Digital Gaming Explosion - Natural evolution or runaway train?

Tell me how · 01-08-2019 01:00PM #1

Sport has long since stopped been purely for the joy of it. Some of the wealthiest people on the planet have earned their money largely because of the skills they have at a particular sport.

Below are some of the figures on offer for winning some individual competitions over the last month with the womens world cup which is a team event included for reference because it ended up being discussed quite a bit.

The Open
Purse - $10.75 million
Winner - $1.935 million

Irish Open
Purse - €6.215 million
Winner - €1.034 million

Wimbledon
Purse - £19M (per gender)
Winner - £2.35M (per gender)

Darts Matchplay
Purse - £700k
Winner - £150k

Womens Football World Cup (Team Event)
Purse - $30M
Winner - $4M

Fortnite World Championship
Purse - $30M
Winner - $3M

I did a double take when I heard the figure for the Fortnite world championship. The first prize means that that person took home more than the winner of Wimbledon, The Open championship, The Irish Open, or the Worlds Match play championship. And not a whole lot away from what the US womens team won for winning the football world cup. All for playing a computer game.

What has kept coming to mind for me on this is just how the organisers could afford such a prize fund for a game which was only released 2 years previously. I understand (I am not a player) that the game is so lucrative largely because of a micro-transaction payment system and given the number of players worldwide then you start to see it add up.

But, I must say I am somewhat concerned at the possible implications of what this means. My 10 year old UK nephew told me a few months ago when I asked him were all his school mates in to rugby or soccer that some were but the most popular thing was Fortnite. He said that lots of them get up at 05:00 or 06:00 and play for a couple of hours before going to school and that one day a parent was called in because their child fell asleep in class and it turned out they had not even gone to bed the night before. The child was 9!
The winners of the above money will definitely see benefits but what about the millions others who are putting so much effort in to this hoping that they will be so lucky.

I shudder to think how challenging it must be for many parents to put a stop to excessive play. Particularly when they can point to a leaving cert student in Dublin who won $50k in the above competition which you would hope would be enough to see him through college if nothing else.

Also, I am of the mind that most of the other sports have largely healthy benefits for participants through social interaction, being outdoors and active (darts is a debate for another day in this respect) but outside of the potential for social interaction (non face to face) with video games, are they something to be lauded, or treated with a growing caution given the way they could take over.

Am I being too Helen Lovejoy here?

TLDR: I have nothing against gamers (young or old) as a hobby (or indeed career for some) but am concerned that they have the potential for massively impacting childrens development if they are played as much as many seem to be playing them at very young ages. I am aware how other sports also can harm people who devote too much time to them but I suspect not at the same figures as potentially happening here.

Potential-Monke · 01-08-2019 01:02PM

I feel like I've read this already...

Edit: To add to this, it's no different than say, playing soccer in the hopes you'll get onto a good team. My nephew spends the vast majority of his time playing hurling, football and soccer. He's hoping to make it with one of them. Granted, he's making moves towards it and is on the county Under 16 team and hoping to go minors next year. Fortnite/Gaming is a lot more accessible to everyone, so more people are going to think they will get good enough to win this.

Personally, I think with a prize pool that high, you should be at least 18 to enter.

Tell me how · 01-08-2019 01:04PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I feel like I've read this already...

Was there a thread on this given the recent Fortnite competition?
I didn't see one but, if so, Mods, please merge or delete.

somesoldiers · 01-08-2019 01:05PM

I hear on the rao during the week that a 15 year old in the UK won 1mil (not sure if GBP or USD).
The radio host, James O'Brien I think, made the point that it will be a hard sell for parents now to convince there kids that gaming is a waste of time

Potential-Monke · 01-08-2019 01:06PM

Tell me how wrote: »

Was there a thread on this given the recent Fortnite competition?
I didn't see one but, if so, Mods, please merge or delete.

There was discussions about it, I just had a déjà vu moment, thought I read those exact words already!

JohnnyFlash · 01-08-2019 01:09PM

Gonna be a lot of people visiting Internet Anonymous in a few years as they realise they cannot beat their gaming, internet, porn addiction on their own. Taking a pledge and doing the 12 steps.

Tell me how · 01-08-2019 01:09PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I feel like I've read this already...

