Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PlayStation (Games) XBox (Games) Entertainment Games

Sports Videogames And Sports - Symbiotic Or Parasitic? 44

Posted by simoniker from the return-of-the-mutant-turducken dept.
Thanks to CNN Money for their column discussing whether sports themselves are helped or hurt by the increased popularity of sports videogames. The author argues: "You've got to wonder if sports leagues are sleeping with the enemy embracing video games. Youth participation in sports is declining, as is overall viewership of sports on cable and television by the targeted group." The NBA's licensing director also mentions a perceived change in attitudes: "In the past video games wanted to look like TV. Now TV wants to look like video games." Although the leagues argue "the [video] games can spur participation and viewership in the [real-life] games", the CNN columnist isn't so sure, concluding: "The leagues may not have a choice but to try to embrace the video games. But the video games' popularity isn't a long-term win for the sports themselves."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sports Videogames And Sports - Symbiotic Or Parasitic? More

Sports Videogames And Sports - Symbiotic Or Parasitic?

Comments Filter:

  • Sports can be expensive. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @08:26AM (#7743917)
    It's not cheap to buy into the league, give up time for the kids, check up on the coach to make sure he's not a child molestor, peddling steroids, or administering cortizone injections.

    On the otherhand, $50 bucks every couple of years for a console little Timmy already has, which keeps him docile and occupied for hours on end without the need for direct supervision, pretty freaking cheap. A game which a middle class parent might have to shell out for anyway, to keep up with the Jones' pop warner or not.

    The things that the game has added that look like a video game don't come from video games, but from the same demands. We all want to know exactly what happened, and have a common set of information with which we can form our own opinions, and we want it to be there at our convienence. It makes it easier to enjoy the game if some of the finer and more esoteric points are blatently spelled out for you. If everyone wanted to spend years learning something so they could enjoy it, we'd all run linux.
    • The bad news is it's not so much 50 USD every couple of years for a console Timmy already has, it's more like 250 USD every couple of years so Timmy can have the a new console and another 50 USD every couple of months so he can have the latest copy of EA Sports' latest-and-greatest NFL/NHL/NBA/Football title.

      But I still agree with you, even at those prices it can be cheaper and certainly easier - so it's not hard to see why this happens, it's a huge undertaking to take your child to a sport and be involved

  • Sports games (Score:3, Insightful)

    by neostorm ( 462848 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @08:28AM (#7743929)
    I've always disliked sports games. I tend to think, if I want to play sports I'll go outside and play sports. I never saw the point in playing a game-of-a-game.
    Now it seems like there's no point in playing sports when you have the game!

    • Re:Sports games (Score:3, Interesting)

      by nearlygod ( 641860 )
      I love getting all of my friends together on a whim after a hard day at work to play a pickup hockey game. I call them up around 7:00 PM and we meet within minutes at the local ice rink that is conviently empty and already has the nets up. I agree, I have no interest in playing sports video games. However, if it wasn't so damn easy to get a pickup game organized on short notice then I may feel differently. Besides I love golfing when there is 4 inches of snow on the ground it is -10F.
    • Here's my guess: you don't want to play sports at all. And I'd further guess that you're not a fan of seeing sports on television or going to the ballpark and watching a game. I mean, why go watch someone else play when you could just as easily go play yourself?

      The point of all this is when you appreciate the game and take a real interest in the game [let's say football, just so the argument can be fleshed out fully], you enjoy seeing people who are far better than you playing it and exceling at it. Likewis

    • Yeah, I can't see the point of playing shooting games either, when I can just as easily just pull a gun at the mall.

      Seriously though, I think a lot of people that play sports games play them when they can't organize a real game or a real game isn't possible. I had a friend in high school that played basketball all the time, but in the winter he was always playing on his SNES.

      You can get a quick game in on your console before dinner.

      You can play even if you are disabled (wheelchair football anyone?).

      The

  • Sports games can evangelize (Score:5, Insightful)

    by leviramsey ( 248057 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @08:33AM (#7743950) Journal

    For instance, American Football is a sport which is known for tactical depth and rule density.

    In addition to the NFL, I'm a huge fan of NFL Europe (arguably a bigger fan of NFLE than the NFL). On online fora (web boards and mailing lists), I've encountered large numbers of people (mostly under 20) in the UK who became fans of the sport thanks to playing Madden. The game allowed them to get into the rules and understand the strategies, which is a critical part of becoming a fan of the sport.

  • Totally unrelated... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BTWR ( 540147 ) <americangibor3NO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @08:35AM (#7743955) Homepage Journal
    Youth sport interest is not going down because of videogames, well not directly. If it truly has gone down, I think it's because of the overall decline in athleticism in kids today, because of health and obesity problems. In one of my medical school classes, we read a medical journal article that says that for all american babies born in 2000, ONE IN THREE will be a diabetic (type ii - the type more related to lifestyle, to WAY oversimplify it) - and I wouldn't be surprised if europe is experiencing similar diabetic explosions (cue unfunny '+5, funny' comments). That statistic is #&@*! insane!!! This is the first generation whose life expectancy might actually DECLINE from the previous one.

    There isn't a single time in my entire life where I've been with a friend and we wanted to play some tennis, but instead decided to play Mario Tennis instead. I never wanted to go for a run one minute, and then decide "Nah, lemme play Track & Field on the NES instead and hit the 'a' button as hard as I can instead of a 3-mile run."

    However, so while I don't think Madden has been a substitute for some real-life backyard football, it is possible that videogame players habits as a whole have lead to some of the weight/sedentary lifestyle habits of its players. If that's so, then tv and non-sports games would also be just as at fault...
    • O.k. Raise your hand if you've ever felt like playing tennis, go for a run or play backyard football.

      Gosh there are more hands then expected. Maybe I should go outside now. Nah, its cold out I like reading slashdot infront of my computer inside of my fairly warm office.
    • "Nah, lemme play Track & Field on the NES instead and hit the 'a' button as hard as I can instead of a 3-mile run."

      Hoo, you didn't get the power pad?

      For my part, playing a hockey video games actually got me interested enough to sign up for a class, and now I actually understand and care (a little) when I see games on TV.
    • I never would have started playing Football in high school if not for EA's Madden series. That is all.
      • that may be true. and for me, Joe Montana football on Genesis taught me all I knew about football. That being said, videogames HELPED you be more atheletic, not LESS. So in essence you agree that it doesn't DETRACT.

  • Flawed reasoning (Score:5, Interesting)

    by leviramsey ( 248057 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @08:41AM (#7743972) Journal

    Having now read the article, I'm struck by the stupidity.

    The main argument against sports games is advanced by the sporting goods manufacturing industry. Of course kids are going to play less physical games when they can do it in a video game (whether that in and of itself is a bad thing is another matter).

    However, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're not going to watch games on TV. I haven't played baseball in years, and I'll still watch it if it's a good game (especially if the Red Sox are playing). I haven't played football (touch or tackle) in years, and I am a massive fan. I've never played hockey (except for a few games of street hockey years ago) and I'll watch a hockey game.

    Ratings across the board are declining (thanks to more channels and electronic entertainment in general). Sports, however, is actually declining more slowly than news and entertainment programming.

    • Re:Flawed reasoning (Score:5, Interesting)

      by PainKilleR-CE ( 597083 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @11:27AM (#7745096)
      The article actually seems quite contradictory. It starts out by pointing to sports games as 'the enemy', but then further in you find that sports games themselves are on a decline in the game industry (which in itself may be due to the age of the platforms, as the article states, or due to the lack of true progress in the games themselves this year). It also takes a single sentence to point out that TV, internet, and other forms of entertainment may also be to blame, but then goes on to point out that TV is the single most important money-maker for sports (with games actually coming in somewhere as revenues for licensing increase, but where we don't know).

      They don't even go into much detail on where sports are really losing players. Are kids not playing baseball as much as they used to, or is it down equally in all sports? I know when I was growing up soccer was fairly popular to play as a kid, but very few of us watched it on TV. On the other hand, I watched quite a bit of baseball when I was around 9-11 years old, but ever since have found the game pretty boring. The only time I watch a football game is when it happens to be on wherever I am on a given sunday, and the last time I did that I noticed that there was almost as much time spent on commercials as the game itself. Given my current aversion to commercials, this actually leads me to seek out something to do other than watch the game.

      Furthermore, to simply add to the anecdotal points, my gf's youngest brother (he's 10 years old) frequently plays football with his friends, as well as playing Madden 2004 and watching an occasional game (in fact, most sundays they go play football rather than watch it on TV, but then he comes in after he's worn himself out and watches the end of the game). He has only a passing interest in playing basketball, and I've never seen him watch a basketball game or play a basketball video game. Probably the only game he plays as much as Madden would be Tony Hawk.

