[CQ-Contest] Ham Radio in the Future

[Steve Dyer W1SRD]

I don't know about making it an actual video game, because it's then 
it's just a video game. It's no longer has anything to do with radio.

If I want to game I put my gaming headset on. If I want to interact with 
the physical world, I turn the radio on and slide into my headphones.

There are definitely good ideas from MMO  to supplement and enhance the 
radio experience but these interactions all require an *internet* 
connection.

How about real time adjudication? It's just stupid we wait months for 
results. The winner should be declared within minutes if not seconds 
after end of contest. Ooops, need an internet connect there too (which 
any competitive is 99.999% likely to have). But you get the drift.

If there is no interest in radio well... game over.

73,
Steve
W1SRD

On 8/10/2025 1:34 PM, David Gilbert 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 at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest