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!

Professional Gaming League Raises $10M

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the hope-they-hire-madden-to-draw-lines dept.

167

Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "Major League Gaming, aspiring to become the official league of professional videogaming, raised $10 million in funding from Ritchie Capital, and named Matthew Bromberg, the former general manager of Time Warner's Moviefone and AOL Games properties, as president and chief operating officer, the Wall Street Journal reports. 'The championship match for MLG's second season will be held this weekend in New York, where individuals and teams of gamers will battle against others in fighting and shooter games like Microsoft Corp.'s Halo 2 for a total of $100,000 in prizes. ... The company says it is in discussions with various cable networks about deals to have its competitions carried on television. "We want this to be covered as a circuit," said Mr. Bromberg.'"

cancel ×

167 comments

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

Time Warp! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776797)

Hellllllooooooooooooooooo 1999!

Re:Time Warp! (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776998)

Hellllllooooooooooooooooo 1999!

You're off by a couple of decades. This was done with the Atari 2600 back in te '80s - it was a flop. Nobody wants to watch OTHER people playing video games on TV.

Hey, give me $10,000,000 and I'll be happy to go through the trashpile of history looking for the next money pit.

Re:Time Warp! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777850)

Hrmmm, I think the visual appeal of games, the team aspect and strategies involved, and personalities of the gamers are quite a bit different that of the 4-bit era.

Cool! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776800)

Now they can buy ten classic Ferraris and crash them in a drunken road race.

Re:Cool! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776931)

Wow, parent was modded by Stefan Eriksson himself.

Would it kill you to spell the headline right? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776807)

Seriously... it isn't that much to ask, and I'm just typing this crap because i kown it is going to say that my message is too short. Or that it looks like spam.

Re:Would it kill you to spell the headline right? (0, Offtopic)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776822)

Could you spell "know" right? Seriously... it isn't that much to ask.

The Big 3 (3, Interesting)

Alex P Keaton in da (882660) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776821)

Watching people play video games on TV?
It is bad enough watching people in real life while waiting for your turn...
The three most boring activities:
Listening to someone describing their dreams
Listening to someone describe their workout routine
Watching someone else play video games.
Seriously- I think that much like building models or programming, playing games is fun if you are doing it, but who wants to watch someone else do it?
Than again people watch poker and golf on TV....

Re:The Big 3 (1)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776891)

There are some people who really are fun to watch playing video games.

But the game matters, and the player matters -- I wouldn't want to watch some slow turn-based RPG, or your average gamer -- it's that much more impressive when you see someone playing a game that you know well, and you watch them when they're completely in the zone -- not some camping lamer.

I can't personally say the same thing about bass fishing, and that makes it on TV.

I'll compare this to the olympics -- watching skilling is much more thrilling when you ski yourself, and you have some measure of appreciation for just how much better they folks competing are to the normal folks you hang out with.

Re:The Big 3 (2, Interesting)

PFI_Optix (936301) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777258)

I see a pretty big technical hurdle here.

Nobody wants to watch football from the helmet cam. Remember those things? I think Fox had them. Novel, interesting, and utterly useless. People want to see aerial views of the action.

To my knowledge, there's not a single competitive FPS out there with a strong observer system that would be well-suited to television.

I watch paintball tournaments on TV when I can catch them. What's fun is watching the strategies, the overall action. Not what player B is seeing as he bunkers behind a taco in an attempt to press player D out of his hole.

Good point -- (1)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777436)

Any of the enjoyable viewing that I've done has been over the shoulder of the player in question.

It gives you an opportunity to hear their reactions to the game, as well as see the game from their point of view, with the same resolution (although from a greater distance).

Although I could see some interesting displays foer spectators (quadrants, overhead view of the map w/ all players marked in one, top two player's views in the next two quadrants, and another one cycling between strategic points / player views / game statistics), it would require massive resolution to have the necessary clarity. (could also do stats as a scroll, or something like the NASCAR thing along the side of the screen)

Maybe it could be pulled off with HDTV ... I'm not really sure. ... but in my opinion, it's still gotta be better than watching bowling on TV.

Re:The Big 3 (1)

Zeinfeld (263942) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776967)

Watching other people play video games is like watching other people viewing porn.

Video games are designed to be interesting to the player, not to be interesting to watch as a non-player.

Re:The Big 3 (1)

Alan B'Stard (936053) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776984)

I heard the gamers will be required to paint their faces, wear skimpy outfits and have to oil their bodies. That should make it a hit with all the repressed homosexuals.

Difference? (1)

sixpacker (687012) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777029)

between
{
      Watching someone playing baseball on TV or
      Watching someone playing chess on TV or
      Watching someone playing golf on TV or
      Watching someone playing poker on TV or
}
and
{
      Watching someone playing computer game on TV?
}

It's just a prejudice!

Re:Difference? (3, Insightful)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777331)

Baseball is a spectator sport with tense drama for those who can appreciate it.

Chess is a nuanced game in which those who know the major strategies can perceive the structure of what players are doing, look several moves ahead, and evaluate the game.

IMHO, Golf is pretty freakin' boring to watch, but the body mechanics of a great golf swing (and the billiards-like precision of a long putt) are at least interesting to witness. Also, there's the psychological aspect. A two-stroke leader in a golf match is only a couple of tiny mistakes away from losing the lead, and being a good golfer requires being able to handle the fact that a tiny hitch in just one of your swings could cost you half your income for the year.

Poker on TV is considerable less popular, mainly because most people don't understand the game. The best professional poker players "grind" out their living in straight-up games, but tournament play is what you usually see on TV because it presents the chance of dramatic upsets and "home run" plays.

Video games, on the other hand, are carefully crafted to amuse the people playing them, with no thought given at all to spectator value. If you are wondering why so many of us are scoffing at the idea of televised gaming, go to your local arcade and watch over somebody's shoulder for a half hour. The mind-numbing dullness of what you are doing will tell you everything you need to know about why gaming on TV is doomed.

Re:Difference? (1)

lucabrasi999 (585141) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777517)

Video games, on the other hand, are carefully crafted to amuse the people playing them, with no thought given at all to spectator value.

Well said.

Re:Difference? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777641)

Chess wasn't designed to be a spectator sport and it shows. It's boring. Speed chess is too fast to enjoy unless you've memorized books of moves. If it wasn't associated with general intellectual supremacy, it would see no general audience. Go is much more fun to watch.

Baseball is a bunch of overweight guys on steroids swinging a bat between stints on the bench. Woo. It's a true puzzle why this is really only popular in the U.S. and Japan.

Golf might actually be more interesting than baseball if it were hockey instead. Still, not that interesting even then. The best part of Golf is thinking about how much prime real estate is wasted on the land they're hitting those little balls around on.

Poker is boring to watch. Poker is a game where you lose (fold) most hands unless the players are unevenly matched. There isn't a lot of excitement in watching people attempt to lose the least each hand. TV tournaments always tell you what the hands are, and what the probability of winning with that hand is. It fills in all of the dots, leaving the ideosyncracies of middle aged people as the only thing to watch.

Video games are more visually appealing than any of the above. Most competitive videogames have been designed to provide spectator entertainment and are free of physical-world constraints in play mechanics. Almost none of this translates well to a television, since you can't control what the camera is viewing. This makes it as boring as an athletic competition like football or golf. The gameplay isn't as intimidating as speed chess to the casual viewer, while not being as transparent as poker tournaments.

The only thing that really differs here is that I have an interest in videogames, while I don't care about golf. I like playing chess, but I'd never watch other people play it even if they were GMs. I'd rather watch and play Go, which is a much more intellectually-stimulating game. I'd never watch Go on television. In fact I'd never watch any competition on television. Television coverage of competition is boring and serves as a forum for narcissistic commentators who practice armchair quarterbacking and overdramatize things that aren't meaningful. But you know why videogame competitions won't succeed in the U.S. in the future? It isn't because bass fishing or poker is inherently more interesting, because that premise is as retarded as much of anything else you say here, but rather because the culture isn't ingrained with videogame competition viewing. Unless there's a demand for a product, no one is going to buy it. XFL style. In South Korea on the other hand, video game competitions are a big deal.

If and when Halo competitions illicit as much interest as local soccer games, then televised competitions might be successful. Who cares, though? Obsessing over meaningless competitions is probably one of the worst aspects of human culture.

Re:Difference? (1)

christian.elliott (892060) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777856)

I watched some of the HLTV (Half-Life TV, a form of spectator mode) of Summer CPL, and for the matches I watched, there were 26000 people on that HLTV watching the same game. I know that may not be millions upon millions of people, however that sounds like an audience to me. A good way of thinking of it is like a French person watching Baseball, or the average american watching cricket, it doesn't seem that interesting, and most people won't watch it. Those who know what's going on, and how important of a play (or a frag) that was, or how difficult that shot was to make will appreciate it and enjoy it.

Re:The Big 3 (4, Insightful)

Radres (776901) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777032)

You're not just watching someone while waiting for them to finish their turn. You're watching someone who is one of the best in the world play the game. If you personally have played the game that is being played, you will be able to appreciate the level of skill the the player is demonstrating. You will be able to learn things about how a superior player would approach the same problems you face, and also realize where you reach your limitations compared to the player you are watching.

I think that it's a prerequisite to watching an event that you actually have some experience in participating in a similar event. Otherwise it can be difficult to appreciate what is going on and the level of skill required.

I've watched some pretty cool videos and demos of video game competitions. There's a video floating around of someone who beat Super Mario Brothers 3 in like 2 minutes. I'll bet that if your friend was able to do that while you were waiting for your turn, you might be intrigued! I've seen videos of top Starcraft and Quake players in competition, and it's like they are playing a completely different game.

The best of anything is worth your time.

Re:The Big 3 (1)

iamlucky13 (795185) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777450)

Some Japanese kid beat Super Mario Brother's 3 in 11 minutes by using an emulator to slow down the game play, then speeding the video back up to normal speed, and even then I think he did it dozens of times over before getting it right. I bet the Numa Numa guy or Star Wars Kid get more smiles from girls in the hallway than a kid who has devoted his life to SMB3. I watched the video once, thought it was way cool. I watched it a second time to show a friend, at which point it lost it's magic. Then I found out it was a setup.

If you find watching people you don't know play video games (complete with clueless, annoying commentators) interesting, that's fine by me. I don't. I can watch a friend for about 5 minutes before either logging on myself or going outside. What I had better not see, however, is ESPN start carrying video games on TV in place sports. It really drives me nuts to see the sports channel showing a poker tournement rather than soccer. And while I'm on that tangent, lose the shades! I understand these guys can't keep a straight face when all they have is a pair of 3's, but wearing sunglasses indoors makes you look like a tool.

In closing, the best of anything is seldom worth your time. I don't watch spelling bees, quilting, debate tournaments, caber tossing, drag racing, ballet, iron chef, curling, etc. The best of things that genuinely interest you are often worth your time, but sometimes not even those. I really thought I'd find battlebots interesting, but nope.

Re:The Big 3 (1)

djspastik (951730) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777282)

there is one game that never gets old to watch Grand theft auto i never get tired of watching my friends kill hookers

Re:The Big 3 (1)

flyingsquid (813711) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777400)

i never get tired of watching my friends kill hookers

I couldn't agree with you more. But what's this "Grand theft auto" thing you're talking about?

Re:The Big 3 (1)

karnal (22275) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777785)

I'm gonna have to go ahead and give you a virtual +1 Funny upmod here......

Re:The Big 3 (1)

IorDMUX (870522) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777311)

I suppose if all you are doing is waiting for your turn, then yes, waiting in line for a video game could be quite boring.
 