      The last sentence brings up another point: how many kids are getting more involved in less traditional sports? When I was growing up kids rode their bikes and skateboards at least as much as they played football, baseball, and basketball in the street, and they were possibly more for recreation and entertainment than for transportation until we got older. Most of the people currently involved in skateboarding and the less traditional forms of bicycle riding as sports are my age or younger (with the exceptions of those like Tony Hawk that have been doing this since I was in my pre-teen years), and many kids look up to them at least as much as anyone involved in baseball, basketball, or football. Hell, look at the popularity of Tiger Woods, in general I'd say that it points to a decline in interest in team sports, rather than a decline in interest in sports in general. Kids are more interested in individual talent and possibly being recognized for having some individual talent themselves. Teamwork and the associated ideals have to be instilled in children, they don't come naturally (except under extreme circumstances that most children don't have to deal with).

    • Co-Existence (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @12:14PM (#7745584) Homepage
      Sports games co-exist with other forms of sports entertainment. In the same way that a person may now go to a bar to watch the game, or throw a ball with their kids, or read Sports Illustrated, they may also now play the videogame. One could just as well argue that adults read the sports page instead of watching the game. If a college kid is playing a round of NBA Basketball between classes, that is not going to prevent them from playing in the intermural sports teams after dinner.

      Videogames are now irrecoverably part of the sports ecosystem, the same way that radio broadcasts created sports heros and television broadcasts created the instant replay.

      Lumping all videogames together in this article is unnecessary, and shows a lack of understanding on the part of the author. It's as if supporting sports gaming implies the support of Deus Ex. He doesn't say how non-sport television shows doesn't do anything but hurt... Or how bars that don't show the game are contributing nothing to the cause.

      Honestly, professional sports is on a slow decline in this country because they are out of touch. While most kids are skateboarding, rock climbing, and doing other physical independent activities, sports broadcasters have stuck with the idea that large traditional team sports will always be the ideal. We're moving away from a team-oriented society, to one where individuals and very small groups work with a great deal of autonomy and specialized knowledge to achieve their ends. A weekly x-games show would probably be a hit with the ratings, but the chance to do such a thing has passed by the broadcasters (again) because of their lack of vision.

      They might receive more sympathy, if professional sports weren't prohibitively expensive. Certainly, not being able to afford actually going to the game has nothing to do with waning interest. With tickets going for roughly the same price as a trip to the Opera, most people are priced out of seeing any professional event in person. Playing hockey will make you like the game, but seeing it in person will make you a fan of a team. That fandom is an essential part of the sporting ecosystem.

      Part of the image of the classic baseball player was that of the clean-cut but slightly unshaven man sleeping in a bus on the way to his next game. They were hardworking individuals with a strong ethic, rough but approachable. With player salaries hovering around 800,000 per year, the image has changed to that of the pampered superstar, likely to get off the plane and have a manicure before being wisked away in a limo to the Park Plaza. Sure, they train all of the time, but that hard work is only emphasized in Gatoraid's commercials. And certainly, no modern sports star from the majors can be considered approachable, emulatable, or otherwise attainable. Tony Hawk retains this ability (and whose public stardom is based on his tremendously successful videogame) because Tony is "one of us" who worked hard and got good at a sport, but retains his middle class status. Barry Bonds is now firmly upper class, and would never be seen with any dirt on his uniform.

      The sports moguls lost touch, plain and simple. This demonizing of videogames is just a sign of that.

  • No correlation (Score:3)

    by Ed_Moyse ( 171820 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @08:41AM (#7743973) Homepage
    The author of this piece is basically saying: "more people are playing games, & games are more and more important to sport promoters, but the number of people playing games in real life is descreasing.... therefore OBVIOUSLY games are to blame"


    That's stupid. Maybe, just maybe, more people are not playing sport because they're too fat to move? (And lots of people watch TV! It must be TV's fault! Right? Right?)


    What is completely nuts though is to blame *sports* video games ... there is a fundamental difference between playing football on a screen and playing it in real life. They require totally unrelated skills, and a football game on a console has more in common with Mario Kart than it does with "real" football.

  • This *IS* a CNN article afterall - and CNN isn't exactly known for being bright or informative to say the least.

    And the reason why more people play sports games? Maybe it's because it's safer then playing the real thing and risking serious injury? :D

    • Re:What did you guys expect? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by gooru ( 592512 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @09:23AM (#7744163)

      Shoot, I was going to use my mod points on some postings above until I read your posting.

      And the reason why more people play sports games? Maybe it's because it's safer then playing the real thing and risking serious injury? :D

      I totally agree. I don't know how serious you're being, but this is true. I broke my jaw two years ago while in a Tae Kwon Do tournament. It was a complete freak accident. Nothing like that had ever happened before in the six or seven years that I had been practicing Tae Kwon Do. However, now that that has happened, I have been much more wary about what physical activities I participate in and to what extent I'm involved. Since then, I've greatly cut down on contact sports. Now, I mostly just practice Tae Kwon Do, for example, rather than compete.