Edit: To add to this, it's no different than say, playing soccer in the hopes you'll get onto a good team. My nephew spends the vast majority of his time playing hurling, football and soccer. He's hoping to make it with one of them. Granted, he's making moves towards it and is on the county Under 16 team and hoping to go minors next year. Fortnite/Gaming is a lot more accessible to everyone, so more people are going to think they will get good enough to win this.

Personally, I think with a prize pool that high, you should be at least 18 to enter.

Can understand the comparison but I think it likely is different for 2 reasons.

1 - The added benefits of sport (healthwise) generally speaking are greater.
2 - How many hours/week does your nephew actually spend playing. 2 hours/day would be a lot in terms of organised training/matches and that would be 14 hrs/ week. It seems that many gamers are playing 6-8 hrs a day.

Retr0gamer · 01-08-2019 01:11PM

eSports is only new so this is looking very like a bubble at the moment. Also the publishers of said game have huge money put into investing in their game so this is more like advertising revenue than a prize fund. The viewing figures for esports are much lower than similar sports. It will remain to be seen if these prize pots are sustainable.

As for kids expecting to make millions out of a career in gaming, only the very top do out of billions of people who play games. And it's only in certain popular videogames, and what is popular changes on a 5-10 year cycle. It's not something I'd want to be making a career in. Streaming might be a better option but the market is way over saturated there.

You can still play games and have a healthy social and work life. I play a lot of videogames, nothing competitive or requires a life investment like WoW but it never stopped me getting a job or being well educated.

Tell me how · 01-08-2019 01:12PM

somesoldiers wrote: »

I hear on the rao during the week that a 15 year old in the UK won 1mil (not sure if GBP or USD).
The radio host, James O'Brien I think, made the point that it will be a hard sell for parents now to convince there kids that gaming is a waste of time

That's kind of my point. 40M gamers started the path to the world championship finals. How many of those have parents who think their child is devoting too much time to it and yet it is so difficult to stop it or argue against it given potential winnings even though there are 40M others trying to do the same thing.

4068ac1elhodqr · 01-08-2019 01:13PM

'Gaming disorder' is defined in the 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).

Wait until actual true immersive VR arrives (it's still in early infancy), sure you'll hardly see any yoofs out on the streets anymore.
Even sane adults will opt for a virtual walk around a virtual LIDL store to fill their virtual basket, then get the actual real-world goods delivered without having to see any daylight.

Potential-Monke · 01-08-2019 01:14PM

Oh, I agree that physical sports are better in terms of health. Although saying that, I've only ever once had a sport injury, pulled both hamstrings at the same time. But I play no sport and haven't for years. Whereas most people who play sport have injured themselves at some stage, which would lead me to believe that while sport is healthier, it's also more injury prone! XD

Te nephew spends nearly all his spare time playing, practicing, etc. He used to be a bigger gamer, but he plays very little now, and usually Fifa. This is all going to come down to parenting. This is no one else's responsibility, it's up to the parents to monitor and enforce restrictions. Kids can 'practice' for competitive gaming, it's up to the parents to ensure they're taking sufficient breaks. Just like it's my sisters responsibility to ensure her son doesn't over exert himself, which she does.

Tell me how · 01-08-2019 01:15PM

Retr0gamer wrote: »

eSports is only new so this is looking very like a bubble at the moment. Also the publishers of said game have huge money put into investing in their game so this is more like advertising revenue than a prize fund. The viewing figures for esports are much lower than similar sports. It will remain to be seen if these prize pots are sustainable.

As for kids expecting to make millions out of a career in gaming, only the very top do out of billions of people who play games. And it's only in certain popular videogames, and what is popular changes on a 5-10 year cycle. It's not something I'd want to be making a career in. Streaming might be a better option but the market is way over saturated there.

You can still play games and have a healthy social and work life. I play a lot of videogames, nothing competitive or requires a life investment like WoW but it never stopped me getting a job or being well educated.

I think many very capable and qualified people benefit from their gaming hobbies.
I am wondering about the children who maybe devote too much time to the gaming before developing other hobbies/interests and in a way which stunts their education. And wondering are the quantities of children who do this a significant number.