However, I live in an apartment style dorm with a few friends, and, because of our crazy schedules, much of our best social time is spent watching someone play a game, be it a classic MegaMan or Final Fantasy or some newer hit like Jade Empire, etc. We root for (or against) the player, poke fun at the storylines, chat about (IRL) current events, give play-by-plays for the game...
 
Gaming can be social, too. And that, I think, is from what these guys [mlgpro.com] are trying to 'Profit???'.

Dreams are fun! (1)

js_sebastian (946118) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777324)

The three most boring activities: Listening to someone describing their dreams Listening to someone describe their workout routine Watching someone else play video games.
I agree wholheatedly on items 2 and 3, but actually dreams are quite interesting. Even though you can't usually make rational sense out of them (except sometimes when you know the dreamer very well) they often are imaginative, absurd, and witty.

Re:The Big 3 (1)

MattW (97290) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777353)

All I can say is: I'm a lot more inclined to watch someone play video games than I am to watch major league sports. Probably because I play video games and don't play team sports. And professional game players ARE on an amazing level when they play. I played video games my whole life, and after 2 years of playing Quake 3 all the time, I was still third tier. There's a tier of people who can challenge top pros but can't really expect to beat them unless they improve, and I could make those people work (a little) to beat me. This meant I could get on almost any server on the net and straight up own the average player. I was constantly accused of cheating. And yet top pros would pretty easily spank the people who were pretty easily spanking me.

Re:The Big 3 (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777467)

"Listening to someone describing their dreams"

I had a room mate who had a wikkid dream once. Could have been made into an awesome Shadow Run campaign, or atleast a decent movie.

"Listening to someone describe their workout routine"

I've compared my workout routine with other's numerous times. It can introduce you to new exercises and work out styles. It can also help you find someone with a routine similar to your own that you can work out with.

"Watching someone else play video games."

When I was a kid I used to goto friends houses and watch them play Final Fantasy for hours. When I got older and my friends and I would set up LANs to play Doom and eventually Quake I still sat back everyonce and a while and watched our top ranked player hack it up. Now that I am older and wrapping up my bachelors, my school's LAN parties are getting more and more serious.

Eventually with round based games (CS for example), you could wind up with a broadcast NFL Football like program, where a pair of announcers comment and commend on the players, their styles, the levels, random stats, etc, while a production team keeps the feeds to the highest paced action, allowing replay, and even those Madden style finger drawn play maps.

-Rick

Re:The Big 3 (1)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777505)

I would agree with you if this was a "get the best score at space invaders game". I just actually happened to attend my first ever tournement for a popular online game (as a spectator), and you're really watching two or more players who are the best in their category facing off in a game of skill. Its no different than poker or chess that someone mentioned. People watch chess (admittedly its not a super televised game), how is that different than the nuances and split second decisions of an RTS game. As for the tournement, I knew this game well and play it often, and seeing the amount of coordination and timing each team had was amazing. Just like playing basketball with friends and seeing a pro game on TV. There is NO difference between what I saw and watching a competitive match between two highly skilled individuals at a game or sport. Its just that one is familiar to most people, and one isn't.

I think the main difference is that if you don't know counterstrike, you won't know whats happening, what good plays were, etc. If you don't know say cricket or football, you won't know whats happening, but on a lower level you can relate to the athletisism (he's fast!) or prowess (how the hell did he catch that ball!) rather than appreciate the tactical or strategic facets of the game. Its a little hard to convey "man, that's good hand-eye coordination!" to the general public. My Mom would think I'm a top FPS player because I can run around the world using the mouse.

Finally, I think they need to figure out the best ways to show these games. I think any game needs a spectator mode, and the equivilent of camera operators and a director switching between interesting views. If the same level of production quality isn't applied to these games as a football broadcast, people won't be interested in watching them because it will be hard to get a good grasp on the action.

Re:The Big 3 (1)

dan the person (93490) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777532)

You have seen how much money is made by big brother and other lame detached from reality "reality" tv shows haven't you?

I couldn't believe it when i first arrived back in the uk and was flicking through the channels. ITV2 had extended coverage of big brother. I watched it for 5 minutes trying to understand the appeal.

In that five minutes it flicked back and forward between two scenes. In one scene someone was sleeping. In the other scene someone was sleeping. There was a dramatic moment though, one of the people dozing rolled over. Boy i was glad i didn't getup to make a drink and miss that.

Ghosting can be fun (1)

Errandboy of Doom (917941) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777534)

I'd definitely rather be playing, so don't get me wrong here...

But when we were playing SoFII on some of the better teams' servers, watching them scrim was actually really rewarding. Watching the little clever tricks people use, or watching their skill, the drama of seeing two opponents cautiously approaching the same corner from opposite sides, seeing the matches where the last man on a team actually manages to chew through half of the other team and win the round...

There are some good things to see flying around as a ghost.

HOWEVER, almost all the televised gaming competitions I've seen miss all the action. They stay on follow mode, and either constantly hop through players looking for action, or have to have an announcer point out all the stuff you've missed.

Good cameramen will make or break this. I would recommend they record a follow mode for every player, and then have several floating camera points, maybe some static at key hotspots on a level, and then a floater or two. They should then cut these together after the match, using splitscreens and zooms when it adds to the experience.

If they're willing to discard the absurd requirement of live broadcast, and want to put together an interesting watchable product, this could be really good.

(But I'm no optimist.)

Re:The Big 3 (1)

gimme_news (930165) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777638)

Don't be so harsh on listening to someone describing their dreams. Listening to one's dreams and subsequently giving advice on them is what helps turn dreams into realities.

Re:The Big 3 (1)

Unnngh! (731758) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777794)

I think you could make it interesting for FPS games, but it would take some work. First, it would have to be a teamplay event or some really clever scenario to cover an entire round or series of rounds. Otherwise, the only objective is to rack up the kills which does get boring to watch pretty quickly, no matter how good the players are. Cuts between floating commentators' viewpoints and individual players' viewpoints would help keep it interesting. Commentators that know the levels and the players and the game in general would be necessary IMO - they may be annoying, but the coverage needs to tell a story and I don't think you can get there without narration. I'm not a big fan of professional sporting event coverage but I think there's a lot that the gaming industry could learn from it.

