Is modern society far too competitive?

[Rett Mikhal]

I'd like to see an intelligent discussion about this. Do you think society has gotten far too competitive to the point we compete in frivolous things just to say we're the best?

Some examples off the top of my head:

Game Tournaments. I thought games were just supposed to be fun. This can include video games or sports, since both were invented for the purpose of fun, not competition. That evolved later. Most people seem to agree sports are a noble endeavor while video game tournaments are a waste. Discuss what you think.

I personally think they're both wasteful and ruin the game by making it a job. However, sports are so well established and so much money goes into them that it would be extremely foolish to tell people they can't do their jobs because it ruins the game. Plus, it does do positive things for the youth, whereas video games should really only be played in moderation since they exercise nothing (unless you're playing some educational game from 1995 or something). To save myself some messages, I'm talking exclusively of non interactive games (not DDR).

As for video game tournaments, I agree they a waste of time. I've been to a few and I've never seen anyone having entertainment of any kind. Plus, to spend 100 hours mastering Ryu in Street Fighter is to waste 100 hours that could have been spent learning something or doing something with a productive result. The unwarranted self importance field of some "professional" gamers doesn't help sway my opinion, either.

Pointless games with scores. This one I'm talking about people who spend 10 hours a day working on their farm on Facebook so they can be in the top 10 list... on facebook. I'm not even sure if Farmville works like that, but I do know a lot of those games DO work like that, and there are always people who get on the top 10 list and refuse to ever get off of it as if anyone else cares. Top 10 lists used to be a by-product of playing the game, but now it's backwards; you play the game to get to the top 10 list. What happened to playing the game because you liked it? It just makes no sense to me.

Games never meant to even be taken seriously going professional. Sigh. I'm almost ashamed to type the words to this one. Did you know there's a professional Beer Pong League? No? Did you know there are several? There's also several professional Eating Leagues, Board game leagues, etc.

Somehow I don't think any argument can justify Monopoly being played as a day job.

The drinking game leagues really bother me, because I think all alcoholic drinking is pointless. Beyond that, it just seems such a sign of the times that a sport with "beer" in the title can become a League governed sport and no one bats an eyelash. It's hard to put into words all the things wrong with that, so I won't even try. Instead I'll just ask this question:

Could you, on a date meeting your date's parents, say with a straight face that you're "a professional beer pong player"?

It seems in all these examples the dominant thing is that everyone wants to be the best at something so bad that they'll be the best at the most pointless things in existence just to say it. This is something akin to the youtube generation which I'm sadly, so sadly, a part of that will do any stupid thing for their 15 minutes of fame.

So, your thoughts?

 

[Amaris]

Being competitive is just the nature of the beast. Long held over evolutionary traits that help us breed in greater numbers by finding the most optimum mate. I don't see it going anywhere anytime soon. You can make a competition out of nearly anything as long as there are two people in the world who want to be the "best". Certainly it has it's downsides, but the upside is the continuation of the species, so, I think we can live with it.

 

[Miss Chicken]

This one I'm talking about people who spend 10 hours a day working on their farm on Facebook so they can be in the top 10 list... on facebook.

Many games on Facebook are more cooperative rather than competitive i.e.you need your friends to help you out if you want to be successful.

 

[Rii]

There's some interesting research out there about the health effects of economic cycles, and it probably isn't what you'd expect: people are happier and healthier during recessions than during periods of rapid growth: they work less, sleep more, spend more time with the people they love, and are less competitive (i.e. enjoy greater solidarity) with others.

Income inequality is interesting too. Nations with high levels of income inequality (such as the United States) have much higher incidences of stress-related and mental health issues amongst the population than do nations with relatively low levels of income inequality (such as Sweden). In nations with high levels of income inequality, concerns over social status and wealth dominate and drive people (rich as well as poor) to engage in unhealthy behaviours.

 

[Rett Mikhal]

Certainly it has it's downsides, but the upside is the continuation of the species, so, I think we can live with it.

You call that an upside?

