Pro gaming more attractive than pro tennis

Good point about how games are designed to be beaten.

People respect professional athletes partly because they do things that most people can't. And people know it. Most people think that if they play a videogame long enough, they can become expert at it. Which is often true.

I also think it has to do with the shelf life and commercial aspect of games.

Tennis and other professional sports have been around for decades and have a rich tradition. You can compare Tiger Woods to Jack Nicklaus or Barry Bonds to Babe Ruth because the game has largely stayed the same. Sure, some things have changed, but the basic game and rules are the same.

Are people going to be playing Starcraft and Halo 40 years from now? Would you even want to?

And unlike a sport, a videogame is created by a company for profit. The rules and conditions of gameplay are set by one for-profit company. Support and development of the game depends on the health and commitment of the company. What if that company goes out of business? Or decides to end support? Or comes out with a new version that radically changes the game?

Having said that, I still think competitive gaming is going to become bigger and more successful.

Wrong point about games designed to be beaten. When you talk Electronic Sports, the game is not the challenge. It becomes a tool to challenge other gamers. And gamers are designed nor willing to be beaten.

This is how Esports is fully comparable to "traditionnal" sports :
- You have opponents
- You have rules
- You have some tools (balls, nets / mouse, pad)
- You have a field (tennis/ game map)

#2 -- you're quite right about e-sports, but the problem is like traditional sports, e-sports are fully accessible to hobbyists; probably even more so. Any moron thinks they can beat Quake 4 -- but if I go and play some tennis against a wall, I'll miss enough shots to realise I'll never be a good player.