First spelling nazi post! (-1, Offtopic)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776823)

"Raises", not "raies"!

Re:First spelling nazi post! (-1, Offtopic)

Davorama (11731) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776849)

I think he does it just to taunt us.

Fix the spelling mistake (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776825)

Read the title of this post.

as if (0)

aexiphixion (529171) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776826)

watching your older brother hog the controller wasn't bad enough..

South Korea? (3, Insightful)

GoodOmens (904827) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776828)

Just like South Korea? Will we have our own 24/7 dedicated gaming channels?

If we are trying to be like South Korea, I would rather have in home fiber to more homes then just what verizon offers in the NE ....

Re:South Korea? (1)

jmhewitt (811760) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777035)

Yes, but after a few years all the game related programming will be replaced with the Man Show and crap about pimping your rod.

Re:South Korea? (0, Offtopic)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777046)

So, is it true that you can only watch old people playing computer games in South Korea?

Finally! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776831)

Finally children have something to which they can aspire!

ok (4, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776838)

As a lifelong gamer with a deep respect for the field and a belief that games are a form of art that will eventually be accorded that status by society as a whole, I can tell you that I have absolutely, positively no interest whatsoever in watching other people play games. And I doubt a lot of other people have either.

Re:ok (1)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776855)

I agree. If people really wanted to watch TV about video games, G4 would have been a more successful channel. As it stands, I would rather get information from games from the internet or a magazine, and not have to sit through commercials. And I would rather see games first hand, either by playing, or watching a friend. At least when I make fun of friends for making mistakes, they can hear it.

Current videogames not good for watching (1)

typical (886006) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777009)

I think that you could make a video game that would be fun to watch.

But it would be very different from current video games (it wouldn't just be "Halo, but displayed on a lot of screens), and probably would be a lot less fun for the players to play. Consider how American football's rules get tweaked periodically -- that's not to make the game more fun for the players, but to make it more entertaining to watch.

Among other things:

*) You probably want some kind of "edge" or advantage that goes back or forth. In most televised sports, there's some sort of "ball position" on the field. It's not fun to just watch someone twitch faster than someone else with a rocket.

*) I think that a televised game probably has to be team-based. A fan can empathize with a team more than one person.

*) The rules would have to remain pretty much the same for a long time, so that viewers can learn and appreciate them. You can't just be playing the latest and greatest video game out. You need a game that stays the same for many years (maybe with slight tweaks to the rules, and obviously the renderer could be improved).

*) I don't think that simple twitch games would do so well. A typical good FPS player is hard to appreciate by anyone other than another FPS player, and it's not much fun to watch. In something like hockey, there are lots of things interacting that make for good slow-motions. In Halo, the question becomes who aimed and clicked at someone else first.

*) There needs to be one point to focus on. Maybe a "capture the flag" style game would be a start, but just watching people shoot other people means that there's no focal point to watch. In major televised sports, there is one ball or puck or whatever to watch that the camera can follow.

*) There needs to be several different types of skill that work together. People like being able to think through the high-level strategy, given some measureable characteristics of the players. In baseball, you have fast people and power hitters. In American football, the characteristics of people who play different positions are striking. In a game, you don't have much by way of physical differences, and most of the mental tasks are fairly similar...you have people who are good at shooting other people. That means a bunch of interchangeable clones doing pretty much the same thing. There are a couple games that vaguely have some efforts in the idea of necessary classes, like Team Fortress.

*) Most televised sports have breaks of some sort -- penalties or between plays, or whatever, that allow slapping advertisements in to fill the gaps. Not many video games have anything like this.

The only games I can think of that try to be appealing to people watching them have been arcade games, and those usually did that by avoiding repetitiveness and constantly throwing new content up on the screen. That kind of "novelty" approach doesn't really apply to a sport.

Basically, what I'm saying is that while I think that it's possible to make a videogame broadcast-based entertainment franchise, it would not be the sort of thing where people just play the same games they do at home and then get paid for it.

Re:Current videogames not good for watching (1)

molarmass192 (608071) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777383)

More importantly, people tend to only watch sports they've played or participated in. I think sports video games are a decent idea, but the argument becomes, why not just watch real live sports instead? What might work better is the ultra-violent (gonna get some interest group mad here) niche, the likes of which would never happen in real life, and probably be banned from network TV come to think of it. I may not be the target audience, but I can't imagine watching any video game play based on real world sports -or- (like you said) a FPS hide and snipe matchup. However, I might be tempted into watching a Mortal Combat-esque tournament, primarily because you can't hide and hit, and you certainly won't see anything like it on ESPN.

Re:ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777037)

I agree with this as well, however I also dislike watching normal sports. I'd rather play the sports or the video games.

I've seen something like this before (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776857)

This sounds a lot like major league soccer, that new sport (not so new to the rest of the world) that hasn't caught on in spite of long effort. Or women's basketball. And if venture capitalist thing that something being zany and hi-tech is enough to make it worthy of funding, they should remember the XFL, eulogized and dissected in Brett Forrest's Long Bomb: How the XFL Became TV's Biggest Fiasco [amazon.com]

Re:I've seen something like this before (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776918)

I think you mean Long Bomb: How the XFL Became TV's Biggest Fiasco [amazon.com] . You know, without your pathetic little referer code?

Re:I've seen something like this before (1)

Otter (3800) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776971)

And yet there's enough interest to keep poker on three different channels around the clock, and people will watch Huey Lewis check raise Melissa Rivers. So, who knows?

Re:I've seen something like this before (1)

Illbay (700081) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777682)

The ONLY thing I remember about the XFL is "He Hate Me."

I wonder if, after "Major League Gaming" bites it, people will reminisce fondly about that zany dark-horse favorite, "He Frag Me"?