 

[Rii]

Certainly it has it's downsides, but the upside is the continuation of the species, so, I think we can live with it.

You call that an upside?

Seriously. What next, social darwinism? It's better for the species, screw the people in it!

Obviously the urge to compete is an ineradicable part of the human condition, but it can certainly be managed and directed to ends which are better than others. The greatest value of sport to society is in providing a safe outlet for male aggression, competition, and bonding.

 

[sidious618]

I think there does tend to be. Competition in schools concerning grades concerns me the most.

 

[Spot's Meow]

I've always seemed to be less competitive than others. It becomes apparent any time I go to a sporting event. I remember being at a Giants game and the fans would boo or make fun of the other team when they were up to bat or did something good for their side. It made me feel kind of sad. What makes "our" team any better than theirs? Why would we deserve to win over them? I just don't get it really.

 

[SinglePurpose]

I think there does tend to be. Competition in schools concerning grades concerns me the most.

Explain why that's a bad thing though. I didn't do shit in school until I got to high school and they showed our class ranking on our transcript.

I could care less about sports though.

 

[sidious618]

Explain why that's a bad thing though. I didn't do shit in school until I got to high school and they showed our class ranking on our transcript.

Because students are better in certain areas. This idea that you need to do well in every class is just silly and it puts way too much pressure on students when they already have too much shit going on in their lives.

 

[RJDiogenes]

There's definitely too much competition. In a civilized society, cooperation and appreciation should be the dominant philosophies.

 

[Caliburn24]

The majority of people who play sports, and the vast majority who play video games do so as a means of relaxation and recreation. Is it a waste of time to some degree? Absolutely. But in a society that is seemingly becoming more and more stressful it is perhaps needed.

I think it is stupid to pay someone big money to play a sport or game competitively. But at sports and games I am good at I do enjoy competing, the higher more challenging level I can reach, the more fun it is.

 

[Yoda]

I'd like to see an intelligent discussion about this. Do you think society has gotten far too competitive to the point we compete in frivolous things just to say we're the best?

No.

Some examples off the top of my head:

Game Tournaments. I thought games were just supposed to be fun. This can include video games or sports, since both were invented for the purpose of fun, not competition. That evolved later. Most people seem to agree sports are a noble endeavor while video game tournaments are a waste. Discuss what you think.

I think competition is part of the fun. If you can't lose at something you don't feel the same satisfaction when you win.

I personally think they're both wasteful and ruin the game by making it a job. However, sports are so well established and so much money goes into them that it would be extremely foolish to tell people they can't do their jobs because it ruins the game. Plus, it does do positive things for the youth, whereas video games should really only be played in moderation since they exercise nothing (unless you're playing some educational game from 1995 or something). To save myself some messages, I'm talking exclusively of non interactive games (not DDR).

Studies show that video games improve spatial coordination tasks. Just because you hate video games, doesn't mean they they don't do anything positive for young people.

I've read articles where games such as Guitar Hero have helped people in physical therapy.

Also, 'non-interactive games?' If it's non-interactive then it's not a game. It's kind of one of the defining characteristics of the medium. Are you sure you didn't confuse video games and television?

As for video game tournaments, I agree they a waste of time.

Yeah... uhhh... you pretty much just agreed with yourself. Great job.

I've been to a few and I've never seen anyone having entertainment of any kind. Plus, to spend 100 hours mastering Ryu in Street Fighter is to waste 100 hours that could have been spent learning something or doing something with a productive result. The unwarranted self importance field of some "professional" gamers doesn't help sway my opinion, either.

If nobody finds it entertaining, then nobody will watch, and nobody will sponsor these tournaments. Exactly what kind of productive result should Ryu master spend his 100 hours on? What the hell is it to you? What about your unwarranted self-importance?

Pointless games with scores. This one I'm talking about people who spend 10 hours a day working on their farm on Facebook so they can be in the top 10 list... on facebook. I'm not even sure if Farmville works like that, but I do know a lot of those games DO work like that, and there are always people who get on the top 10 list and refuse to ever get off of it as if anyone else cares. Top 10 lists used to be a by-product of playing the game, but now it's backwards; you play the game to get to the top 10 list. What happened to playing the game because you liked it? It just makes no sense to me.

I don't do Facebook/Farmville, so I wouldn't know. You seem to care about the top 10 lists... You obviously look at these top 10 lists to see that people 'refuse to get off them', so apparently you care.

Games never meant to even be taken seriously going professional. Sigh. I'm almost ashamed to type the words to this one. Did you know there's a professional Beer Pong League? No? Did you know there are several? There's also several professional Eating Leagues, Board game leagues, etc.

Lots of people do stupid stuff for fun.

Somehow I don't think any argument can justify Monopoly being played as a day job.

If they can generate a legitimate income from playing Monopoly why shouldn't they? If enough people want to watch the best Monopoly players go at it, who are you to say they can't? Have you never spent any money on 'pointless' entertainment? Why the hell are you posting on TrekBBS when you should be curing cancer or something?

The drinking game leagues really bother me, because I think all alcoholic drinking is pointless. Beyond that, it just seems such a sign of the times that a sport with "beer" in the title can become a League governed sport and no one bats an eyelash. It's hard to put into words all the things wrong with that, so I won't even try. Instead I'll just ask this question:

Could you, on a date meeting your date's parents, say with a straight face that you're "a professional beer pong player"?

Well, I could say that. I'd be lying of course, on account of not being a professional beer pong player.

It seems in all these examples the dominant thing is that everyone wants to be the best at something so bad that they'll be the best at the most pointless things in existence just to say it. This is something akin to the youtube generation which I'm sadly, so sadly, a part of that will do any stupid thing for their 15 minutes of fame.

So, your thoughts?

I think you're coming off as a bit condescending, and that you're probably not very good at video games.

 

[Kestra]

There's definitely too much competition. In a civilized society, cooperation and appreciation should be the dominant philosophies.

There are actually societies here on earth (I can't think of examples right now) that specifically discourage competition. I think it's been shown that these cultures have much less aggression. I wish I had studies around, but I'm lazy and can't find them at the moment.

 

[Canadave]

The majority of people who play sports, and the vast majority who play video games do so as a means of relaxation and recreation. Is it a waste of time to some degree? Absolutely. But in a society that is seemingly becoming more and more stressful it is perhaps needed.

I think it is stupid to pay someone big money to play a sport or game competitively. But at sports and games I am good at I do enjoy competing, the higher more challenging level I can reach, the more fun it is.

Agreed, on both counts. Sports and video games are as legitimate a form of entertainment and relaxation as any other, and in some ways perhaps better, given the physical or mental benefits both can offer.

And competition is most definitely FUN. To give an example, if I meet with friends to throw a football around, that's enjoyable and all well and good, but it doesn't really become really fun until we get a game going. Doesn't matter that there are no real stakes, or that the outcome won't matter in an hour, the competition still drives you and makes you enjoy the game that much more.

 

[RoJoHen]

I think you're coming off as a bit condescending, and that you're probably not very good at video games.

It comes across like a rant by someone who sucks at games and was always picked last in gym class.

 

[Amaris]

Certainly it has it's downsides, but the upside is the continuation of the species, so, I think we can live with it.

You call that an upside?

Yes. In general, I'm in favor of the continuation of the species.

 

[JonathonWally]

I think you're coming off as a bit condescending, and that you're probably not very good at video games.

It comes across like a rant by someone who sucks at games and was always picked last in gym class.

Now I miss dodgeball

 

[Rett Mikhal]

I think competition is part of the fun. If you can't lose at something you don't feel the same satisfaction when you win.

Competition is fine, but the tournaments seem to encourage absolute obsession. Have you ever read a list of rules and regulations regarding video game tournaments? The people are quite borderline insane.