      I've also found DDR to be a good source of aerobic activity. :)

      And, just because I don't watch sports and play video games instead doesn't mean I'd watch sports in the first place. I'm sure I identify with many of you when I find watching most sports extremely boring and unexciting. Furthermore, I just can't feel the excitement and loyalty people have towards teams. Who really cares if *your* team wins? What in the world does that mean anyway?


      • I broke my jaw two years ago while in a Tae Kwon Do tournament

        Dude, it's a martial art. "Martial", as in fighting. I think it's sort of amusing (except for the guy getting hurt) when people who engage in this sort of sport are surprised about injuries.

        I fenced in high school--there was a particularly gruesome accident in our city HS league, where some girl was hit in the mask by a guy using an old foil; the blade had metal fatigue, and snapped when he lunged at her, broke, and drove straight through

      • Re:What did you guys expect? (Score:5, Funny)

        by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:11PM (#7747282) Homepage Journal
        I broke my jaw two years ago while in a Tae Kwon Do tournament. It was a complete freak accident.

        Breaking your jaw while engaging in a "kick me in the face" contest isn't a freak accident.

        Breaking you jaw while knitting: that is a freak accident.

  • Who plays Big Leagues? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fuzzybunny ( 112938 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @08:47AM (#7744002) Homepage Journal

    I'm not a big sports fan, but I somehow got the impression that a lot of pro athletes (especially in US league sports like football and basketball) were kids from the wrong side of the tracks--a lot of whom wouldn't be the sort of spoiled middle-class brats who'd have access to a Playstation, or the upbringing to sit inside all day long playing Madden XXXV.

    On the other hand, what are big league sports really about? Not just entertainment, but seeing people who're "larger than life". Watching a big European soccer game, or going to a baseball game, or having a Superbowl grill party is a fairly particular experience. Little Charlie Jones' Juventus scoring 8 goals against Bobby Smith's Man U online isn't and won't ever be in the same league as watching Barry Bonds knock one out of the park.

    I think this goes both ways--people play sports both for the fun and sport of it, and maybe a bit for the knowledge that they're doing the same stuff as their "heroes" on TV, and people watch sports on TV because here are a bunch of dudes doing really well what you just do for fun. And wa-hey, if it leads to the death of bloated overblown pro sports, well, I don't know if they'll be missed much--people will always play pickup hoops in the park.

    A friend of mine found what I think is the perfect balance--on Formula 1 weekends, he'd invite a bunch of people over for a few rounds of racing on his console, then a BBQ, then the real race. So I think it's definitely a complementary experience.
  • But the video games' popularity isn't a long-term win for the sports themselves.
    I dont think that TV is a long-term win for sports, either.
    TV is only a long-term win for some ultra-high payed sports(wo)man (Is thtere already a gender-neutral word avaiable? Id prefer sportsperson ;-D *) and athletes.


    * Dont take me serious, please!

    • the gender neutrel word -is- athelete. ;p
      simply, professional athelete.

      that said, since there is no actual proof of a correlation between these two trends, the author is still an asshat.

      i'd be more inclined to blame the decreased enrollment in sports on our kids being so damned fat anymore.

      maybe this was the unanticipated effect of our civilization finally evolving away from physical advancement and toward mental advancement.

      perhaps we do not waste away to become steven spielberg's frail greys, but rath
  • people that buy sports video games are going to be too busy playing them to go out and watch/play an actual sport. just like the people who bought the Return of the King game will be too busy to go to the movies today. that logic makes a whole hell of a lot of sense.

    and then we can flip the tables pointing out how the tomb raider game killed the movie [slashdot.org]. so perhaps the next really bad football game from EA (or whoever makes bad sports games) will ruin the NFL...
  • It would seem that this might be a last generation to play or watch football (to take one example) of both the real and virtual kind. If the kids of today do not go to football games or watch them on TV, then financial interest in the game will plummet (empty stadiums and low TV ratings are the death knell of a sport). Football, and other sports, won't be shown on TV (except maybe on some obscure low-budget cable channels). Eventually this leads to even less public interest in the sport.