Re:I've seen something like this before (1)

piltdownman84 (853358) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777716)

I think the biggest problem with MLS is that it is rubbish compared to the other Football (Soccer) leagues you can watch on TV and its only ten years old. Most hardcore football fan have followed a team with real talent from europe all their lives. Try to convince those people to follow a relatively new team that isn't anywhere as good as the team you have been watching your entire life. Its a real tough sell. Its like trying to convince a Yankees fan or Red Socks fan to support their local single A baseball team.

I'm a pro gamer cyber-athlete (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776862)

I'm to fat and worthless for anything else!

http://mitglied.lycos.de/darkzonk/meister2.jpg [lycos.de]

Oh, great (1)

Eli Gottlieb (917758) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776875)

Now there will be whole new cliques of "console jocks" who stuff those who can't beat them at Smash Brothers Melee and Grand Theft Auto into lockers.

Whose dumb idea was professional gaming, anyhow? We make enough people rich and arrogant for being able to play inconsequential games as is.

I want in on that... (1)

Devir (671031) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776895)

I been a "professional" gamer for 15 years now, i should get in on this competition.

"That's what makes it a sport" - ??? (2, Insightful)

sczimme (603413) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776935)


"That's what makes it a sport," says Mr. Sepso. "It's not chance. It's really based on skill."

No, that's what makes it a game, though he did narrow the definition a bit by stating that Halo, et al are not games of chance.

game n.

1. An activity providing entertainment or amusement; a pastime: party games; word games.
2. 1. A competitive activity or sport in which players contend with each other according to a set of rules: the game of basketball; the game of gin rummy.


Yes, 2.1 mentioned the word 'sport'. However, compare this inclusion with the definition of sport:

sport n.

1.
1. Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively.
2. A particular form of this activity.

2. An activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively.
3. An active pastime; recreation.


To sum up: (video game) != (sport).

(All definitions supplied by http://www.dictionary.com./ [www.dictionary.com]

Re:"That's what makes it a sport" - ??? (1)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777013)

Not at I agree that it's a sport, but couldn't definition #3 be argued that it is, in fact, a sport? Since you're actively participating in the game.

Re:"That's what makes it a sport" - ??? (2, Interesting)

destruct85 (956209) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777055)

Funnily enough though, I'm sure some would argue that gaming does in fact count as a sport in accordance with the definition you posted. Their argument (and yes I have heard this argument) is that while gaming they are physically exerting themselves. They argue that moving fingers to press buttons and arms to move the mouse (in a PC game) is just as acceptable physical exertion as say running to catch a football or a pitcher throwing a fastball in baseball. Even if you don't agree with this definition of physical exertion, what about games like DDR? It's competitive, it's recreational, it involves physical exertion, so could we classify that as a sport? What about if I start playing it with the controller instead of the dance pad, is it no longer a sport anymore?

In defense of gaming as a sport.. (1)

ntxb229 (542609) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777271)

If curling can be an olympic sport than video games can be considered a sport

Re:In defense of gaming as a sport.. (1)

bitt3n (941736) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777327)

you don't even have to go that far. Shooting a rifle while lying on your belly get you an olympic gold medal. It's called a "skill sport." You could tell those people they don't actually play a sport, but I'd do it from at least 1000 yards away.

absolutely (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777294)

In the next 20 years America will be fatter than ever.

But there will be a lot of leet haxors.

What differs between a game and a sport (1)

toupsie (88295) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777596)

Sport (n): Something you can die from doing. That is why hunting with Dick Cheney and carpooling with Ted Kennedy are sports.

eh (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776952)

I'll bite. I'd actually like to see something like this. However, it's probably going to suck as they have to deal with the most vile species known to man, gamers. Not only that, but anyone who seems to take a swipe at this kinda thing (*cough cough ARENA cough cough*) generally picks the most brain dead, socially inept, personality vacuums that they can possibly find (so in otherwords they pick perfect examples of most of the yahoos you find taking a swipe at professional gaming). Plus you know it's just going to be halo and instead of anything interesting (some of those korean starcraft matchs are actually rather exciting, of course seeing as how I'm still and age of kings fan the subtle nuances of halo 2, perfect dark zero, and counter strike are lost on me).

Fantastic (0, Flamebait)

TheRealFixer (552803) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776960)

Because there's nothing more exciting than watching a room full of Ritalin-addicted 14-year-olds "pwn" each other at Halo all day.

Oh Yay. (1)

Saige (53303) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776965)

As if MLG players don't already have big enough egos as it is. Now we'll do even more to make them even more full of themselves. I think the first requirement for anyone who wishes to be part of MLG is to announce, frequently and loudly, how they're better than anyone else just because they're "pro".

I had enough of this MLG crap when I was playing Halo 2. I hope they stay there while the rest of us move on to other games.

This is even too nerdy for me (0, Flamebait)

BecomingLumberg (949374) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776969)

I gotta say, it is very sad to me that there are actually professional gamers.

Disclaimer: I am terrible at shooter games, so consider me biased if you must.

As much as I love video games, there is no excuse for it being your main pursuit of life (playing them, that is - video game creation makes total sense to me as a career). And it is getting ingrained as a part of our children's culture.

I mean, seriously, has anyone looked at a picture of this Jon F4ta|1ty (or however his baby1337 ass choses to spell things) Wendell guy? He has the same "I'm the badass of the world" expression that those idiots with thier $20k civics with $30k of upgrades on them look when they get out of their car.

I mean, seriously, eat something beside pizza, drink something besides red bull, go outside, get a suntan, and get some bruises playing sports with friends. If you have any, that is.

I'm sick of kids contending that being a gamer is a valid counter to being an athlete. All the kids I used to play video games with all played sports.

/rant

Now that my head is no longer primed for explosion... this really is rediculous. Gaming is fun. Have tournaments. Have a cash prize. But poker should not be on TV, and nor should videogames. Heck, curling and pool are pushing it as it is, but at least they require some physical skill.

