Of course it would be an optional alternative. Why would you think
otherwise?
By the way, here are some interesting statistics.
The number of ham radio operators worldwide (high side estimate) is
about 3.5 million. The number of video gamers (at least one hour per
week and includes cellphone games) in the U.S. alone is estimated to be
over 190 million ( a number that even I have difficulty believing but it
comes from multiple studies).
More than half of the active video gamers are less than 35 years old.
By far the majority of ham radio operators (certainly greater than half)
are older than 60. Which do you think represent the future?
Roughly 38% of the U.S. population that is older than age 60 report that
they at least occasionally play video games (another amazing statistic
to me), but only 0.16% of that demographic are ham radio operators (many
of which aren't even active and even fewer are contesters). This
statistic alone should be an eye opener.
CQWW says that roughly 35,000 hams GLOBALLY are active AT SOME POINT IN
TIME between the SSB and CW contests. Multiple studies estimate that ON
AVERAGE as many as 10 million people in the U.S. alone are playing video
games ... about 55% of them on their smart phone and 45% on consoles or
desktops.
You can argue with these statistics, but not the general pattern. Those
of us who enjoy contesting as it is are a very small fraction of what it
could be, and we aren't getting younger.
From a commercial perspective, anyone want to compare the money spent
annually on ham radio versus that spent on video games?
Dave AB7E
On 8/11/2025 10:14 AM, Stan Zawrotny wrote:
I think the video game perspective would greatly diminish the number
of participants in a contest.
Based on the presentation done at Dayton, I would like to have the
playing and adjudication based on a system that is similar to the
current Contest Online Scoreboards. This would add the game-time
competition and the fast adjudication of the final results. Contest
participants not wishing to engage in the on-line score competition
would still be able to add their logs at the conclusion of the contest
for final results and adjudication. This is easy for everyone, without
requiring a gaming persona.
As demonstrated at Dayton, most of the infrastructure programming has
already been done. The more complicated programming comes with
applying the rules and scoring of each contest. They are looking for
volunteer contests.
If the video game activities could be done as an optional alternative,
then fine. Let the video game enthusiasts have some fun. I hope you
can find the programming resources, with AI as an assistant. If it
catches on throughout the contesting community, then make a move to
make it the default way to operate.
__________
Stan, K4SBZ
On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:55 AM Daniel Weinhold NC8R via CQ-Contest
<cq-contest@contesting.com> wrote:
I have heard this idea brought up quite a few times. I am a young
(Gen Z) ham myself. To me, this idea of transforming ham radio
contesting into a video game does not appeal in any way. Part of
the reason radio caught my interest in the first place and the
reason it continues to fascinate me is that it is not dependent on
the internet. It is a form of communication much, much older than
the internet or computer games. This is what makes radio so cool!
I also think that contest rule changes should be left up to the
older, more experienced contesters. Inexperienced people often
want to change things without realizing that they are done a
certain way for a very good reason.
If you look around, you will find quite a number of young hams
(even younger than myself) who have succeeded in major contests
and are enjoying ham radio just the way it is!
73,
Daniel NC8R
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
On Monday, August 11th, 2025 at 1:40 AM, David Gilbert
<ab7echo@gmail.com> wrote:
> A friend of mine (Bob, K7ZB) just sent me a link to a recent video
> interview of Tom, W2SC (aka 8P5A) done by W1DED. In addition to
> descriptions of his station and approach to contesting, Tom
speculates
> on where ham radio and contesting in particular might go in the
future.
> He pointed out that whatever happens will most likely be
determined by a
> younger generation that isn't bound by what ham radio is to
those of us
> who have been at it for a while.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ck-RMIyjSfI
>
> His view of the future is very interesting, and I agree that if ham
> radio survives to any significant extent it will have to change
... and
> it will likely be changed by a younger generation that comes up
with a
> way to adapt ham radio to something that is more interesting to
them.
>
> Personally, I've always thought that contesting should figure
out how to
> become more like an online video game:
>
> 1. Integrated computer graphics that display participants on a
playing
> field ... Earth or maybe even some simulated world. You could
zoom in
> or zoom out, but the part of the world available to be seen on your
> screen could be determined by the real time propagation at that
moment.
> To make a contact you'd have to zoom in far enough to see the
station
> you're trying to contact, and the display would show their current
> frequency. Real time propagation could be derived from actual
contacts
> being made if everyone's computer was connected to a common
server ...
> just like is done with video games. And before anyone says that real
> time internet connectivity is an issue, keep in mind that it
isn't at
> all problem for the demographic we'd be trying to reach.
>
> 2. Multiplayer .... where every participant shows up on the
screen at
> their actual (or simulated) QTH.
>
> 3. ACTUAL COMPETITION! Instead of just trying to make the most
> contacts and finding out at the end how you did, make each
contact some
> sort of competition that gets displayed on the screen ... and
have some
> way of preventing others from making a contact. How that happens
would
> depend upon the context of the particular game, just like there are
> different video games. But the idea would be to contest each
contact in
> some manner that requires either an offensive action or a
defensive one.
>
> 4. "Contacts" (whatever the game required for a point) would still
> purely come via RF ... station to station. The video display and
> central server would only provide the environment for making the
> contacts, albeit a hopefully more elaborate and richer
environment than
> whatever we currently picture in our minds while making contacts
now.
>
> Some people might say that this is actually no different than a
video
> game and that video games have the advantage of a level playing
field
> since most computers don't hinder your play. And that's
precisely why I
> think a ham radio version might be more interesting. Propagation,
> antennas, choice of times and bands would all make the game more
complex
> than the typical online video game. The play style would be
enriched by
> the variables of ham radio and the technical side of the hobby
would be
> retained.
>
> The biggest problem I see with something like this is getting the
> programming done. Successful video games can take years and lots of
> money to develop, although there are games like Valheim that
didn't ...
> at least not by comparison. However, I strongly suspect that it
won't
> be too long before AI could do something like this, or at least
most of
> it. We wouldn't need the complexity of a top tier video game, and
> graphics engines are becoming increasingly accessible for simple
> environments. Station wise, I don't think it would be any different
> than it is now to use a logger for rig control and score
tracking ...
> just different software.
>
> I realize that the actual game mechanics are missing here. That's
> because I'm not smart enough to come up with the specifics. But I am
> convinced that something like this could be done ... it's really
just a
> simple visual interface with an RF connection for the points
instead of
> data packets. The number of made contacts would be MUCH fewer
than it
> is now for a typical contest, but each contact could potentially
require
> more thought and focus. Think in terms of catching fish instead of
> hammering out CQ's.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|