Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Blizzard Launches A Professional Sports League For 'Overwatch' (usatoday.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the World-Series-of-frags dept.

An anonymous reader quotes USA Today: One of Blizzard Entertainment's hottest video games is making the jump into a professional sports league. [Blizzard] announced Friday the launch of Overwatch League, a professional video gaming league kicking off its inaugural season during the second half of 2017... Blizzard says the league will combine competitive video gaming -- better known as eSports with hallmarks of professional sports leagues like the National Football League, complete with teams based in various cities worldwide featuring owners who will cultivate team and player development... Blizzard will start by recruiting prospective owners representing cities in the Americas, Europe, Asia and other parts of the globe... Players who get picked up by a team are guaranteed contracts complete with benefits, and owners will be required to take steps to develop their players and grow their fan bases.
Overwatch already has 20 million players after just four months. Could professional videogame competitions someday become more popular than football?

64 comments

  1. Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Once AIs get better than the world's best human players, the tournaments will seem rather pointless.

    Games that physically require human players will remain unaffected, and remain popular.

    1. Re:Nope. by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      Cars are infinitely faster than anyone can run, but we still hold tracck and field events.

    2. Re:Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do cars do in the pole vault and the javelin? Or the hurdles? Don't the rules specify that an athlete must stay within their lane? How does your car manage that?

      You might have noticed that cars already have sporting events of their own. The cars are controlled by humans, not AI.

    3. Re:Nope. by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      And when the cars can be controlled by AI (which won't be far off)?

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    4. Re:Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dream, dream , dream, all I have to do is dreeeeeeaam.

      Haha deluded dude.

    5. Re:Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sports like F1 could produce remotely controlled vehicles right now, and probably a winning AI within a few years,

      But they aren't going to do that, because spectators want to see people racing other people.

  2. tickle my scrotum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i love it

  3. Professional (anything) requires spectators by Opportunist · · Score: 0

    And let's face it, playing computer games is no spectator sport. Of course you will have a few people who would watch because they're interested in the game itself, the same way you have a handful of people wanting to watch chess, people who are playing themselves and want to watch people who can play well, maybe learn a thing or two or just watch how the "pros" are doing it, but there is simply no mass appeal like with football, soccer or basketball, where people who are not playing themselves are interested in watching, even if they don't really know all the rules and wouldn't even dream of playing themselves.

    So far I cannot identify a single computer game where this was the case. Any "professional" computer gaming only attracts other players as spectators, but it has never really gained any traction outside of gamer circles.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by Draeven · · Score: 1

      Had this been 2010, I would have agreed with you. The numbers for 2015 show that esports isn't just a game these days, though. Sure, these aren't NFL or MLB numbers, but they aren't minor either.

      http://esports-marketing-blog....

    2. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So what you have here is 36 million viewers for the top gaming events and 30k people attending physically. Compare the former to some YouTube videos of some YouTube "stars" and the latter to the average E3 (or BlizzCon) attendance number and you'll see that this is pretty much what I was talking about: People who are not only interested in a certain activity but are most likely actively participating in it and only because of this interested in watching those that are good at it.

      There isn't much room for increasing those numbers unless playing computer games in a competitive multiplayer environment becomes the favorite pastime of a sizable portion of the population.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re: Professional (anything) requires spectators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dota2? so many normies watched ti6 who don't even play video games

    4. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 1

      ESports is a thing, it's big, and it's growing fast.

    5. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by Afty0r · · Score: 2

      And let's face it, playing computer games is no spectator sport.

      Errr... three years ago an e-sports event became the fastest selling event ever to sellout the Staples Center... http://www.redbull.com/us/en/e...

    6. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      However, games like Starcraft sold in the millions, and some players are considered super stars in their countries.
      Just because your girlfriend neither plays nor watches Starcraft competitions, it does not mean that jap. or korean school girls do it neither.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    7. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Anything children do is big. Because there are lots and lots of children with mommy's money out there, duh.

    8. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      You mean like the part of the population that has grown up playing Nintendo games or spending their free time gaming on a PC? A sizable portion of the upcoming generation already plays computer games. Eventually the people who didn't grow up playing computer games will die off.

      Your exact argument could have been applied to basketball or football in their infancy, and yet they're some of the most popular sports in the U.S. at this point. Whether or not Overwatch, or any other computer game reaches anywhere near that level is debatable, but Valve's Dota 2 championship had a $20 million prize pool this year. Hard to scoff at that.

    9. Re: Professional (anything) requires spectators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I buy his argument. I watched sc2 esports for a while because I was playing . I stopped playing, stopped watching. And I've probably watched a match or two tops outside a game I was playing.

    10. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yes, professional e-sports is a thing, and yes, endorsements by the stars is valuable to prospective sponsors, but I doubt that this is ever going to become as big as current pro-sports like football or (outside the US) the real kind of football that you actually play with your feet. I don't doubt that you can attract a few thousands to a couple ten thousand people to come to some global event, and you will find a million or ten to watch it if broadcast world wide, but that's basically your potential market. You also can't do that on a weekly base like the various sports events now without saturating the market very quickly.

      Yes, there is a market. But I doubt that it will ever become any bigger than for other niche games like chess or curling. There are also fans of either, but neither has any kind of mass appeal.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      Yes, there is a market. But I doubt that it will ever become any bigger than for other niche games like chess or curling. There are also fans of either, but neither has any kind of mass appeal.

      People said the same thing about video games 10,20,30 years ago. Now, video gaming is a ~$100 billion USD industry that makes ~2.5 times the revenue of global box office sales (all film/TV revenue together is still quite a bit more, at ~$300 billion, but the gap is closing). And only ~$40 billion of that is mobile gaming. The days of video gaming being a "niche market" are long since over. And you can easily do weekly events, though no ones started doing that yet, in part because if you want to watch video games, you can hope on Twitch and watch them anytime, no need to limit yourself to a few hours a day on one specific day. Hell, the top 5 games on Twitch right now have ~500,000 people watching them.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    12. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by paskie · · Score: 1

      ...yet, there are professional chess (and Go, shogi) players. It's just smaller economics than football, but that's okay.

      --
      It's not the fall that kills you. It's the sudden stop at the end. -Douglas Adams
    13. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by iampiti · · Score: 1

      If eSports want to get a loyal fanbase they need a stable game: The same game played for many years, small amount of changes, rules easy to understand.
      There's a few popular sports (10,20?) How many games are there that are played professionally? For how long?

    14. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yes playing video games is a huge market. Watching video games not so much.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    15. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by tnok85 · · Score: 1

      League of Legends has been adding new champions consistently from 40 in 2009 to 133 today. That's a LOT of changes, and they've been quite successful. I don't play LoL anymore, but the games are still "okay" to watch. I wouldn't go out of my way. Same with CS:GO. Overwatch I'm actively playing, Diamond ranked, and I can't stand watching games. It's *too* chaotic, there's too much to watch and a caster can never get the full picture.

    16. Re: Professional (anything) requires spectators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how many people who watch basketball have never played basketball? How many people who watch soccer have never kicked a ball. Why are some sports more popular than others? Marketing, and all your friends are doing it/talking about it, and money. Throw in some gambling and you're set.

    17. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same situation as in regular sports.

    18. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by tepples · · Score: 1

      One difference between video games and ball sports is that unlike ball sports, video games are subject to an exclusive right to perform them publicly. A game's publisher holds copyright that it can use and in some cases has used to ban leagues from publicly performing its games. Blizzard, for example, has had a spat with KeSPA from 2008 through 2011. This doesn't bode well for potential competitors to Blizzard's league.

      If the National League held copyright on baseball, the American League, Negro National League, and Negro American League could never have formed. (The NL and AL eventually merged to form MLB, and most NNL and NAL players were signed to MLB teams after World War II.)

      If the National Football League held copyright on gridiron football, the American Football League could never have formed. (They eventually merged to form the present NFL.)