Re:This is even too nerdy for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777298)

These people probably like to play video games "professionally" for the same reasons that many athletes play their sports. Fame. Money. They get to feel better than other people.

The major difference is that video games don't take a lot of hard, physical effort to become skilled (which is a pretty big difference, but it's just as bad for curling or pool).

Why shouldn't video games be on tv? It would be better than all those soap operas and crappy sitcoms. Heck, I'd rather watch someone play video games than watch a game of basketball

Re:This is even too nerdy for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777750)

All people that excel at all physical tasks (video games, shooting, playing football) tend to have a genetic predisposition toward excelling at the task. This does not mitigate the need for training. A professional videogame competitor will train probably more than a professional football player, but their training is different in nature. Both are physically-taxing. This chauvinism you people espouse about running around kicking balls is pretty funny. You can expose yourself to all of the excessive amounts of solar radiation you want, at the end of the day Fatal1ty will beat you at any 3D FPS no matter how long you've spent running around a field. You could practice for the remainer of your life and he's still be better than you.

Re:This is even too nerdy for me (1)

CoderBob (858156) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777827)

This might be a troll, but I'll bite... I have to ask, what is it about going outside, getting a tan, and bruising oneself that is so important to growing up? (Aside from a using a stereotype to bash gamers with, that is?) What is so great about taking a football up and down what amounts to a backyard marked with spraypaint in an attempt to get it into a little colored area at the end? Or putting a basketball through a round hoop? Or using a racket to smack a little bouncy ball back and forth over a net? What possible benefit to society do any of those "sports" add? Keeping the populace appeased and happy, so that they don't look too deeply at other things? I see no reason that professional "atheletes" should be paid as much as they do to engage in something that is supposed to be a "fun" past-time. "Love of the game" my ass- they do it for money. While we're at it, why on earth are actors paid so much to make movies? What does the next Adam Sandler film contribute to society? People choose a path in life because they enjoy it (hopefully, anyway- some people don't have all the opportunities that others do). I maintain software. Others run wiring for buildings. Some people write fiction. Others work for the government (which may or may not be another form of writing fiction- I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader). If someone can make money playing video games, I'd say let them. I know I'm not a good enough gamer to run with that crowd and get anywhere- so I can respect their dedication to the game that they enjoy, just like I know that even though I cannot play basketball as well as Ben Wallace, I respect his skill in that area and enjoy watching him play. Everyone values diferent things out of life- you place more importance on athletics than you do on gaming. So be it, that's your opinion. As someone who has all the athletic grace of an obese cat (thank you, genetics, for making me tall and lanky but giving me no natural grace), I think I grew up just fine without playing sports. I have a "real" career, I have friends, and most importantly, I'm satisfied with myself and where I'm at. Does anything else really matter?

Parent post- with formatting this time! (1)

CoderBob (858156) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777847)

Fark. Sorry about that. Meant to hit preview. SHould look like this:

This might be a troll, but I'll bite... I have to ask, what is it about going outside, getting a tan, and bruising oneself that is so important to growing up? (Aside from a using a stereotype to bash gamers with, that is?) What is so great about taking a football up and down what amounts to a backyard marked with spraypaint in an attempt to get it into a little colored area at the end? Or putting a basketball through a round hoop? Or using a racket to smack a little bouncy ball back and forth over a net? What possible benefit to society do any of those "sports" add? Keeping the populace appeased and happy, so that they don't look too deeply at other things?

I see no reason that professional "atheletes" should be paid as much as they do to engage in something that is supposed to be a "fun" past-time. "Love of the game" my ass- they do it for money. While we're at it, why on earth are actors paid so much to make movies? What does the next Adam Sandler film contribute to society? People choose a path in life because they enjoy it (hopefully, anyway- some people don't have all the opportunities that others do). I maintain software. Others run wiring for buildings. Some people write fiction. Others work for the government (which may or may not be another form of writing fiction- I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader).

If someone can make money playing video games, I'd say let them. I know I'm not a good enough gamer to run with that crowd and get anywhere- so I can respect their dedication to the game that they enjoy, just like I know that even though I cannot play basketball as well as Ben Wallace, I respect his skill in that area and enjoy watching him play. Everyone values diferent things out of life- you place more importance on athletics than you do on gaming. So be it, that's your opinion. As someone who has all the athletic grace of an obese cat (thank you, genetics, for making me tall and lanky but giving me no natural grace), I think I grew up just fine without playing sports. I have a "real" career, I have friends, and most importantly, I'm satisfied with myself and where I'm at. Does anything else really matter?

Really? (4, Informative)

taskforce (866056) | more than 8 years ago | (#14776990)

The CPL (Cyberathlete Professional League) http://www.thecpl.com/ [thecpl.com] is by far the most respected league out there. The launching of a new league is hardly a news... new ones are made or broken every ,month.

And when people compete in CPL games they tend to play better games than HALO... I'd say professional gamers by and large consider HALO a complete joke, as they will this league.

Re:Really? (1)

kevin.fowler (915964) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777407)

I miss Counterstrike CPL matches. Does this mean that I am technically a former professional gamer? Damn, I was still on a dial-up!

Re:Really? (1)

Diadems (956490) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777476)

I agree. The CPL is a huge event that is gaining popularity every year. It's not uncommon to see 10,000 specatators watching a Counter-Strike match via HLTV, and more watching through Team Sportscast Network online streaming. Especially for highly anticipated matches between Internationally known teams. For people who love videogames, it's quite an experience to see them played by the best. It reminds me of Summer 2005 when Team EG won in tripple overtime against Team SK.swe (basically, an underdog victory).

Re:Really? (1)

AutopsyReport (856852) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777744)

The MGL has been active somewhere in the neighborhood of two years as far as I know, so it is not a new league. It just has new funding and I guess a new direction.

Re:Really? (2, Interesting)

deckone (911663) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777832)

Thank you, finally someone caught the real culprit here.. they're playing Halo 2.. why the hell would I wanna watch Halo 2, when i could go over to any college dorm and watch it.. How about an actual computer game like Q4/BF2/CS:S/Lemmings I don't care.. dont make me watch untalented console players play a horrible game.

Lol (4, Funny)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777043)

Sports are too energetic for the current generation to anything but stare at a TV, now even computer games are too energetic. hehe.

 

Re:Lol (1)

aug24 (38229) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777543)

I could argue with you, but... well... bleh.

Starcade (1)

Gruneun (261463) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777059)

If the concept worked, this show would still be on the air. Quite simply, watching other people play video games sucks.

Re:Starcade (1)

ToxicBanjo (905105) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777630)

You have to take it in context. This is not about physical interaction of players. It's about skill in playing the game. Many FPS games allow spectating of existing players in the game and I have used this feature many times.

There is a reason why people watch "boring" sports like golf and that is because they get to see the cream of the crop. It would suck to sit through 2 hours of amateur golf where no-one can break 110 let alone come near par. Where watching Tiger Woods light up a course can be fun because he is a pro. Video games are the same, the pros are fun to watch play.

That said though, video games are not sports.

bleh (1)

signore pablo (544088) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777089)

who cares, lets see how they do... watching madden nfl gaming "playoffs" on espn during the college football season was actually pretty cool. You got to follow these people that had a chance to go meet professional athletes that they would play as with the team on the football game... then depending on whether they won or lost they got to stay with their team which was actually the bus that they travelled to different sites on. It was like survivor with video games. Will this ever take off? I frankly don't care, it'll probably find its own niche. 15 to 19 year olds will always be interested in this kind of stuff IMO. We'll see.........

Let me be the first to say... (2)

Newton's Alchemy (601066) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777115)

Let me be the first to say...

BOOM! HEADSHOT!! [purepwnage.com]

MLG has owed communities thousdands of dollars for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777132)

MLG got a $10 million dollar cash infusion? And another CEO took over? Great. Because to be honest, they were terrible in the public relations department when it came to late or missing checks. Now they can finally pay the players that are owed thousdands of dollars over several communities.

MLG has a history of not paying up in some of their events, for months, or even years. Here is a example of what the fighting game community had to go through, and why the relationship with them soured today because of thousdands of dollars due over months - in some cases, YEARS. They are finally starting to pay up now though, and some people -still- havent gotten their but they were quite close to filing suit.

I know some other communities didn't get their money as well, but I don't know their status or if they got it or not - I can only talk about the Tekken Zaibatsu community.

http://www.tekkenzaibatsu.com/forums/showthread.ph p?threadid=85134 [tekkenzaibatsu.com]

What happened to the other $9,400,000??? (3, Insightful)

InsaneLampshade (890845) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777167)

The article mentions that a total of $600,000 will be given away as prize money..... but they raised $10,000,000, so what happened to the rest of the money?

Re:What happened to the other $9,400,000??? (1)

metternich (888601) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777249)

It went to /. for promotional fees.

Re:What happened to the other $9,400,000??? (1)

Fujisawa Sensei (207127) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777295)

Rule number one: Profit!

Rule number two: See Rule number one.

Re:What happened to the other $9,400,000??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777646)

Phase 1: Collect Underpants

Phase 2: ????

Phase 3: PROFIT

What was phase 2 again?

spectator computer games? (1)

Twillerror (536681) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777176)

If there is money to be made off of this, how long before major game makers take people watching people playing games into account during design.

The watching of the game doesn't have to 100% live, it could be delayed. I'm thinking a server simply ships all the commands going on in a game to a replica, or several replicas that then can have many cameras attached. Major matches could have millions wanting to watch, and mostly live.

On top of that you'll want commentators. Replay and a lot of other things to really make watching the games fun.

Next I think is scoring. Using counterstrike as an example you can take wins and types of wins into account to score. I'd say you have 10 matches. Each team plays 5 matches as terrorist, and 5 as CT.
If you defuse the bomb you get 2 points, if you win by killing everyone you get 5 points, and so on.
Of course this would lead to a point where someone could win the game in less then 10 matches. My point is that we need to start thinking about these things to make matches close, and interesting to watch, not just play.

hltv / sourcetv (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777359)

This is something already available for Half-Life/CS and Source Engine based games. It's basically a delayed proxy that allows people to connect and watch matches as if they were in the server. As for scoring Counter Strike is generally played as follows: - A match is 2 halves, 15 rounds per half. - Each team has 1 half as Counter-Terrorist, 1 half as Terrorist. - Terrorists win the round by having the bomb explode at the bombsite or by eliminating all the CT's - Counter-Terrorists win the round by eliminating all the T's or preventing the bomb from exploding (e.g. defusing it after it's planted) - First team to get 16 rounds wins. If it ends up in a 15-15 tie usually overtime of 6-10 rounds (3/5 per half) are played until a team wins. It can be an extremely exciting format especially when you have 1v1 situations in the later rounds of a match. I'd compare it a lot too a shootout in hockey. What makes it even more exciting is that you can completely reverse roles when the terrorist gets the bomb planted in a 1v1 situation and it puts all the pressure on the CT to get to the bomb and defuse it.

Re:spectator computer games? (1)

kevin.fowler (915964) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777428)

CS made a pretty neat system to allow spectators to watch on a nearly separate server. Not sure how it worked, but when our clan played CPL matches and I wasn't on the squad, that's how I watched.

Re:spectator computer games? (2)

Evangelion (2145) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777468)


This has been done, and done, and done before.

Five years ago, I was watching my clanmates in matches using the QuakeTV mod (one or two spectators join in as the camera, and they would flip between views in a CTF match).

The spectators would just join a mirroring server, with like max_clients set to 128 (or whatever it could handle).

The real problem here is one of interest. It is only interesting to watch a game if you know something about the game. I find football and soccer to be dreadfully boring, primarily because I don't know anything about them (and little desire to learn). However, sit me down infront of a hockey game, and I'm glued to the set -- because I understand hockey and I understand what's happening in the game and what it means.