Badly Drunk Boy · 01-08-2019 01:16PM

Retr0gamer wrote: »

eSports is only new so this is looking very like a bubble at the moment...

The thing is...it shouldn't be called eSports. It's eGaming really. And I've no objection to the events being held and if people can make a living from it, fair play! but it isn't a sport.

Tell me how · 01-08-2019 01:20PM

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

The thing is...it shouldn't be called eSports. It's eGaming really. And I've no objection to the events being held and if people can make a living from it, fair play! but it isn't a sport.

The terminology is a slightly different argument but given the way people join teams, practice, play knock out competitions, play massive events in stadium like venues, I think we have to accept that it is a sport of kind to many.
I'd rather not see it in the Olympics myself, but I expect we will. They're not going to pass up the $$ associated with it.

Sonics2k · 01-08-2019 01:40PM

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

The thing is...it shouldn't be called eSports. It's eGaming really. And I've no objection to the events being held and if people can make a living from it, fair play! but it isn't a sport.

It is a sport, just a different kind. A new kind.

Personally I find the amount of money going for these things to be insane, and I say that as an avid gamer, but I feel the same about football players too.

The amounts up for grabs are a direct reflection of how much money these competitions and companies are making. $3 million is a drop in the water compared to the sheer cash the company is making itself.

eSports/Gaming has been on the increase for well over a decade now. I remember years ago in World of Warcraft it was a big deal about who got the World First kill on the latest endboss. Online gaming has gone way past the days of pointing your mouse in the right direction and shooting someone in Quake, but time, patience, developing tactics and quite frankly. skill.

Here's the current 'top' guild in Warcraft. www.method.gg. Look at those companies listed as sponsorship, these are big businesses in themselves.

A few nights ago they got another world first kill and over 250k people watched it happen live. While it seems odd, they had 393 attempts on this boss before they finally were able to kill it, and it's very likely that less than 10% of the playerbase will ever actually be able to do it. Simply because they aren't good enough. Method is a full blown international business now fully involved in a number of games, when 13 years ago it was just a group of people who enjoyed killing monsters.

https://www.twitch.tv/method/clip/WiseHardTortoiseNononoCat?filter=clips&range=7d&sort=time

Warcraft, in compared to Fortnite is small and insignificant. And as odd as it seems, they do train and practice for hours on end to get to the top level of the game, this training just happens to be more about reflexes, mental training and awareness.

ToddyDoody · 01-08-2019 02:41PM

A guy at work was lamenting how he spends €50 a week on online gaming.

I suppose smokers spend a fortune on smoke and gamblers a bit on gambling.

I pay for podcasts because I'm stupid myself.

Utter Consternation · 01-08-2019 02:45PM

I know of a couple who let their five year old child play Mine Craft for up to eight hours a day. The mother apparently is trying some form of parenting where they never say 'no' to the child.

Sounds like they're abusing that poor child by allowing him to do that.

ToddyDoody · 01-08-2019 02:48PM

Utter Consternation wrote: »

I know of a couple who let their five year old child play Mine Craft for up to eight hours a day. The mother apparently is trying some form of parenting where they never say 'no' to the child.

Sounds like they're abusing that poor child by allowing him to do that.

Did you say anything?

Utter Consternation · 01-08-2019 02:51PM

ToddyDoody wrote: »

Did you say anything?

I don't know them that well. I've only heard it's happening.

The child is out of control by all accounts, but that's not his fault.

Deebles McBeebles · 01-08-2019 02:55PM

Is the mother alright? Brain-wise, I mean?

Utter Consternation · 01-08-2019 02:57PM

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Is the mother alright? Brain-wise, I mean?

I dunno. It's some new age bollocks.

chris_ie · 01-08-2019 03:00PM

I've no real issue with it. If the competition runners are setting the prize money that high then they are making a hell of a lot more from the games and the competition itself, so why shouldn't people playing and partaking in the competition get a big prize.

With regards the concerns of kids growing up seeing that and wanting to do the same, parents still have to parent! Some kids love football, they'd spend all day out in the garden kicking the ball around and not go to school if they had the choice. Upside is that its a physical sport and they're keeping fit.