    Ultimately, th
    • I find this an interesting though. I don't neccessarily agree with what you're saying...I think sports will be around for a long long time. But one must wonder how sports will evolve. Some sports may be for just the rich kids and hence played by the rich people. How many inner city children do you know that play golf or tennis? The poorer kids tend to play basketball or football and such. Take this and combine it with the fact it's the kids who come from more well-off families that will have gaming systems.
      • Interesting ideas, chia_monkey. I do agree that sports will evolve, I just wonder if they will evolve to be dominated by non-physical electronic game-oriented "sports."

        I especially like your rich-poor dichotomy. It makes me wonder about two issues, though. First , I wonder about the penetration of game machines in low-income neighborhoods -- if the machines are cheap and popular, then will poor kids shift to gaming. Second, it seems more likely that rich kids will stop watching sports (the article a
    • Where are you getting this idea? We'll focus on football since that was the example you wanted to use. You say, "It would seem that this might be a last generation to play or watch football"; why would it seem that way? Because the NFL has the largest media contract of any professional sport in the U.S.? Because the EA and Sega football games are consistent best-sellers? I honestly see no reason you can draw the conclusion you have drawn. Football is thriving.
  • Just to note, I'm a big fan of sports in general, but particularly American football. I was also active in many sports for years.

    You can often tell whether or not somebody wants to play actively at a very early age. If you've ever played tee-ball or watched a game of it, you'll know what I am talking about. There's some kids sitting in the outfield picking at grass and watching the sky, while there are others that really try hard. Sports video games really don't sway the young kids because they are too com
  • The writer's conclusions are absolutely ludicrous.

    Without the real sports, the games would have very little appeal to most people.

    I suggest that the decline in participation has more to do with peoples' lack of time, and the same reason for decline of viewership. A game, OTOH, you can play whenever you have a couple free minutes.

    JMO, YMMV.

  • Sports and Games Not Related (Score:3, Insightful)

    by chia_monkey ( 593501 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @10:39AM (#7744633) Journal
    These two are totally unrelated. I love how the media will pick out all BAD aspects of society and blame it on games. Kids nowadays are just lazy. It's much easier to sit on your rump and play video games than it is to go find friends to play with. It's sad but true. If more kids are sitting at home playing sports games rather than going out and playing sports themselves because of this "gaming link", wouldn't the same twisted logic say the violence that the kids are participating in as they play their games would lead to a decrease in violence in society? Yet instead games are blamed for the violence. So by this logic again, playing sports games should lead to an INCREASE in kids playing sports.

    Kids are out of shape and lazy. That's the simple truth. Don't try to blame it on games. Blame it on the parents who feed their kids fat and calorie laden food with no veggies, the parents who say it's ok to stay inside and play games for three or four hours a day and then watch another three or four hours of TV each day.
    • Kids nowadays are just lazy. It's much easier to sit on your rump and play video games than it is to go find friends to play with. It's sad but true.

      You hit on a good point there. When I was younger, I used to LOVE to play sports outside. Really almost anything active. The problem was that once I got into high school and college, I still loved to do stuff outside, but most of my friends just wanted to sit around and do sedentary activities like watching TV or playing video games. It was very frustrati

      • I think it's just a matter of finding the right people. I wouldn't say that there's an entire generation where the majority does not want to play sports or enjoy physical activity. My roommates and I frequently go down to the park and play a pick-up game and then come home and play some video games. It's just a matter of finding the right kind of people; moderation in all things.
        • I completely agree again. As a whole, society is much lazier and it's tough to find the active people to participate in sports in. Then you break it down geographically and it gets even worse. When I lived in Santa Cruz, there was NEVER a problem finding someone to go mtn biking with or some other outdoor activity. Finding someone to play football with was a bit tough but you could still find someone to be active with. And yet, I knew more gamers out there too. Now I'm in Philly and people think I'm a freak
          • Aren't there any web forums for runners? I mean, if you don't know anyone who wants to go running you could always just seek out new people. I'd bet that there's got to be runner's circles or whatnot. Another way that I meet people to run or play sports with is to just go to the gym. If you get a gym membership, you're guaranteed to meet people who are active and you can also sign up for leagues or whatnot, if that's your thing. But definitely you'll be able to find people to go running with.
  • I live in SW FLA, 6 months out of the year the outdoors is pretty much uninhabitable (humidity 100%, 90-100 deg. F, time to burn =10 minutes w/o sunscreen and afternoon thunderstorms + big bugs...), the other 6 is's either muggy, or cold. only for 2 months or so is it really 'nice' IMO. That and with my sensitivity to light (a geek who lives in a cave... thats a new one) and general dislike of the outdoors (parents took me on a mountain hike of some 5 miles when i was 2, they didn't know it was that long...

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close