Should Video Games Be In the Olympics?

An anonymous reader writes: The BBC is running a story about e-sports and competitive video game. It's based on comments from Rob Pardo, formerly of Blizzard Entertainment, who says there's a good argument for having e-sports in the Olympics. He says video games are well positioned to be a spectator sport — an opinion supported by Amazon's purchase of Twitch.tv for almost a billion dollars. The main obstacle, says Pardo, is getting people to accept video games as a legitimate sport. "If you want to define sport as something that takes a lot of physical exertion, then it's hard to argue that videogames should be a sport, but at the same time, when I'm looking at things that are already in the Olympics, I start questioning the definition." The article notes, "Take chess, for instance. Supporters of the game have long called for its inclusion the Games, but the IOC has been reluctant, considering it a 'mind sport' and therefore not welcome in the Games." So, should the Games expand to include "mind sports" and video games?

Comments

One word

[Anonymous Coward]

NO

Don't need the IOC corrupting my hobby, plus how would you even chose which game was in the Olympics?

Re:One word

[stephanruby]

...plus how would you even chose which game was in the Olympics?

The same way it's currently done now, with both bribes and sponsorship money.

In any case, I agree with you. If video game studios want their own competitions, they should just organize their own leagues.

I'm Gonna Say "Yes"

[Greyfox]

If only to watch the IOCs' heads explode when the suggestion is put forth.

Re:I'm Gonna Say "Yes"

[Samantha Wright]

It may not happen; the modern Olympics, quite unlike the ancient Olympics, have not always been purely about physical sports. Competitions like poetry and painting were removed in part because the same entrants won year after year—this has not, so far, been an issue for e-sports.

They do have one advantage

[Cytotoxic]

Video games have at least one advantage over many of the Olympic sports: They can have clearly defined objectives and scoring. Many of the Olympic sports don't really qualify in my book because they rely on judges to tell us who was better. Even if they were fully objective in every respect, it still smacks of a beauty contest rather than an athletic competition. If we play a match of FIFA 2015 there will be absolutely no question as to who the winner is.

I still think it is silly to talk about video games as an olympic sport, but it is also silly that we have sports like ballroom dance and synchronized swimming in the Olympics. My rule of thumb is "if you have to ask someone else to tell you who the winner is; it isn't a sport, it is a recreational activity."

NO

[Megahard]

Olympics is for sports. Not games. Sport is "activity involving physical exertion and skill" google. And no, pressing keys or buttons doesn't count.

Something that challenges the body

[JoeCommodore]

I think some ultimate Dance Dance Revolution would make an interesting olymic event. Singles and in groups.

Limit it to actual war fare games

[plopez]

The origianl games revolved around martial sports; javelin, wrestling, archery, etc. Then came shooting, pentathlon, biathlon etc. So limit it to the games actually used in warfare such as drone strikes, gunship strafing, and the perennial favorite thermo-nuclear war. Though the last one would actually be pretty boring. The players would have to do nothing to compete.

Re:Betteridge here.

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

Bennett Haselton is working on one for you right now.

do what you want.

[ihtoit]

The Olympics lost all meaning when it was decided to admit events for people missing fucking LIMBS into a sporting gala previously for those who were ACTUALLY BETTER THAN AVERAGE! Better, stronger, faster. What the fuck is "dressage", anyway??

Take my favourite competitive sport: archery. OK, we have the longbow, which is pretty fucking difficult to STRING, never mind DRAW and AIM, but now we have the olympic event where they get to use counterweights, spring cam mechanisms to bring the draw weight down yet maintain nock energy, composite bows and superthin strings, peep sights(!) and drop scales, and the basic event which runs just 33 feet, where it is entirely possible to gain a gold medal. I *PRACTICE* AT NINETY FEET. WITH AN ENGLISH LONGBOW (and the trainer at the club across the river wonders how I don't tear the shit out of my shoulder muscles every week, it's because I've been shooting bow since I was FOUR). I could piss the basic event with my bow on a *bad* day.

Re:do what you want.

[Krishnoid]

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you, Robin of Locksley, Internet edition.

Re:do what you want.

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

I'd love to see him post that shit on ArcheryTalk and watch him get laughed out of the building.