      If the National Basketball League held copyright on gridiron football, the Basketball Association of America and American Basketball Association could never have formed. (The NBL merged with the BAA and ABA to form the NBA.)

    19. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Yes, there is a market. But I doubt that it will ever become any bigger than for other niche games like chess or curling. There are also fans of either, but neither has any kind of mass appeal.

      I broadly agree with you. However I expect interest in "traditional" sports to fall as well - all the arguments against videogames as a spectator sport are the same for football as a spectator sport. The only thing these sports have in their favour is momentum - every watches a match/talks about a match because their friends are all watching/talking about a match.

      Watching sports was a draw when kids had little else to do. Now, they've got a ton of other activities more interesting than watching a match. They've also got lots of ways for social groupings whilst previously the best way for a group to get together was at a match (as spectators).

      I suspect that within a few generations football will be limited to a niche like chess is - only the parents of the kids who play will follow the sport.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    20. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm not that sure. Team sports are attractive for one single reason: You can't just do them at home. Even if I am in shape and able to play football, I still need a lot of friends to get a game going. Plus, I could get hurt. So, if I'm interested in that sport, the only way to enjoy it (if I don't have a lot of friends that share that interest) is to watch it on TV.

      Plus, the learning curve to play it in a way that's good enough to not drop the ball more often than catching it is pretty steep. It is way easier and appealing to just watch people who can do it well do it.

      The same isn't true for computer games. Here, it's trivial to play them yourself if you're interested. Moreover, the difference in "appeal" between you trying (and failing) and someone who can do it well isn't that big. Especially when it comes to appeal.

      Maybe I'm biased as someone who can actually play computer game decently, but then again, if I couldn't, why the hell would I be interested in them in the first place?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    21. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm not that sure. Team sports are attractive for one single reason: You can't just do them at home. Even if I am in shape and able to play football, I still need a lot of friends to get a game going. Plus, I could get hurt. So, if I'm interested in that sport, the only way to enjoy it (if I don't have a lot of friends that share that interest) is to watch it on TV.

      Well, that's why I said that the interest would fall. Sports as a spectator pastime was interesting because there was so little else to interest a teen/young adult. That has changed. Prior to 2000, the average person was the target audience for sports (matches, news, etc). Post-2010 the average person plays more phone-games than viewing sport.

      Looking at the stats (last time I looked sometime last year), sports viewers still made up less than 10% of the population while at one point in the past it was well over 65%. Right now there are more people playing smartphone games than there are people watching sport (combined). This is why I think sports viewership numbers are going to dive down to the same level as videogame viewership numbers.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    22. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Sports will take a long time to die off, they have a huge amount of inertia and are still getting record TV deals. The fans may be old, but they won't die for decades. Real sports also has local pride to keep people watching, a Geordie will keep watching Newcastle United FC, but it's much easier to stop watching SKT Telecom T1 if they go to shit.

    23. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by drsquare · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much just Korea, no-one else cared about the Starcraft esports scene. The Japanese don't like PC gaming at all.

    24. Re: Professional (anything) requires spectators by whh3 · · Score: 1

      I will add my voice to this conversation: I am a CS undergrad/grad and total geek. I am their prime audience in every way except one:

      I have not played a video game since HS when I played Starcraft over dialup.

      And yet I listen to a nightly SiriusXM radio show about esports and I follow them rabidly

      I agree with other commentators that in this instance I am somewhat like a person who has never played a particular sport but will still have an interest. I don't race cars, but I love F1. I don't play tennis, but I love Roger Federer.

      There is an audience outside gamers. But, whether it can be harnessed is another thing entirely.

      --
      remove nospam. to email!
    25. Re:Professional (anything) requires spectators by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Why do I meet so many Japanese eve online players or warcraft players then?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  4. need a new word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    If you can play it without leaving your chair, it's not a "sport".

    Sport implies physical activity. Running, throwing, kicking, swimming, skating, what have you.

    1. Re:need a new word by Tukz · · Score: 1

      You're right, which is why it's not called "sports", it's called "e-sports".

