Quote:
Originally Posted by 216
hunting definitely takes more physicality than gaming, i agree with that. its obvious. i think you should at least have to stand up at some point for it to be considered a sport LOL
i dunno if serious or not  i hope sarcasm from the chameleon.
those injuries come from prolonged play. most activities result in injury if done long enough, thats just common sense. there are certainly athletes NOT in top phyiscal condition BUT they have to at least stand up or move in their sport lol |
You're not really arguing anything here we didn't cover in great detail 20 pages ago. It really would be worth reading the thread through from start to finish so that we can avoid doing the same points about physicality to death. There's already been a lot of back and forth over whether physicality actually defines what is and is not a sport.
For sake of a position being put down in this reply - My position is that the difference between a game and a sport isn't the physicality or even difficulty of the thing - What defines a sport is the framework of competition. Games are played for fun. Sportsmen/women play to win, and there will be or should be a framework in place to determine that victor on a more broad level than simply that game. Best of 5, tournament play, playoff brackets or points rankings based on consistent performance and defeat of the competition - thats what sports is to me. Anything else, be it football or rugby or counterstrike or starcraft - If you're just playing for fun or recreation, thats a game, and the people involved can't call themselves sportsmen/women until such time as they engage in a competition of commensurate scale.
Also, not gonna lie, if you're here to discuss, cool, if you want to mock, take it elsewhere. You've made your opinion clear already. If you think you can back it up convincingly then do so, but the jabs and snide remarks are really not the way to contribute to this, or any other discussion on any topic.