![]() |
[FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Posted on the FRC Blog, 5/13/16: http://www.firstinspires.org/robotic...by-the-numbers
Quote:
|
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
1 Attachment(s)
I took the liberty of creating a bar graph of the Weekly Quality Survey 9from the survey Excel sheet that was in the post).
http://imgur.com/kDRQseO Edited spreadsheet is attached |
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
|
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
I look forward to more well integrated themes. |
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
|
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
|
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
I, for one, think the game helped to contribute a lot to FIRST, including making viewership for an outsider seem a bit more entertaining. The theme helped to get team members engulfed into the game, and while the 'Renaissance Fair' flair that some people had at competitions may have been off-putting to some, it just shows they were inspired. The Disney Imagineers helped to hit this game out of the park. |
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
|
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
|
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
Most of the people I showed the game to thought the medieval theme was too childish. The times where we got the best response during demos of our robot we just explained it as a Dodgeball robot. Our team went with the theme quite a bit. In fact our lead mentor spent over 10 weeks straight hand making chain mail. But, I think the best first games are the ones more like a sport. It's just easier for some outsiders to relate. Also I don't see how making a costume instantly shows someone is inspired. Think of this game without the decals without the castle tops and without the interestingly named defenses. I think it would still be just as fun and less off putting to the average high school student. I will end this saying I did love the game the concept was cool and I liked the game pieces. What I did not like was the imo childish theme. |
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
|
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As for your 'average high school student' comment... I find 2 key issues. 1) Not every 'average high school student' connects to sports 2) This program is full of students I would say stray from the 'average' high school student in A LOT of ways. While I like sports games too, FIRST has done A LOT of sports themed games. Its cool to stray from the norm. I think a majority of the people in the program took the theme well. Besides, its better than Recycling. |
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
|
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
A themed game does not have to be good or bad. As a matter of fact, what makes or breaks a game probably ISN'T the theme, but the theme can enhance the game.
Themed games: 2008 (NASCAR/Mario Kart) 2009 (Moon base) 2010 (Soccer) 2011 (FIRST Logo) 2012 (Basketball) 2015 (Waste management) 2016 (Medieval) Pre-2008, there really wasn't much of a theme to the games, per se. They were... the games. 2013 and 2014 are left off as well, for a similar reason. So, with that being said... 2009 and 2015 consistently make "bad game" lists. 2009's primary issue seems to have been the floor and the trailers resulting in scrums; 2015 was essentially 3v0 + 3v0, with "extra" game elements. 2011 is often included on those lists due to the minibots (a rather failed attempt to integrate FTC with FRC to some extent, which happened to decide many matches and tournaments). On the other side of the coin, 2012 is generally regarded as a good game (though not top-flight necessarily--that depends on how many other good games whoever is ranking it has seen) with the one negative being the coopertition points that year; some teams tell horror stories about being stood up on that bridge. 2008 is "OK"--nothing fancy, nothing too terrible (other than the dreaded lane violation penalty); 2010 is in the same boat (with the main complaints being, as I recall, the ties and the possession limitations). And 2016 is one of the few games that was greeted with "We get to play this? COOL!" rather than "WTF, GDC?", and maintained a generally very high level of liking through the season (minor hiccups aside). Where does that leave themed games? Done right, the theme enhances the game and makes it more popular. Done wrong, the theme can detract from the game. If a game element is done poorly, the themed game can give all themed games a bad name... I'm thinking that next year's game will have a hard time passing Stronghold, but I'm willing to give it a shot. |
Re: [FRC Blog] The 2016 Season, by the Numbers
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also I don't see how making a costume instantly shows someone is inspired. Quote:
This is what it might be like without names and decals: "okay you guys go over the bump and the teeter totter, remember it takes 2 "going overs" to get the points. Than shoot 3 or 4 foam balls into the hole. With that we should get the points for going over the obstacles, and the points for putting 8 balls in the holes. We will even try to attach to the bar and climb" .... not nearly as interesting to talk about, OR to explain to other people what the game is "this game is about goving over teeter totters and bumps, and shotting balls into holes"... Quote:
Just putting my opinion on this out there. :) |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:12. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi