Starcraft Sweden Political Tournament

The event is the brainchild of one Jonathan Rieder Lundkvist, who conceived of the idea in 2010 as a way to increase awareness of esports in politics, and of politics among gamers. At the time Lundkvist was a member of the Pirate Party, a relatively new political entity formed in 2006 that focuses on issues like copyright and patent reform, internet censorship, and net neutrality.

“Voting is important, and we seem to forget that," he said. "It's part of why I created this: to show the politicians esports is a thing and to remind the youth that their votes matter. They should not waste it.”


Thoughts?
http://www.dailydot.com/esports/starcraft-sweden-political-tournament/

“to show the politicians esports is a thing”


Thoughts?
http://www.dailydot.com/esports/starcraft-sweden-political-tournament/

Orgies are a thing. Codeine is a thing. Red Bull is a thing too. Whats his point?

This is just another way for politics to get into a big audience. Politics should not interfere with such minor culture that video games are, and should take care either of true one like opera, painting, literature (no, not comics & co.), or true problems.

Swedish is one of the worst countries in this current hype shit of politics acting like retards in order to get people thinking "oh man they are so cool i'll vote for them".

Politics don't have to be cool, it have to be like a good father : slapping you when you do bad, and rewarding you when you act good. And not acting like "don't do your homework and go buy ice cream". This should not cost any public money, or at least really few, as all minor things deserves compared to country's problems.

I mean what the hell does gaming and voting have in common ? Its purely an interested move to gain the "gamers movement" into their pocket and this is ridiculous and an inappropriate interference in order to make people vote for them just because they sponsored a gaming tournament, and not for what they will do for the country.

This is just another way for politics to get into a big audience. Politics should not interfere with such minor culture that video games are, and should take care either of true one like opera, painting, literature (no, not comics & co.), or true problems.

Swedish is one of the worst countries in this current hype shit of politics acting like retards in order to get people thinking "oh man they are so cool i'll vote for them".

Politics don't have to be cool, it have to be like a good father : slapping you when you do bad, and rewarding you when you act good. And not acting like "don't do your homework and go buy ice cream". This should not cost any public money, or at least really few, as all minor things deserves compared to country's problems.

I mean what the hell does gaming and voting have in common ? Its purely an interested move to gain the "gamers movement" into their pocket and this is ridiculous and an inappropriate interference in order to make people vote for them just because they sponsored a gaming tournament, and not for what they will do for the country.

Video games are an art form equal to panting, opera and literature and seeing as the video games industry is bigger than movies, books and the music industry combined it is not a minor culture, it is massive and like other forms of art or sport it brings people together who share a love for it and removes boundaries.

Sure, it is a political stunt but if it gets people interested in politics and it is not just one party then I am all for it.

Video games are an art form equal to panting, opera and literature and seeing as the video games industry is bigger than movies, books and the music industry combined it is not a minor culture, it is massive and like other forms of art or sport it brings people together who share a love for it and removes boundaries.

Sure, it is a political stunt but if it gets people interested in politics and it is not just one party then I am all for it.

Are you trying to say that a video game could be ever equal to an opera of Tchaikovsky ? Ahahaha. I love video games, but just stop pretending that is is something it is clearly not.

Your part on the "its bigger" clearly shows that you misunderstood my statement on the difference between quality and quantity (which have nothing to do with).

It is perfectly conceivable that, in the future, a true once-in-a-generation creative mind ends up at a video game studio and creates a game that changes the way people think. Games like Black and White arguably have done it to some extent in a small percentage of people.

Video games are a unique medium in that the player shapes his or her own experience; this may make video games ultimately more influential on people's lives than any other form of art. And while we're talking about other forms of art, let's not forget that a lot of video games have original scores. Most of them are not that great yet, but as less and less people care about the Opera, the new composers will have to go somewhere else, and why not Relic?



The notion that one form of art is superior to another is elitist nonsense.

It is perfectly conceivable that, in the future, a true once-in-a-generation creative mind ends up at a video game studio and creates a game that changes the way people think. Games like Black and White arguably have done it to some extent in a small percentage of people.

Video games are a unique medium in that the player shapes his or her own experience; this may make video games ultimately more influential on people's lives than any other form of art. And while we're talking about other forms of art, let's not forget that a lot of video games have original scores. Most of them are not that great yet, but as less and less people care about the Opera, the new composers will have to go somewhere else, and why not Relic?



The notion that one form of art is superior to another is elitist nonsense.

Art has nothing to do with audience. Even if no one is listening to opera (which is not true i can assure you) it will still be dimensions ahead of video games. Of course video games could be great, but show me something which matches the art of Mozart, Chopin etc. ...