      --
      - Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
    2. Re:need a new word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "e-sports" attempts to imply by the name that it is a sport, which it is not.

    3. Re:need a new word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only way this rubbish is a "Sport", or an "E-Sport" if you insist, is if televised Poker is considered one. And the only reason that Poker is considered a Sport is because Morons bet on it.
      It is certain that those involved in promoting this already have the entire thing rigged, and stand to make a nice packet. Hell, NASCAR has been rigged for decades. It just appeals to a different kind of Moron.
      There is no such thing as honest gambling.
      (Note that I'm not making any kind of silly Moralistic argument, just a pragmatic one- The House always wins.)

    4. Re:need a new word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with you on this, how about something like a "professional gaming league". Does anybody call professional poker a sport? What's wrong with calling it a game or a gaming league?

    5. Re: need a new word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing at all. What's wrong with calling it "esports" though? Did some god descend from the heavens and declare the word "sports" off limits? People can be so self righteous with their semantics.

  5. 20million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Reasons Lucio Soccer should be brought back.

    The only reason apart from that that I bought the game, was diablo wings.

    The games a joke.

  6. the game is terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    20 million people ripped off, but i guess if you can find viewers for nascar or baseball, hell, overwatch is a masterpiece in comparison

    wouldnt play it for free, but then again, i would play baseball neither

    my mom handling the supermaket cart moves faster than the cart in overwatch, what a fucking TURD of a game

    1. Re: the game is terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your mom is only 18. You're not old enough to appreciate anything.

  7. E-Sports don't need more leagues. by SolemnLord · · Score: 1

    The leagues it has needs better organization, stability, and developer agnosticism. I don't trust that Blizzard's "Overwatch League" will be kicking around ten years from now, but I expect that MLG and EVO will.

    For an idea on how e-sports could actually change to a lasting, reliable force, Chris Kluwe (who's pretty on point for this sort of stuff) spells it out entirely.

    1. Re:E-Sports don't need more leagues. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      If Blizzard have their own league then they know they can always keep it going. If MLG had Overwatch, they would drop it as soon as it became unpopular.

    2. Re:E-Sports don't need more leagues. by SolemnLord · · Score: 1

      That is completely true.

      It's also true that Overwatch will, sooner or later, lose its player base (and I don't mean to knock it! The SO and I both play). At some point Blizzard is going to need to scale back on promotion, events, and prizes. And what's left of the Overwatch League at that point? An e-sports league dedicated to a single game is ephemeral; one of the biggest advantages major league sports has is history. Narratives build around around teams, cities, players, and beyond. The Cubs' World Series win this year is one of the most amazing sports stories I'll ever see in my lifetime. I think baseball is generally boring as hell, but I can still get caught up in a great story.

      E-sports leagues dedicated to a single game are not going to have the chance to to build that history and the stories that come with it. A league built with the ebb and flow of video game popularity in mind could support a broad number of games (maybe with developers directly backing) while being able to pivot its biggest events and promotions as time goes on. Teams* and sponsors, which drive leagues, can follow along. Spectators get something they can rely on not just for the next five years but for the next twenty or fifty, building the loyalty and history that ultimately matter.

      I think I'm rambling now, so TL;DR if we want e-sports as a whole to prosper we can't depend on leagues that put all their eggs in one basket.

      *when I say "teams" here I'm thinking of Kluwe's suggestion of an umbrella team that has multiple groups dedicated to specific games

    3. Re:E-Sports don't need more leagues. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      By that logic, MLB should never have been formed, because they would have had to scale it back if baseball lost popularity. They should have put it in a general 'Sports League' with multiple sports involved.

    4. Re:E-Sports don't need more leagues. by SolemnLord · · Score: 1

      The modern MLB did not spring fully-formed from the earth. Itcame about from the rise and fall and merging and ship-jumping of dozens of professional baseball leagues and teams. So did the NFL, NHL, and every other major professional sports league. They all crawled over the bodies of other leagues, grabbing what they needed, and adding to the corpse pile along the way.