If you haven't:

http://www.libraryforlife.org/gameboard/viewtopic.php?t=6

Studies show that video games improve spatial coordination tasks. Just because you hate video games, doesn't mean they they don't do anything positive for young people.

Nay. I don't hate video games, I enjoy them on a regular basis. It just saddens me when people play them too much, to the point they forget about the other things in life. It's difficult to convey an opinion about such a broad topic without it becoming long winded and boring, so I ere on the side of brevity. Sorry I didn't flesh out that opinion more.

Also, 'non-interactive games?' If it's non-interactive then it's not a game. It's kind of one of the defining characteristics of the medium. Are you sure you didn't confuse video games and television?

Non-interactive is the new term coined for the old type of games you only use your fingers to play. This is opposed to most Wii games, Dance Dance Revolution, and the like. To quote a very young Elijah Wood in Back to the Future Part II: "You have to use your hands? That's a baby's toy."

If nobody finds it entertaining, then nobody will watch, and nobody will sponsor these tournaments. Exactly what kind of productive result should Ryu master spend his 100 hours on? What the hell is it to you? What about your unwarranted self-importance?
I don't do Facebook/Farmville, so I wouldn't know. You seem to care about the top 10 lists... You obviously look at these top 10 lists to see that people 'refuse to get off them', so apparently you care.

I think the tournaments mostly get money from entrance fees and perhaps one sponsor. The ones I've seen have been at conventions, which is smart because even if no one cares the advertising still works... to the point that advertisements "work" in modern days.

Really anything other than mastering the one character for the one game by learning every single game mechanic seems like a better use of time. For instance, playing the game with a friend and not caring about point guard breaks or other glitches. I remember finding glitches in games all the time during my youth (Goldeneye, anyone) but I never dreamed people would be exploiting them for a slight advantage in competitive gaming someday. The fact there are probably a couple hundred youtube videos on Smash Brothers, Halo or Soul Calibur glitches, cooldowns, traps, etc gives evidence to the nature of exploiting game mechanics for the slightest percentile of an advantage. Then the people who have mastered these glitches or mechanics that were meant to be random suddenly look down on the casual players or people who just play because they like the game. Hey, I'm as cynical as the next guy but can't we all just get along for once in our lives? To clarify I've never picked a fight with anyone because they play these games or tried to tell them to get a life. I'm actually a pretty neutral person and I usually just walk away and think about it to myself.

My only experience with those type of facebook games was some application called Starfleet Command (which had nothing to do with Star Trek). I only played it because my friend Ben did, and we used to play games all the time before he moved and started a family so it was a good time for a while. That was until we got big enough fleets to get absolutely destroyed by this one guy who has 100x more money than anyone else in the game, and probably 10x as big a fleet as everyone else in the game combined. Obviously, we quit after that, because there was no hope of victory or fun.

The only motivation I could see (because honestly, the game was boring) for that level of commitment is just to say you're the best at something, even if it's pointless and stupid.

Lots of people do stupid stuff for fun.

Doing stupid stuff for fun is a staple of life, that's for sure. That's the problem I have with the professional aspect of non-professional things. It removes the fun aspect and that shut your brain off and relax aspect.

You might argue the people playing these games doesn't hurt me and I should just not care. You're probably right on that aspect, but there are two factors that prevent me from coming to that way of thinking.

One is that game companies are actually starting to bend to the wishes of competitive gaming leagues, which means games are officially being designed to no longer be fun or have engrossing storylines but to be a tool for tournaments. I'm not going to name any names (Halo 3). Games are becoming routine day jobs, and I don't think that's fair to people who don't want them to be jobs. To quote Yahtzee: "When you give a kid a sandbox you do not spend six hours explaining the mechanics of the sandbox, nor six more hours explaining his motivation for wanting to play in the sandbox."

Secondly it's not fair to the younger generation that these games are becoming so advanced in their rules and regulations that they can't enjoy them. Games have to be made just to cater to them ("cater to younger audiences" always translating into "pretend they have no intelligence.") I miss the days when everyone could pick up and play; if you were good it was fun and if you sucked at it at least everyone could get a laugh out of it and have a good time instead of busting balls over your lack of spending 40 hours a week practicing.

