blink his eyes he wouldn't even see it coming across home plate, or seeing a wide receiver grasp a football by the tips of his fingers and haul it in while maintaining his footing in-bounds, or watching a driver make a perfectly timed pass at 180mph... these are special and amazing feats, in my mind.

a different person might think watching so-and-so, the pro insert-game-here player kick ass required ridiculous twitch reflexes and was an equally amazing feat. personally, I think spectator anything is generally dull a shit.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27543677)

I suppose it's like vicariously playing the sport.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27544655)

I second that opinion.

I never understood why people prefer to sit on the couch eating nachos while watching a 3 hour long football game with sweating grunting men ramming each other.

If you really enjoyed the sport you would try to play it yourself.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27544931)

Oh well, you could say the same about porn. Why do people sit on their couch and watch other people fucking? If you really enjoyed fucking you would try to do it yourself.

Most humans have imagination and empathy. That enables them to feel like somebody else, and often even have stronger emotions than that other person. That works for sports too. Especially when they actually did play it at some point in their life.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (1)

Ka D'Argo (857749) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543261)

I disagree. While it would be awesome to have pro level skill and be able to hang with the likes of fata1ity, zero, cooller or socrates, etc when you know you'd probably never be good enough to win anything spectating is fun as hell. I love being able to stream video online of high calibre matchups, just intense balls to the wall action of the best players duking it out for supremacy. I hate traditional sports other than a somewhat passive enjoyment of baseball but e-sports? awesome stuff. Counter Strike, Quake, Starcraft, etc just awesome to watch, especially if it's a game I play and know what the fuck they're talking about and understand the nuances. Some of us enjoy being e-sports spectators.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (1)

dr_wheel (671305) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543405)

There was a time when I was interested in online broadcasts, too. But it was mainly to see who my team might be playing next round in a playoff bracket, or to see what kind of tactics the winner/winning team might be using to possibly gain an advantage. So again... like watching and studying demos, it was a menial, self-selving task.

I know that you're not alone and that there is a entire community of gamers that enjoy watching/listening to e-sports. But like I tried to say before, it's a niche market.

Think about the fact that there are millions of Counter-Strike players, yet several pro gaming leagues that had CS as their staple game are dead or dying. Why is that? Maybe, it's because interest is limited to a small portion of that community? Maybe because it's just not that lucrative of a business model to sponsors/advertisers? I don't have all of the answers.

I think there will always be pro gaming in some form or another. But, like chess or backgammon, it will never be something that anyone should aspire to make a living at. At least, not in my lifetime. There's just not enough money to go around for these types of activities. If there was, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (1)

frission (676318) | more than 5 years ago | (#27546045)

I agree, I do enjoy spectating certain types of games. Street Fighter tourneys might be one of them. I'm looking forward to this indie documentary http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/90660-I-Got-Next-A-Street-Fighter-Documentary [escapistmagazine.com] SF is interesting to watch because you get to see how pros play, learn new combos, styles of fighting, etc. It's 1 on 1, and all the action takes place on one screen. i think it's hard to spectate FPS games, or team based games, where different screen "see" different angles of the same action

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27544449)

Amen :) Something a lot of people lose sight of is the old adage about 'It's not the destination, it's the journey'.

The games I've had the most fun playing are either 'sandbox' RPGs, or MMOs. And unlike most people I generally solo in them, help newbies, explore far away lands, stuff like that. I found that trying to compete in RPGs on the 'stat treadmill' tends to leave me unsatisfied because rather than having a character that can do ANYTHING when the opportunity presents itself, even if not well, that I have a character that can do ONE thing very well, but only either for short periods of time, or with the help of many other people. And if I need the help of many other people anyhow, then why not just know a little bit of everything and just help prop up the specialists when they need that little extra :)

Mind you this is also a limitation on what sort of games I can utilize this playstyle on, since RPGs with a skill based stat system instead of level are few and far between.

Re:Gaming is a poor spectator 'sport'... (1)

Caboosian (1096069) | more than 5 years ago | (#27546187)

Why? Because gaming, especially at the highest levels, is way more fun when you are actually playing. Gaming, to me, is all about the adrenaline rush that you get when you're storming a base, or grabbing quad damage, or fighting back to win a round when it's 1v3. Spectating, to me, is for losers. Spectating is what I did back in high school when I lost a round of Street Fighter II and had to sit and wait for my turn in a rotation of friends.

Football is boring to spectate. Why? Because football, especially at the highest levels, is way more fun when you are actually playing. Football, to me, is all about the adrenaline rush when you make that 3rd and long pass, or the breakaway run, or the clutch sack. Spectating, to me, is for benchwarmers. Spectating is what I did back in high school when I wasn't the biggest or fastest and had to sit and wait until we were up by 21 in the fourth quarter.

Not really a business model (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27541631)

Playing game is an entertainment, just like watching TV. Do you know someone called "pro TV watcher" that "bagged millions?" I never.