      E-sports is in that early stage now. We can either use what we've learned to organize e-sports now on the basis of their strengths and weaknesses, or wait twenty or fifty years for a victor to drag itself out of its own pile of corpses.

      And I guarantee you Overwatch won't be what's being played that far down the line.

  8. Has caught baseball & hockey for US male mille by SallyBowls · · Score: 1

    https://newzoo.com/insights/ar... Has caught baseball & hockey for US male millennials

  9. Not all competitions are sports events by QuietLagoon · · Score: 0

    What's next? Calling Scrabble tournaments "sports" events? Not all competitions are sports events. Most, if not all, sports events are competitions. See the difference?

    1. Re:Not all competitions are sports events by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      What's next? Calling Scrabble tournaments "sports" events? Not all competitions are sports events. Most, if not all, sports events are competitions. See the difference?

      Old people don't get young people. News at 11.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  10. What is overwatch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, what is it?

    1. Re:What is overwatch? by Falos · · Score: 1

      A video game.

      I'm surprised you were able to use a pronoun in there, and deduce a shortened implication from context instead of being retard-grade explicit.

    2. Re:What is overwatch? by crimson+tsunami · · Score: 1

      It's when your mummy is always looking out for you and doing those tricky Google searches for you until you get a bit bigger.

  11. Pathetic. by jcr · · Score: 1, Informative

    Sportsball is bad enough, but watching other people play computer games, for fuck's sake?

    Get off the couch, people!

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Pathetic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least professional sports can inspire some of our youth to get off of their asses and play the same game that they watch on TV. I know that sure motivated me as a kid to play hockey and baseball.

      Professional videogaming, is going to motivate kids to do more ass sitting. So at least "sportsball" has at least one redeeming quality about it.

    2. Re:Pathetic. by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a form of entertainment is it really any worse than watching television? You could pretty much make the same argument for any other widely accepted form of entertainment (e.g., watching a movie (i.e., watching other people pretend to be something they're not), listening to music (i.e., hearing a recording of some other people blowing air, physically striking, or using other means to produce vibration), reading a book, etc.) in that you could go outside instead. Of course if that's the crux of the argument, there's nothing stopping you from doing it while you're running on a treadmill.

      Almost any form of human entertainment seems rather silly when you stop to look at it. Most don't produce anything of material worth or have an extrinsic value unless they're being done professionally.

    3. Re:Pathetic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sportsball is bad enough, but watching other people play computer games, for fuck's sake?

      Get off the couch, people!

      -jcr

      Your age is showing. You're on the couch to watch 'any' type of sports, what's the harm in adding another if people enjoy watching it?

      By the way, you don't have to.

      Watching people compete with logic, strategy and hand-eye coordination is a human past-time, what makes this so different?

    4. Re:Pathetic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Professional sports anything sounds like shit, much better to play just for fun in a backyard, no fancy equipment/clothing needed

    5. Re:Pathetic. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      When I play in an MMO, I am one of the actors in the television show that I am watching. It's much more interactive than passively sitting on the couch watching a sports event, or watching some other twitch monkey play a video game.

    6. Re:Pathetic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Endlessly grinding the same big boss for a tiny chance of getting some slightly better equipment?

      Sounds like great fun.

    7. Re:Pathetic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Starcraft 2 fan here. I can get of the couch and try to play the ladder. But my Action Per Minute(APM) is 60. Pro's play around 300 APM with bursts to 500. It is a different kind of sport, I can not compete, just watch in awe.

    8. Re: Pathetic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. Raiding is boring. I am out in the world. Instances are for endgamers. When I reach endgame it's time to roll another.

  12. player unions? W2 or 1099? travel costs? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    player unions? W2 or 1099? travel costs?

    Also what will be on the clock time and off the clock time?

    Will the player be able to cover the costs of a tax pro to deal with the Jock taxes? and will the teams / Blizzard have there own issues with that if say they try to do some tricks that the IRS or others say no you can't do that.

  13. so sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love games. From moraff's world way back when to the most current shooter of the day.

    Yet the whole 'esports' thing makes me cringe so hard my soul collapses.