Here's a good example. StarCraft II. The original StarCraft is such a masterpiece of multiplayer fun with no real rule set. The Use Map Settings variant let people design whatever type of game their imaginations wanted and that's why it's still being played strongly online today, 12 years later. However, for StarCraft II we've gotten no news about the future of Use Map Settings and only information about online ladder play, rankings, team matches blah blah blah blah. They've clearly been influenced by the fact it's now the national sport of Korea... and that's just confusing...

If they can generate a legitimate income from playing Monopoly why shouldn't they? If enough people want to watch the best Monopoly players go at it, who are you to say they can't? Have you never spent any money on 'pointless' entertainment? Why the hell are you posting on TrekBBS when you should be curing cancer or something?

Well from what I've heard from actual professional players (not of board games, but video games) the purses are generally something like 20-50k American. That's an average salary range, but you only get it if you win. What happens to the thousands of people that foolishly depend on that salary to sustain them for the next year and don't get it? Before you ask, people DO do this. I can prove it:

http://kotaku.com/5037975/parents-let-kid-drop-out-of-high-school-to-focus-on-guitar-hero

The human mentality seems to be "it won't happen, it happens to other people, not me." So these people think they'll always win and they can make a living doing something they love. But it gets twisted when something they love turns into something they have to do, obsessively, to put food in their mouths and if they fail the game is over. This is really my main motivation against it. It's not that I hate it for what it is, I hate it for what it does to people without them knowing it because they get sucked into it and don't realize how much they've let it control their lives.

To answer your question, I post on the Trek BBS because I always want to learn more about what people think, how they act, or any other form of information. The pursuit of knowledge is never made in vain, even if you obtain useless information you learn how to better obtain more useful information. I don't cure cancer because I'm not a biologist and in fact know nothing about organic life. I'm a mechanical engineer who likes to ask why, particularly about humanity.

Well, I could say that. I'd be lying of course, on account of not being a professional beer pong player.

Fair enough.

I think you're coming off as a bit condescending, and that you're probably not very good at video games.

That's only because it's difficult to express emotions via just times new roman text. I'm actually very neutral, just curious. I can still beat my nephew at video games, and he's the ripe age of 17 so he's not a push over, but that's besides the point. Also I do know someone who let their life go to shit because they got so hooked up in becoming the Number 1 player of Modern Warfare, to the point his family tried and failed an intervention, his girlfriend left him, got evicted, the whole shebang. I don't want to ruin anyone's fun, just the opposite, and that's why I'm against this level of professional regulation.

 

[scotpens]

There are actually societies here on earth (I can't think of examples right now) that specifically discourage competition. I think it's been shown that these cultures have much less aggression. I wish I had studies around, but I'm lazy and can't find them at the moment.

And what have those societies achieved? Have they invented anything of comparable importance to the wheel, the printing press, the steam engine, or the telegraph? Have they sent men to the moon?

“In Switzerland they had brotherly love, they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.”

Competition is fine, but the tournaments seem to encourage absolute obsession. Have you ever read a list of rules and regulations regarding video game tournaments? The people are quite borderline insane.

You mean, like Star Trek geeks?

Well from what I've heard from actual professional players (not of board games, but video games) the purses are generally something like 20-50k American. That's an average salary range, but you only get it if you win. What happens to the thousands of people that foolishly depend on that salary to sustain them for the next year and don't get it? Before you ask, people DO do this. I can prove it:

http://kotaku.com/5037975/parents-let-kid-drop-out-of-high-school-to-focus-on-guitar-hero

That's just bad, irresponsible parenting. Would you let your kid drop out of school to become a professional poker player?

I think you're coming off as a bit condescending, and that you're probably not very good at video games.

That's only because it's difficult to express emotions via just times new roman text.

Maybe it's Times New Roman when you're composing offline, but in here it's Verdana, baby!