The Future of Paintball - Part I
I came across this question on PBNation just awhile ago, and it got me thinking.
Where do you think paintball is going in the future?
I am going to break my response up into two posts; one for speedball, the other for woodsball. I see some very different ways these two styles will go, and people will begin to see paintball as “speedball� or “woodsball�, but not just paintball.
I see it becoming more professional, which means more regulations, standards, and permanent teams - everything that takes it to become a popular sport. I see a limit on future technology as well. There’s a point when things just become ridiculous. We don’t need guns that can shoot 30bps, even anything more than 20 for that matter. It’s just unsafe.
I can also see new developments in the reffing process, like the introduction of instant replay cameras and what not to eliminate those upset calls (Dynasty/Joy). There’s no arguing with the camera. It will steadily become more mainstream and accepted as a sport, but teams need to stay together instead of player swapping, and the media coverage has to improve (especially the camera angles etc.)
Right now, I just don’t think it’s out there yet. The older people typically go for the usual sports like football, baseball, basketball, etc - it’s what they grew up with. Our generation, kids of the 90s and 2ks grew up with paintball, and we accept it as a sport without hesitation. It’s like grandparents and computers. PCs are just radically new to them, and they’ll never really get used to them. But the newer generations have grown up with them, and they’re what we do best. It’s just old vs. new.
Much of the public still views paintball as a promoter for violence, and just doesn’t realize what it’s about. That is why it’s crucial for speedball to completely separate itself from woodsball/milsim/scenario. I’d say it’s doing a fine job at it, but until people know the difference then the task is not complete.
May 2nd, 2007 at 7:04 pm
Evan,
I would agree with your initial assessment of increasing the rules, regs, etc. in regards to the sport as it gains popularity. However, regardless of how mainstream the sport gets has nothing to do with whether or not speedball separates itself from its origin - woodsball. Quite the contrary considering that there are enough crossovers between the two that to drive a wedge between them would set off a split that reminds me of what happened when snowboarding went mainstream.
That fight continues to this day, and regardless of how popular boarding is, the consumers are still regarded as reckless. Same with speedball, a lot of the people see speedball as a frantic, A.D.D. induced craze that supplants other, more negative influences that could impact our youth (which is a benefit).
In closing, the woodsball players shouldn’t be labeled as the “renegades” of the sport. Without woodsball there wouldn’t be paintball. To forget its own roots is to bastardize the sport, marginalize a lot of its older advocates, or even worse - split the support the sport has enjoyed. Just remember, for anti-gun/violence advocates there is no separation between woodsball and speedball. There is still a gun, a trigger, a ball that flies at 300 fps, and a human target that you’re “aiming” at.
May 2nd, 2007 at 8:16 pm
Couldn’t have put it better myself, Jason. I completely agree. I’ve long advocated attempts to de-militarize the look of the sport, but not at the expense of woodsball. What I mean by that is to continue promotion of speedball, because as paintball becomes more visible to the public, speedball will be a much easier format for the general public to accept as a legitimate sport.
May 3rd, 2007 at 12:53 am
Dana,
Speedball is definitely picking up in popularity and acceptability. But at what expense? I’m not saying that the two shouldn’t be separated, they absolutely should. They are two completely different formats and require (almost) two different sets of equipment. De-militarizing the sport of speedball absolutely opens the markets eyes to the fact that this is a high intensity sport that requires skill, teamwork, and the physical ability to participate. Those are great virtues to instill in the youth (and adults) that participate in it.
Having said that, there are benefits to woodsball as well. Disabled players can participate in larger scale scenarios as mobile gunners and commanders whereas in speedball there isn’t a lot of room for those roles. Woodsball also provides an outlet for the older players to put their experience to practical use in a scenario setting. I’m not an advocate of woodsball per se but rather a advocate for the sport as a whole. On principle one can’t ignore the fact that the tactics used in speedball are just a manifestation of woodsball tactics adapted to smaller courses and shorter games.
I don’t think we disagree on anything in regards to this debate other than the fact that speedball is a more legitimate sport than woodsball. It may in fact be more palatable to the general public, especially in light of the VT tragedy, but it’s still (undeniably) a game of cat and mouse no matter how you dress it up, and that’s going to be the hurdle that needs to overcome if and when the sport goes truly mainstream.
Lastly, I really think the players need to do a cost-benefit to determine what greater exposure means. Does it bring more money? Or does it open the sport to blame when the next school tragedy is attributed to an individuals participation in the sport?
It’s a slippery slope unfortunately and the only real way to grow the appeal of the sport is to make it less expensive. Field fees are ridiculously high, parts and supplies are ridiculously high, and the cost of some of these higher end markers is ridiculous. Why would some kid pay over $1k for a bob long when he can go down and pick up a real firearm for a fraction of the price?
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:00 am
[...] The Future of Paintball - Part II am going to break my response up into two posts; one for speedball, the other for woodsball. I see some very different ways these two styles will go, and people will begin to see paintball as speedball or woodsball , … [...]
May 3rd, 2007 at 10:26 am
Again, I find myself agreeing with you on almost all points, but the legitimacy of woodsball still seems to be a sticking point. I’m not saying that woodsball isn’t a sport in itself, I’m saying that it really won’t be considered as the same sport as speedball by the public because of the format in which it is played. Speedball is much more accessible to the public. While the two are fundamentally the same sport (duh! paintball), it’s all about the packaging.
Greater exposure, assuming that it’s of a positive sort, will do nothing but benefit the sport. Promoting speedball (and paintball as a whole) in a positive manner will create outside opportunities for sponsorships. Once companies outside of paintball industries start putting money into the sport, paintball companies can cut back prices drastically because they no longer have to support the sport from within. Paint and field fee prices will drop as paintball’s popularity rises because fields will be able to support themselves better with many more customers. It all revolves around the popularity of the sport.
May 3rd, 2007 at 11:14 am
Dana,
First, thanks for hosting such a respectful difference of opinion (if we can call it that since we tend to agree on most of the points). In this day and age it’s nice to know that a sport which many think trivializes violence can bring people together, from different sides of the spectrum, to agree that there is a larger problem.
Second, a lot of the success we hope to see in the future is contingent on the players rather than the sport itself. Efforts like the ones put forth by the promoters of D-Day Oklahoma (to reward sportsmanship and camaraderie) are spreading to local fields which makes novices and observers alike feel welcome. That my friend is customer service and it’s a vanishing commodity in organized sports these days. IF (and it’s in caps for a reason) our sport is going to enjoy mainstream acceptability it will be because of the people rather than the format, and word of mouth rather than advertising.
Lastly, I’m not as optimistic about fees dropping once popularity increases. Simple supply and demand (and the fact that community zoning laws in high density areas prohibit paintball) is going to give field owners carte blanche to agree amongst themselves how much to charge according to the demographics of the region. Of course this may only happen in areas such as California but if/when it does, a lot of the revenue that is generated for the sport will dry up. I realize that this may come off as a little narcissitic (and it should, considering I live in the SF Bay Area) but I don’t think the field owners (if given the choice) would lower their prices if they knew that their consumers could afford paying a premium.
Of course, this will be great for the other fields located throughout the USA since they’ll be able to concentrate more on capturing larger concentrations of players at pre-determined dates as they move to format games in a manner similar to that of the DDay scenarios. Then again, perhaps speedball takes the place of NASCAR, but then you have to worry about longevity. Regardless of what happens it still boils down to the individual that plays the game, and a continuing dialogue such as the one we’ve had here.
Hope to run into you guys on the field someday.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:57 pm
Thanks a bunch for stopping by and taking the time to read and leave (awesome!) comments. I definitely think that we both have valid points, and obviously the only way to find out who’s right (which it will more likely be a blend of our opinions, ironically enough) is to wait and see.
And I hope we ‘ball it up someday too.