However, if you had a kid that wanted to be an author and sat in his room all day writing small stories or drawing small comic books he would probably be praised, even though he sitting on his arse the same as a gamer would be!

paleoperson · 01-08-2019 05:02PM

Fortnite is more a lottery than a game of skill. Games like the Quake or Starcraft series involve really deep and refined skill and analysis where you have to be both incredibly talented and playing for many years to be any good. Put it this way - Quake and Starcraft, and even your Counterstrikes and Call of Duties are a lot more like professional sports than they are like Fortnite. Fortnite is the absolute pits in terms of shallow gameplay.

I'm sure some people here have heard of that Ninja lad who was supposed to be like the god of Fortnite, similar to Rapha in Quake or Nadeshot in Call of Duty. And where is Ninja now? He didn't even make the World Cup. This didn't surprise me because it takes many years to build up an even remotely professional type of skill level around a game and Fortnite just doesn't have that. The fact that it's all a Battle Royale - basically what's known as a Free For All in shooters (notoriously a casual type of game that is never used for serious competition because it's pretty much all luck), should tell you most of all you need to know. You also won't hear of any of the currently successful names again in the future apart from how they become twitch streamers or whatever.

Let's say Quake is like chess, Counterstrike/Call of Duty would be something like checkers or Connect 4. Fortnite would then be Hungry, Hungry Hippos or Thumb War.

scamalert · 01-08-2019 05:04PM

3 mill for 16y old, id imagine 4 generations of parents before him didn't even scratch to that amount, yet he still has to finish school and already sorted for lifetime.

pretty low investment on 2yr old game and having skills to make it to the top 1, ain't bad.

but if compared to reaching same level in sports chances would be less then 0.1% achieving same in such a short duration to get such pay off.

thou can see many reasons why even looking at game it would seem like total waste of time, just like chess would be for many.
as its more brain and strategy, then any physical requirement.

paleoperson · 01-08-2019 05:09PM

scamalert wrote: »

3 mill for 16y old, id imagine 4 generations of parents before him didn't even scratch to that amount, yet he still has to finish school and already sorted for lifetime.

pretty low investment on 2yr old game and having skills to make it to the top 1, ain't bad.

but if compared to reaching same level in sports chances would be less then 0.1% achieving same in such a short duration to get such pay off.

thou can see many reasons why even looking at game it would seem like total waste of time, just like chess would be for many.
as its more brain and strategy, then any physical requirement.

The chances for him to get it in Fortnite were even lower.

He basically won the lottery. Sure the "investment" was low, but so were his chances at the time of making it.

Potential-Monke · 01-08-2019 05:27PM

paleoperson wrote: »

Fortnite is more a lottery than a game of skill.

As much as I dislike Fortnite, you're wrong here. Yes, there is some luck in the weapons you find, but the place is littered with them so I don't think it gives an unfair advantage to the 'Pros'. Have you watched competitive Fortnite? Again, not my game at all, but the skill some of these people have is insane, being able to build up and around attacking enemies and kill them, all in the space of a few seconds, is skill.

Ninja didn't qualify because 40 million people went for it. Nobody is the best at anything forever. It's not the same as Quake, so the comparison is unfair. Quake is a shooter, Fortnite is a builder/shooter. Both require insane skills at the game to be on the top, but in very different ways.

Again, I don't like Fortnite and I don't watch anyone streaming it (aside from some friends who may have it on in the background). But to call it pure luck is not right. Same could be said for any game if you think of it that way. Quake has skills required, but a lucky noob could kill a veteran player. Chances are slim, but luck is luck regardless of game.

But I still think it should be 18 years old as the minimum qualifying age.

Sonics2k · 01-08-2019 05:31PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

As much as I dislike Fortnite, you're wrong here. Yes, there is some luck in the weapons you find, but the place is littered with them so I don't think it gives an unfair advantage to the 'Pros'. Have you watched competitive Fortnite? Again, not my game at all, but the skill some of these people have is insane, being able to build up and around attacking enemies and kill them, all in the space of a few seconds, is skill.

Ninja didn't qualify because 40 million people went for it. Nobody is the best at anything forever. It's not the same as Quake, so the comparison is unfair. Quake is a shooter, Fortnite is a builder/shooter. Both require insane skills at the game to be on the top, but in very different ways.

