Quote:
Originally Posted by billylo
Just returned from Waterloo. I have been reflecting on what the most important thing, the one thing I would put on the feedback form.
Here it is:
It's practically impossible to predict how a game will be played by 50000 smart people, young and the-young at heart. Even if you recruit Neil deGrasse Tyson (as an example) and put him onto the GDC.
So, what can be done to continue growing STEM better through FIRST?
Engage the 50,000 smart people in participating the evolution of a game in structured way. Leverage the competition experience of teams like 254, 469, 33, etc; the less experienced teams; and the rookies and pre-rookies too.
Turn the problem on its head.
Don't fix this game (yes, you heard that from me here... :-) )
Invest our time in enhancing the process of conceiving, designing, testing and deploying the game. Transparency will lead to understanding, engagement will lead to acceptance; and openness will lead to willingness to forget about the imperfect aspects of the system.
|
This above.....
It wasn't that I didn't like the game (though I anticipated it would become very damaging Battle Bots like, and it did for a period of time, forcing some changes)...It was that I knew I wouldn't like the resulting "fixing that was going to be applied" either to the field elements, or all the rest that would be necessary.
I agreed w/ the above poster weeks ago...Though the GDC took the only route available once many stated how much they didn't like the game, and attempted to, in their way make the game better....It has improved it, and I am now a convert. It is better. Though, if you rely on your scouting or the Stats from week 1, 2, 3, or 4 at the Championships (or compare those stats on a season wide basis)...You just may be sorry you did. As too many changes have taken place in just less than 3 months, and the last 4 weeks. Will there be more to come? Who knows.....But, my personal complaints about the game are over.