Pro Gamers Can't Scrape By?
An anonymous reader points to a Wired News article discussing the harsh nature of professional gaming. According to the piece, "Professional gaming is in its infancy, providing few players with the means to live without any other job. Still, the competition for those sponsorships is cutthroat." Even for the elite team covered in the article, there are issues: "Game Point lost in QuakeCon's Wolfenstein finals, which cut their prize money down to $12,000. It was disheartening for the team, particularly since five members said the time constraints necessary to maintain this high level would most likely force them to retire." So, is pro gaming really semi-pro gaming? A player points out: "If you work for eight months and you divide up your hours, the amount of money that you make is minimal."
It was never ment to be made money on playing games, so don't whine when it doesn't.
an oxymoron.
What about the Olympic GAMES, or the X-Games, etc. Besides, what makes computer games any different than chess. There are professional chess players who live off it, its only inevitable that computer game players eventually will. The only problem is that there is only one game of chess, while there are a myriad of computer games. Therefore while one can be the best chess player in the world, a computer gamer can only be say, the best Quake , UT, or Warcraft III player in the world.
Photos.
Is gaming such an interesting spectator sport? It's more interesting to play than watch someone else. And if you want to watch someone else play well you can do that using your own screen and some server on the net. If someone gets promotional dollars out of games it's going to be the game makers not the players.
And what about the players themselves. Can you see yourself (or anyone) worshiping someone for their their ability to click really fast for endless hours in front of a screen? It's all about personalities and their ability to promote products.
Reliable, Great Value Hosting: $7.95/mo 2.4G/120G
Games are suppose to be fun to play, a way of exscaping reality.
Not a way of providing yourself an income. I thought this sort of thing when away when the so called dotcom boom fizzled.
Time for people to relise that there's more jobs out there than ones that involve sitting at a computer, and guess what, they do pay enough to live on.
Easy... it's not an spectator game. It's fun for the players and that's it. You can't fill an amphitheater of people paying $15 bucks to see five or ten guys duke it out in a Quake deathmatch. You can't sell pay-per-view rights for the same reason.
Why not? Maybe it's because people somehow admire the performers at some level, and a computer game screams neither physical fitness/skill (sports) nor brain power (chess, etc).
It will always have it's admirers, but so will horseshoe tossing.
No sig
I have absolutely no doubt that gaming on a "professional" scale is incredibly difficult, takes hours on days on weeks on months on years of practice... Is far beyond %99.999 of the populace's capabilities... But COME ON... Anyone who honestly believes that they "should" be able to earn a full living playing video games is completely fooling themselves. There are two parts to any business transaction - there has to be someone receiving the money, and there has to be someone willing to PROVIDE the money. Exactly who are they expecting to provide the money? Spectators? As people have already pointed out, nobody wants to buy a ticket to watch people play Quake. Game companies? Why should they? The company made the game to sell it to you, not to give you thousands of dollars to play it for a living. And no, it's not good "advertising" or "promotion" or whatever. The only people who really care to watch "professional" gamers playing game XYZ is people who already own game XYZ and are already really into it. Maybe it's a harsh realization for some, but yes, if you want to earn a living, you have to work for it. Meaning an actual job that someone is willing to pay you to do. Stop acting so surprised that you "professional gaming" isn't making you rich or famous, no matter how good you are.
...Also, I didn't know Buggalo could fly.
The first is a game you can download and train with. It is an okay animated slighly odd to use fight game. The second is lot less clear but the ads for it make it looks a bit like the total war series. Lots of formations of soldiers fighting it out. (nice animation)
But yeah I think that current games make extremly poor TV entertainment. But then again quake? That is like a drunk punchup compared to a thightly regulated boxing match. Just try to make a running commentary on a quake match
Player [34_the()_[t53]] just picked up the gun. oh and got fragged. and he is back and he frags that guy and he gets fragged.
So though luck guys but it looks like you have the following options
So in short I find this article to be in the trend of "Hey we made millions in the dotcom days. But now people seem to expect us to make real products". Yeah cry me a river. Oh well at least they are not aimbot cheaters.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.