And elitism is just loving that the best prevail, fighting elitism is just when you're shit and you don't want that better things go faster, that's egoistic and harmful for everyone.

Are you trying to say that a video game could be ever equal to an opera of Tchaikovsky ? Ahahaha. I love video games, but just stop pretending that is is something it is clearly not.

Your part on the "its bigger" clearly shows that you misunderstood my statement on the difference between quality and quantity (which have nothing to do with).

People said the same thing about Vincent van Gogh work when he was alive.

You never know what will become a classic, what will looked back on as the defining piece of its category.

Video games are a combination of several art forms and some of the greatest concept artists, story tellers and composers in the world today work on them.

People said the same thing about Vincent van Gogh work when he was alive.

You never know what will become a classic, what will looked back on as the defining piece of its category.

Video games are a combination of several art forms and some of the greatest concept artists, story tellers and composers in the world today work on them.

Ok, let me be more clear in my statement : i don't say that video games could not be an art. But, as the world is going, focusing only on pure money, it won't. We had real beautiful art back then before, because there were noble people who didn't care about making money, and just payed talented people to make them pieces of art (which they did). With the profit-minded society of today, with peasants CEO of companies that just want to make money like relic, this will never happen, sadly.

Of course video games could be awesome, everybody here have at some time thought about a video game of dreams, that will never happen because there is not enough 12 yo fags paying DLC's with their laxist parents credit card, that would play it.

Ok, let me be more clear in my statement : i don't say that video games could not be an art. But, as the world is going, focusing only on pure money, it won't. We had real beautiful art back then before, because there were noble people who didn't care about making money, and just payed talented people to make them pieces of art (which they did). With the profit-minded society of today, with peasants CEO of companies that just want to make money like relic, this will never happen, sadly.

Of course video games could be awesome, everybody here have at some time thought about a video game of dreams, that will never happen because there is not enough 12 yo fags paying DLC's with their laxist parents credit card, that would play it.

I have worked with so many amazing artists over my years as a designer and none of them have done it for the money (there isn't that much of it), they do it because they love to create, because it is there passion and calling.

They were artists long before they started getting paid for it.

Art has nothing to do with audience. Even if no one is listening to opera (which is not true i can assure you) it will still be dimensions ahead of video games. Of course video games could be great, but show me something which matches the art of Mozart, Chopin etc. ...

And elitism is just loving that the best prevail, fighting elitism is just when you're shit and you don't want that better things go faster, that's egoistic and harmful for everyone.

Your definition of the word best is what's "egoistic". If a farmhand would rather listen to a local man's rendition of an old folk song than Chopin, does that mean you have better taste than him? Or is it perhaps simply that you grew up in an educated household where you were taught to appreciate all the old dead white guy art.

If there is less creativity and/or high quality art in the modern era (which I personally agree with but can rarely be demonstrated objectively), that is a separate issue from whether or not video games are a valid artistic medium.

Look at it this way: A lot of Mozart is technically less complex than programming unit AI. If someone gets as much joy from microing units as you do from Mozart, which is best?

It is perfectly conceivable that, in the future, a true once-in-a-generation creative mind ends up at a video game studio and creates a game that changes the way people think. Games like Black and White arguably have done it to some extent in a small percentage of people.

Video games are a unique medium in that the player shapes his or her own experience; this may make video games ultimately more influential on people's lives than any other form of art. And while we're talking about other forms of art, let's not forget that a lot of video games have original scores. Most of them are not that great yet, but as less and less people care about the Opera, the new composers will have to go somewhere else, and why not Relic?



The notion that one form of art is superior to another is elitist nonsense.

Let's not forget that the contribution of video games on the "collective of people's lives" is mainly negative. In this particular example, these politicians link themselves to Starcraft, which might be a good tool to increase their share of potential voters amongst young people that are allowed to vote, but does not go well with solving the various issues surrounding video games.

However, imagine these politicians would link themselves to the most popular game in Sweden: CS:GO. A politician cannot uphold his/hers integrity while promoting a violent video game and take a strong stand on the current situation in the Middle-East.

There are political parties (Piratpartiet in Sweden, Piratenpartij in The Netherlands) where one of the main political goals is to increase the rights of the average internet user. This is a much better way to combine video games and politics.

They dont want to be associated with terrorists yet they name themself after people who rape and plunder merchant ships?

The negative connotation of the word "pirate" is not in line with the historical business of priveteering, where acts of piracy are performed through authorization of a given government by means of a letter of marque, somewhat comparable to all those current private mercenaries operating in Iraq and Afghanistan under a legal U.S. mandate. Whether the founders of these political parties are aware of this and/or use the current controversy of the word "pirate" to their advantage, I do not know.

