[Grant Cox]

As a driver I'm inclined to say that a game should offer the maximum possibility for adaptive strategies. Talking to our drivers this year about the intricacies of driving this game (empty cell running, keeping the bot away from corners with super cells, etc) made me wish I was still in high school. 07 was similar, often required split second strategy changes (scoring on one side of the rack vs the other, coming back to ramp or not, etc). As Paul has posted here before, in 08 the coach essentially served the purpose of glorified cheerleaders; once the alliance gets into a groove, the only strategy elements are deciding when to place or knock of the opponent's trackballs.

These are the two I know most about since these are the two I've driven, but in my opinion the pattern can be tracked back as well (many games are remembered for the ridiculous strategies that are discovered).

That being said, many people regard 06 as the "greatest game ever" and 03 (Stack Attack) as having the best autonomous ever, each because of their insane levels of excitement for the spectators. FIRST is, at its heart, an engineering experience for the students, and hopefully always will be. However, it is impossible to deny that in order for it to grow more into the public eye, the public has to be interested in the games going on. With the impending/apparent rollout of some sort of adapted FiM district structure nationwide (it will happen.. eventually..) and the events lose some of their appeal as gigantic beautiful crazy events, the games themselves will be what is drawing the spectators. And honestly, I don't need to ask what game is more exciting to the layman from the street who doesn't know what FIRST is, Aim High or Lunacy...