BTW: Compound bows and peeps sights are NOT used in the Olympics; his "33 feet" is just out his arse, Olympics are shot at 70 meters. After that, he just starts talking bullshit.

Re:do what you want.

[sdguero]

Hey now! My aunt rode dressage in 2 olympics. One of my earliest memories was seeing her in the opening ceremonies in 1984.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...
She was holding the red balloon. :)

Dressage is defined as "the highest expression of horse training." My aunt dedicated her life to understanding and working with horses. Going to the olympics was an added bonus, awarded to her because she is very good at what she does.

Horses were largely replaced by the internal combustion engine about 100 years ago. Bows were replaced by firearms nearly 400 years ago. Both are archeaic and underappreciated. Honestly, I was surprised someone who enjoys longbow archery has no respect for dressage. Then I read NoNONAlphaCharsHere's reply and see that pretty much everything in your post is bullshit. So now I'm no longer surprised.

Re:do what you want.

[wonkey_monkey]

but now we have the olympic event where they get to use counterweights

Yes. I'm not sure why that's such a big deal...

spring cam mechanisms

No; there are no compound bow events at the Olympics. It's all recurve.

peep sights(!) and drop scales

Peep sights aren't allowed. I don't know what a drop scale is.

and the basic event which runs just 33 feet

No, all four events are at 70 metres. That's 220 feet.

where it is entirely possible to gain a gold medal.

Of course it's entirely possible to get a gold medal. The whole point is that there's only one, and someone gets to win it.

I *PRACTICE* AT NINETY FEET. WITH AN ENGLISH LONGBOW

Okay,

(and the trainer at the club across the river wonders how I don't tear the shit out of my shoulder muscles every week, it's because I've been shooting bow since I was FOUR).

we get it,

I could piss the basic event with my bow on a *bad* day.

you're awesome.

Re:Rifle-shooting is a sport in the olympics...

[CastrTroy]

If video games go into the Olympics, there's a lot of other things that have to make it in there first like darts and snooker. While video games are a good form of competition between people, I don't think that they are a good fit for the Olympics.

Cut Down On Olympic Bloat

[rnturn]

Get rid of the sports that cannot measure the success of the competitors using the Olympic motto: higher, faster, stronger. That means no figure skating, no synchronized swimming, and, especially, no more rhythmic gymnastics. Essentially, nothing that requires assigning a number to a performance via a panel of judges. (I'm a little torn about any sport that chooses winners based on the points that they score on a particular day but when I think about the excessive coverage given to beach volleyball in the last few Summer Games I lean hard to the "drop them, too" side.)

Just think how much less expensive it would be to hold an Olympics would be if all those judged "sports" were taken out. The potential sites for the games would mushroom without a need for all the additional venues for the judged events. Cities that hold the Games can rarely afford to and the citizens wind up footing the bill for facilities that will rarely see use after the closing ceremonies. Plus, if it would get Bob Costas' interviews with prepubescent gymnasts off the air, we all win.

Re:Cut Down On Olympic Bloat

[AmiMoJo]

Almost all sports are judged to some degree, even if it is only a referee making decisions. In any case, those sports are all in there because they have large international competitions and structures, with well defined rules that many athletes feel are worth competing under. If they were just a pure judgement call people wouldn't bother participating since there would be no clear and objective way to measure and improve their performance, but that's not how they work.

The judges use very specific criteria, just like an examiner does to mark papers in an academic setting. For example, in rhythmic gymnastics there is a list of moves, ranked by difficulty and judged on how well the athlete meets the prescribed forms. It's not about looking good, it's about doing the motions correctly and with a high level of skill.

They can do whatever they want

[HBI]

I'm not going to watch the retarded shit anyway. I do think that video gaming nowadays should be lumped into regular sport, because it's the same kind of people who play the button mashing games anyway.

A game that required actual intelligence can hardly be found, never mind made into an Olympic sport.

Re:Only one game is demanding enough,

[Nemyst]

You jest, but Quake would be a good candidate on the basis of being open-source. I wouldn't want to see a commercial game be used in the Olympics, the balance would be different every year and features could appear and disappear without control. Plus, there's enough branding going on in today's world without having an event dedicated to a commercial product.