Your definition of the word best is what's "egoistic". If a farmhand would rather listen to a local man's rendition of an old folk song than Chopin, does that mean you have better taste than him? Or is it perhaps simply that you grew up in an educated household where you were taught to appreciate all the old dead white guy art.

If there is less creativity and/or high quality art in the modern era (which I personally agree with but can rarely be demonstrated objectively), that is a separate issue from whether or not video games are a valid artistic medium.

Look at it this way: A lot of Mozart is technically less complex than programming unit AI. If someone gets as much joy from microing units as you do from Mozart, which is best?

Of course farm music is inferior to Mozart, that does absolutely not mean that it is something you should mock. I appreciate a lot "peasant" culture, as my ancestors are ones, however i would never state that it is something as wonderful as a Stravinsky opera.

People nowadays just can't admit that there is things superior and things inferior. Not everything is the same value, that doesn't mean it is shit.

Moreover, what makes a beautiful opera better than programming is that all the difficulty is in the fact that the "thing" that make your arm's hair erect is not even written. It comes from something that is not technically understandable, and "this" is art.

Music is very much technically understandable. Classical music in particular conforms for the most part to some pretty clear rules. You appear to still be confusing preference with superiority so we can end this conversation.

Music is very much technically understandable. Classical music in particular conforms for the most part to some pretty clear rules. You appear to still be confusing preference with superiority so we can end this conversation.

- First point : it's just false, if not, that would mean everybody could be a Mozart by just following rules of harmony.
- Second point : you are the one stating that superiority is subjective while its obviously objective, in terms of art. That does not mean that you can't prefer something that is inferior, which is your right. But just don't compare Mozart and the actual production of video games.

But just don't compare Mozart and the actual production of video games.

You should compare it, thats a big thingy in art-theory at the moment. The older (by this I mean soon dead) artforms as litterature, opera, and mozart makes the spectator passive, while the newer ones as videogames makes the spectator to a gamer. In some sense the gamer has a bit more of freedom to interact (produce)with the art she is consuming. So politics and art are nearly related.
Art is also in some sense propaganda (partial), I dont want to know what COH has done to my conception of war.

You should compare it, thats a big thingy in art-theory at the moment. The older (by this I mean soon dead) artforms as litterature, opera, and mozart makes the spectator passive, while the newer ones as videogames makes the spectator to a gamer. In some sense the gamer has a bit more of freedom to interact (produce)with the art she is consuming. So politics and art are nearly related.
Art is also in some sense propaganda (partial), I dont want to know what COH has done to my conception of war.

Soon dead ? Passive ? Stop saying random shit please. I accept all arguments but just not nonsense.

If active mean "huuuuu click click" on a button, then understanding an opera is 10000x times above this.

However, the thing that makes an opera a hundred times better than a video game would ever be, is because people can't modify it. Guess why ? People are retards 90% of the case compared to the one who is making this art. And I would not let an average opera listener modify anything in an opera unless I want it to become pure shit.

Just learn to be humble and don't state false things on opera as you clearly never truly listened to regularly. It is quite crazy how people only see from their point of view : you are in a game forum, so all people state that gaming is an art, you are in a dildo forums, all will say "yeah putting stuff in your arse is an art, Mozart will soon be over" ? I love both video games and classical art, I'm really interested in both, I spend my days on both of them, but I would not even under torture say that the video game thing is a serious art, unless some genius make something revolutionary.

Video games are an art form equal to panting, opera and literature and seeing as the video games industry is bigger than movies, books and the music industry combined it is not a minor culture, it is massive and like other forms of art or sport it brings people together who share a love for it and removes boundaries.

Making video games could be considered an art, playing them is not. Remember this is a video game tournament, not a "who can make the best video game" contest.

The negative connotation of the word "pirate" is not in line with the historical business of priveteering, where acts of piracy are performed through authorization of a given government by means of a letter of marque, somewhat comparable to all those current private mercenaries operating in Iraq and Afghanistan under a legal U.S. mandate. Whether the founders of these political parties are aware of this and/or use the current controversy of the word "pirate" to their advantage, I do not know.

pirate (noun)- a person who attacks and robs ships at sea
pirate (verb)- rob or plunder a ship
privateer (noun)- an armed ship owned and officered by private individuals holding a government commission and authorized for use in war, especially in the capture of enemy merchant shipping

Pirate and privateer are two completely different things. Privateer means private organization sponsored by the government to wage war, not government sponsored piracy. And privateers are not necessarily mercenaries. Mercenary means you don't give a fuck what side you are, just the paycheck. I can't speak for all countries but the most well known (possibly largest?) American privateering company, Blackwater, works only for the US government.