Poker (1)

genjix (959457) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541647)

I'm a professional poker player and I make a reasonable income. Many other regulars I know were former Starcraft players. It's just a natural cycle of things. A few years ago people used to play Chess, but I know a few of them moved to Poker. As an example: Bertrand Russell or 'Elky' used to be a world champion at Starcraft, now he's a champion poker player.

Re:Poker (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27541847)

Yes, there are top players from the Total Annihilation community that eventually made it as professional poker players as well. It seems that strategy games grant a skill set that's applicable to poker as well.

Dream team of Pro gaming (1)

Pravus (1112745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541851)

What the Dream Team [absforathletes.com] of professional gaming might look like

Pro gaming (3, Insightful)

rob1980 (941751) | more than 5 years ago | (#27541885)

Professional gaming looked set for the big time. It never happened...

I will tell you why it never happened: the same reason other dot com creations like Webvan and Pets.com "looked set for the big time" and then promptly disappeared. The difference between professional gaming and Webvan is that professional gaming refused to die. A friend of mine was active in that stuff for years and despite being pretty good at what he did, all he ever won was an $800 check that had to be split 4 ways with his teammates. That was after multiple trips to all four corners of this country and at least a couple outside of the country. Not enough people give enough of a shit for sponsors to care enough about professional gaming, therefore there is no money in it for the participants unless you win the whole thing. Even low-rent sports leagues like the AFL pay their bottom-rung players something.

The day an organized league with a valid, sustainable salary structure comes into town is the day professional gaming makes it. Otherwise all it'll ever be is a smattering of competitions for people who can afford to take long weekends to go sit in some hotel conference room and jam themselves full of Red Bull and play video games in tournament brackets.

Re:Pro gaming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27544807)

Because theres two sides to pro gaming -- commercial, and personal enjoyment.

Pro gaming will never die because as long as theres a game, someone will be good at it and want to play against other people. Maybe he'll never make a living off of it, but maybe he wont have to. I consider just getting to travel to lans I've been to reward enough. I've gotten a lot of fun experiences I'd have never had otherwise.

I hope not (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27541941)

I certainly hope there's no future for it.

Too fast, or too slow (1)

shdowhawk (940841) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542567)

Having spent a large amount of my youth playing games like real-time strats and shooters ... and having gone to competitions and doing really well, I can give you the simple answer as to why the "games" would not do well.

Real time strategies ... are too slow. I've played games with people of equal caliber that latest 5 minutes, and others that lasted well over 3-5+ hours. It's not consistent and most people don't understand what is happening. It's like watching chess, sure it's intriguing, but it's boring after a bit, let alone watching it over and over. Playing it yourself is much more fun.

Shooters. I'm by no means the best, but I'm usually very high ranked on many of the GAMING servers (not competitions). The reason why is because i'm constantly moving and I react quickly. This has been shown on many shows that that's how the GOOD gamers do it too. The problem with this is that I've been told countless times by my friends watching me play that I make them motion sick from moving to much and so fast. I can't imagine what it would be like to actually watch "professionals" do that for a half hour straight. The only way it would work is if they showed small 3-5 second clips, or just random frags... and then focused on the PLAYERS. The problem with that of course is that PLAYERS are just sitting in front of screens clicking a mouse and keyboard... so that gets old after a few seconds.

I can see there being gamer competitions, and i'm sure that the TOP players will do well $$ wise, but I don't think that the "professional gaming" will ever really become "mainstream". There is too little happening, too few things that changes in the game, and it's too difficult to understand for people who don't already play.

In the end, the people who would watch it the most, would be the people PLAYING the games. Except, that after watching it for a few minutes, they'd probably turn off the tv, and start playing the games themselves.

More profitable venues.... (2, Insightful)

Dekar (754945) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542853)

A lot of them seem to be turning to online poker, which is obviously more profitable but requires similar skills.

If there was a way to play Counter-Strike for 1$ a kill, then you'd have professional gamers.

Re:More profitable venues.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27543947)

Correction, if there was a way to bet on Counter-Strike, then you'd have professional gamers.

When gaming has more nuance... (1)

Anonymatt (1272506) | more than 5 years ago | (#27542857)

Maybe I'm ignorant of what pro gaming is like these days, but I can't see it becoming mainstream (that's not what we're talking about, really) until the games themselves are: (1)Nuanced enough that individual styles of top-flight players can be discerned by laypeople and (2)that the technology to render a sufficiently immersive experience in a particular model of is a achieved and plateaus.

The second condition has been fulfilled by games like Pac-man, off the top of my head. The first condition has has been achieved in some modern games, but inability to maintain the second condition doesn't allow any one "sport" to catch on.

Also, and I don't know if this exists, but some kind of commentated observation of a FPS game may hasten achievement of the first condition in some styles of game.

Clearly none of you play games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27542985)

At least, not the kind that get "professional gamer" attention. Counter-Strike 1.6, Counter-Strike: Source (during TheCGS era), TF2, COD4 and Halo are highly popular online games that were (and are) still successful in the professional arena. The problem is your definition of "professional" is based on who gets on T.V. A professional is anyone who is an expert in his or her field.