Again, I don't like Fortnite and I don't watch anyone streaming it (aside from some friends who may have it on in the background). But to call it pure luck is not right. Same could be said for any game if you think of it that way. Quake has skills required, but a lucky noob could kill a veteran player. Chances are slim, but luck is luck regardless of game.

But I still think it should be 18 years old as the minimum qualifying age.

Online gaming is a bit like poker in that regard. Luck is an element, and a new player may beat a veteran out of sheer luck, but over the course of many rounds/games, the veteran/professional is going to win overall.

Potential-Monke · 01-08-2019 05:32PM

True, and in an elimination event, the veteran should win, but some lucky noob can take them out. Or maybe the noob just had better skills.

paleoperson · 01-08-2019 06:14PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

As much as I dislike Fortnite, you're wrong here. Yes, there is some luck in the weapons you find, but the place is littered with them so I don't think it gives an unfair advantage to the 'Pros'. Have you watched competitive Fortnite? Again, not my game at all, but the skill some of these people have is insane, being able to build up and around attacking enemies and kill them, all in the space of a few seconds, is skill.

I don't know how you can talk about "the skill involved", if it's not your game then you don't understand what you're watching very well at all. The major downfall of computer games and board games as spectator sports is that the spectator tends to not be able to understand what's going on or able to recognize great skill unless they're at a high skill level themselves. You're really claiming to have an idea of what's going on at the highest levels of the game already?

Everyone can see Messi busting through the world's greatest defenders and sending it the ball to the roof of the net. However when it comes to games like Fortnite you can't see what's going on very well and can't assess the skill involved, all you can see are the results on the screen. Any effect of skill you thought you saw was the emperor's new clothes. Even watching spectator sports like football a person who is new to the game will have a very difficult time spotting a really good player because they have nothing to compare it to.

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Ninja didn't qualify because 40 million people went for it. Nobody is the best at anything forever. It's not the same as Quake, so the comparison is unfair. Quake is a shooter, Fortnite is a builder/shooter. Both require insane skills at the game to be on the top, but in very different ways.

Sorry, I don't know what the hell you are talking about. There's no "going in" for something unless it's a lottery. If someone is meant to be by far the best player in the world at something then overall, then you should expect them to qualify for the finals which got something like 100 participants. It'd be like Federer not qualifying for Wimbledon. You don't just "try your hand" at something involving a high skill level, that is ridiculous. It's like if you started playing football or tennis and all of a sudden you were world champion, that's not how it goes.

Ninja not qualifying is a good argument because it's a good piece of evidence showing that the game has a large element of luck rather than actual skill. It's all a kind of lottery at the higher levels.

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Again, I don't like Fortnite and I don't watch anyone streaming it (aside from some friends who may have it on in the background). But to call it pure luck is not right. Same could be said for any game if you think of it that way. Quake has skills required, but a lucky noob could kill a veteran player. Chances are slim, but luck is luck regardless of game.

You are suggesting I said things I never did or would claim. I never said anything like it was "pure luck", I said it involved a very heavy element of luck. In no way did I suggest that it was all luck. I would never claim I wouldn't be buried alive by any of these players in Fortnite, I'm sure I would no matter how much practice I had. However take the most talented player in any medium-sized town in Ireland, train them up really well, and they would have as much of a lottery of chance as most of the others.

A lucky noob could only kill a veteran player in FFA in Quake, not in Duel which is where all the serious competition is.

Bobblehats · 01-08-2019 06:42PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

But I still think it should be 18 years old as the minimum qualifying age.

We’re talking Fortnite here I would say 12. Maximum.

The Tetrarch · 01-08-2019 06:44PM

Small stuff.
The WSOP (world series of poker) in Las Vegas had 89 events this summer.
The Main Event (started 1970) has a USD 10,000 buy in, and in 2019 had 8,569 players, with a prizepool of USD 80,548,600, and USD 10,000,000 to the winner (2nd 6,000,000, 3rd 4,000,000 ..... with 9th getting 1,000,000).
Many events had a 10k buy in, with event 83 a USD 100,000 entry fee.
In the past there was a tournament with a USD 1,000,000 entry fee.

Digital Gaming Explosion - Natural evolution or runaway train?

Comments