That's why sports are so popular -- everyone can (at some level) understand the games, and they're (relatively) simple. The rules have evolved over a hundred years or so into what we have now, and the sports, and the concepts encoded in the sports are part of the culture where the sport is popular.

Getting that level of interest for a single video game would be a feat -- and therein lies the catch. That level of interest needs to be there for EVERY GAME. Not just "video games".

Take a few examples.

Back when Doom 3 came out, there was a Doom 3 release DM tournament at Quakecon that year that was webcast live. I put that up on my TV, and watched it as it was happening (never have I felt like such a pure geek). That worked for me, because I played one on one deathmatches for years, so I understood what was going on in the player's heads when they were trying to control the map, and I could recognize when they succeeded and failed. They were also showing a Q3CTF tournament, which I watched similarly, as I have played CTF since Q2.

Had they showed a CS tournament, I wouldn't have even been able to follow the game, as I've never played CS.

I used to watch Warcraft III demos when I had nothing better to do, and I loved them -- I understood the game, and could follow why things were working. Not as well as an FPS, but I still "got it".

Any other RTS, and I wouldn't have even bothered. I've never played another RTS before or since WCIII.

See the problem there? Sports are part of our culture(s), and everyone, even if they don't watch them, still has at least some understanding of them.

Video games start from a blank slate. Each time.

The Wizard! (2, Funny)

calculi (51698) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777205)

The final match should be Super Mario Bros. 3!

What about RTS games? (1)

tbcpp (797625) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777244)

RTS game competitions would be interesting. Some games would work really well, like StarCraft, Age of Empires, etc. Some like Battle For Middle Earth II would be awesome to watch 8 people dueling it out on. Epecialy if you had a running commentary on it for the viewers (this would need to be hidden from the players though). That would be more down my alley. But watching a FPS? Yawn...

The Commentator (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777299)

I can see it now. FPS Doug. Cause all the kiddies already love him.

"Night8talk3r52 is coming around the corner, remember, he's the only one left on his tea BOOM HEADSHOT, BOOM HEADSHOT BOOM HEADSHOT BOOM HEADSHO[out of breath]! Counter terrorists win."

Funding? How? (1)

supermank17 (923993) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777313)

How do they convince people to fund something like this? It's just going to be money down the drain, and any 14 year old could tell you that.

Perhaps, now they'll pay their debts... (1)

Pale-Horse-Rider (713087) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777458)

Major League Gaming is notorious for not actually paying out its prize money. Amongst their Tekken 5 tournaments, alone, there are guys still waiting to be paid for tournaments they won nearly a year ago (http://tekkenzaibatsu.com/forums/showthread.php?t hreadid=85134 [tekkenzaibatsu.com] )

something else to fill time between commercials (2, Funny)

bobbyhc (951142) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777584)

if anything it's going to be techtv's or g4 (whatever the fuck it is now) having lame ass FPS tournaments. it's highly unlikely that the point is going to be to just give viewers a spectator view of the entire game, they'll focus on each player, give some lame ass interview where johnny-too-many-twinkies tells you how gaming has been a suitable replacement for actual human contact, and that he doesn't regret the fact that he's 27 and still hasn't felt anyone up because he can just buy a real doll after he kicks everyone's ass and takes home the prizemoney. then they'll show the whole 30 seconds it takes for him to die at the hands of some 9 year old korean kid followed up by post game statistics given by some girl that is way too hot to actually know anything about the games she's commenting on. but it doesn't matter because you aren't really listening, you're just watching her tits bounce as she nods way too enthusiastically while prentending to care. tune in next week for our exclusive coverage of the EA superbowl, where competitors slap each other on the ass not because it's the only place they'll feel it, but because they're afraid it might get stuck in a fat roll if they went elsewhere.

If you doubt that this won't work..... (3, Insightful)

8127972 (73495) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777594)

..... I've got three words for you:

World Poker Tour

Poker: Exactly my first thought as well. eom (1)

BlueBoxSW.com (745855) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777685)

eom.

I like the math (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777598)

I like how the math works.
1) Raise 10 million dollars
2) Spend say a million on organizational needs
3) Give out "a total of $100,000 in prizes."
4) 10 000 000 - 1 000 000 - 100 000 ~ $8 900 000 Profit!!!

Enough Bashing! (2, Insightful)

j3one (949806) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777616)

Come on, Gaming is not a fad or a trend... YOung adults grew up on this stuff and love just as much as teens now days do. Gaming rocks, because of the compitition factor. And as games get more and more visualy apealing, they will be more fun to watch. Although I admit the core group of people tuning in will be other gamers, or at least those who aspire too. TONS of people game, few get 10,000 for thier skill. People want to compete and get better, so they play against others who wipe them up, and they will most likely watch to learn and enjoy.

As for me I am just as competitive when it comes down to old school nintindo... And fragging people all over BF2 or Halo is just as fun as running and tackling somebody. (well almost) - SO hey, face it Gaming is going to be bigger and bigger, and TV is a part of that. I expect online video and stuff like that to realy boom with this stuff though. Gamers are also computer savy, (exept some console only gamers, which should have the tittle gamer removed and replaced with console junkie.

Where are the good old games? (2, Insightful)

Mewtwo (878960) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777721)

We shouldn't be watching people play the newest FPS or whatever piece of crap Microsoft churns out next. If I want to watch someone play games on a grand scale, I want to be watching them play CLASSIC games. The games that actually matter. Super Mario Kart. Tetris. Dr. Mario. That might draw in all the people who played games back in the 80's and hasn't done so since, as they'd actually recognize the games and get interested.

I could get into it. (1)

AdamThirteenth (857966) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777745)

That would be fun watching a CS clan math on TV. I'm not a football fan, but I can imagine becoming like one if they started showing MLG matches... Drinking beer, eating cheez-its watching Starcraft finals.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?