And if you want a come-back to professional gaming, refer to ESEA.net.

Fatal1ty's new job (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27543083)

"Want some fries with that?"

By comparison (1)

cephalien (529516) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543151)

In a world where you can be (relatively) famous for the ability to eat more hot dogs in five minutes than anyone else in the world, I can't see how gaming is all that bad.

(Why not combine the two? Oh, wait. There's already a competitive eating video game. Holy crap, I think I might just explode.)

By my own experience... (1)

Anachragnome (1008495) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543419)

I've found that there is no better way to ruin a perfectly good hobby then to make it a career.

Re:By my own experience... (1)

RogueyWon (735973) | more than 5 years ago | (#27543781)

Oh if only I had mod points.

This is the single best piece of advice that you can give to any teenager or young adult who's approaching a big decision point career-wise. The number of people I know who are stuck in IT jobs they loathe and despise because they enjoyed playing around with computers while they are at school is just insane.

Terrible advice (1)

Alarindris (1253418) | more than 5 years ago | (#27545343)

No, you'll confuse and worry them. Do what you like and try to get paid for it.

Its because of wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27543625)

All gamers went to wow thats why the pro gamers vanished.

thrust me the marketing of those pro games have alot to do with what kind of games people play, for 5 years wow has been numero uno so much that it killed the interest in other games , when professional gaming was big there was starcraft and quake.. ( and you cant really have people watch wow raiding tbh , altough i would love to see ensidia,method guilds etc try to get a world first, but that only lasts for a week or two every year )

dont go to a too rash judgement here , but ill bet you $100 that the pro comp gaming will take up when starcraft 2 is released.

The problems with pro gaming... (1)

Endo13 (1000782) | more than 5 years ago | (#27544007)

First, PC games are not long-term. Even Starcraft has only been around for about 10 years, and its replacement is coming up this year or next. FPS's typically remain popular for 2-3 years at the most. Compare that with any real pro sport. Some of them have been around longer than the US has been a country; almost all of them have been around before computers existed. So when this year's $BIG_POPULAR_FPS dies out next year, which one is going to replace it as the next "pro" FPS? No one really knows until they've been out for a while, and it's more or less selected by how popular it is. Of course by then, it's going to be popular for probably another 1-2 years, and then it's on to the next game.

The second problem is that watching someone play a PC game really just is not that fun.

Re:The problems with pro gaming... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27544885)

So when this year's $BIG_POPULAR_FPS dies out next year, which one is going to replace it as the next "pro" FPS?

Quakelive, potentially followed by Rage. The DM lineage is pretty easy to follow.

The second problem is that watching someone play a PC game really just is not that fun.

Spectating is not for everyone, be it pc gaming or irl gaming. I find it MUCH more enjoyable to watch a good pc game than any sporting event in person though.

In person you get to see one angle, likely a bad one from great distance and barely see any action, and if you missed something you missed it.

On TV you at least get replays and close up zoomed in cameras, which are just now matching the football video games (hi, skycam).

Spectating a PC game though, you have complete control. You can skip to the action, you can spectate your favorite guy and see exactly what he saw, you can go split screen.. you are the director.

Try gambling (1)

skreeech (221390) | more than 5 years ago | (#27544611)

There is not enough money in gaming to support a large number of players. Hockey and Football support all of the players at the high end while in gaming only the top few can make a living and the pay drops off sharply after. I do not think that this can change right now.

Gambling may be an interesting avenue. Anyone can try playing poker. A loop of interest can exist between watching and playing. I think that getting people to try and win 50 bucks playing Quake or Street Fighter would generate interest in the pro gaming coverage.

The question is... (2, Insightful)

Jerrei (1515395) | more than 5 years ago | (#27544731)

do professional gamers have a future?

Re:The question is... (1)

Renraku (518261) | more than 5 years ago | (#27546685)

The unfortunate side is that gaming usually favors people with the most time. There's nothing stopping an unemployed person living in mom's basement from sitting around all day and playing Counter-Strike. But the person that has the 9-5 job and the wife might get to play 30 minutes a night, if they aren't tired from the day. They're less likely to want to spend time to be competitive.

So what you end up with is someone that won $500 for being #1 at a tournament, but they've spent the past 12 months of their life practicing for it. Even an hour a day working at a job would be more than $500 in 12 months.

Unless they're rich or are being taken care of money-wise, no. I'd wager most of them don't have a future.

The real question is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27545625)

did professional gaming ever have a present?

How about WINE game completion competition!!! (1)

rofthorax (722179) | more than 5 years ago | (#27546093)

Let me see, have you completed and/or installed as many games as I have on WINE?

http://www.youtube.com/user/rofthorax [youtube.com]

I think I should get some prizes too.. I doubt F4tality or whatever his name would not have the balls to get games running on WINE, nor to play them to the end.

Let's see you install COD4 on WINE F4t4lity or whatever your name is..

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?