Game Design Committee Members/Questions

[Corey Balint]

I was discussing this with a few people the other day and I just wanted to know.
Are the members of the Game Design Committee kept "secret"?
I know, in the past, they have only had 6-8 members that have been announced at kickoff. In recent years though, I have heard many people say they were members. I do not know what a member actually does or how involved you have to be to be a "member".
Also, does anyone know if anyone on the GDC has an affiliation with a team? It just seems like it wouldn't be the greatest idea to have someone make the game who actively participates on the team.
The discussion I had with others led us to this conclusion/idea. Maybe the GDC should be an outside company, who has no affiliation with anyone in FIRST or any team, to design the game. They should be given parameters, shown past games, and given all the feedback about the previous games. They should also have little to no contact with individual team members. The members should be kept truly secret in my mind, if everyone wants everything to be fair.

It pains me to think that way, but it seems to be a prevalent thought among many people (not a majority, but many people do have issues with how it is being run). In the past two years, I have heard numerous people leak information about the game a few weeks before hand and have that information actually be true.

This is not a shot at anyone in particular, just a review of the system that has been established.

[Greg Needel]

Originally Posted by Corey Balint

In the past two years, I have heard numerous people leak information about the game a few weeks before hand and have that information actually be true.

I would suspect that most of the leaks are coming from the remote kickoff sites and not the GDC. Because the GDC is small committee and I believe they know the secrets/ power they have none would dare leak anything. On the other hand the remote kickoff sites build fields before kickoff and many of those people are team related. Yes they sign an NDA, but i think info gets out that way. I wouldn't be surprised if fields at remote kickoff locations disappeared in future years.

[Corey Balint]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

I would suspect that most of the leaks are coming from the remote kickoff sites and not the GDC. Because the GDC is small committee and I believe they know the secrets/ power they have none would dare leak anything. On the other hand the remote kickoff sites build fields before kickoff and many of those people are team related. Yes they sign an NDA, but i think info gets out that way. I wouldn't be surprised if fields at remote kickoff locations disappeared in future years.

Well, for the most part (to my knowledge), they only build the field with 2 days (or less) to go before kickoff. Plus, you can only get a certain amount of info from the field alone. I have heard some people from the remote kickoffs say things as well...but I've heard stuff 2-4 weeks in advance over the past 2 years.

[Tottanka]

i know that the people who built the field did not understand how the game was played...

[Corey Balint]

Just another quick point to put out there...(wanted a separate post so this didn't get buried).

Re:Team affiliated GDC members
They might not tell anyone else, but they are still thinking of robot designs before anyone else and they might be able to refine ideas more. I think this is a point that also should be looked at.

I know Dave Lavery has said that he does not take part in any design of the robot because he feels it would be unfair. Others, who claim they are GDC members, are actively involved in their design...so I'm just unsure of it all.

Maybe some clarification, not names particularly, on what members affiliations are would help this.

[Amanda Morrison]

Also keep in mind there are several different GDC's at FIRST. To my knowledge, the folks represented during the FRC Kickoff are the only members of the FRC GDC. Other FIRST Staff (especially the Engineering Department) assist with some areas, but they are not formal members of what we call the GDC.

And since we're on the topic, I'm dying to know - why does knowledge of the game in advance somehow equate that your team will do better that year? I know Dave has his own viewpoint that he will not be directly involved with the build, but where's the advantage?

Do people think that the GDC members order their students to build a certain type of robot because they 'know' it will win? Does game knowledge somehow help your team obtain more sponsorship, or allow you to more time to build your robot? No.

After having been on a GDC myself, I can honestly say that the advantages many teams might view to be present are somewhat, if not totally non-existent. In fact, I truly believe that the best games in the history of all FIRST programs are those that have involved team mentors in the process... they have intimate, first-hand knowledge of what it takes to compete in a yearly game challenge and what makes these games exciting and fun. You wouldn't want a group of people who have never been involved in FIRST creating a game and not understanding the dynamics of the FIRST community and what a good robotics competition entails.

If anything, I think the GDC members respect the rules more than almost anyone else - they MAKE the rules, so why would they not follow them?

(...and furthermore... what good does an accusatory post like this really do?)

[Corey Balint]

Originally Posted by Amanda Morrison

And since we're on the topic, I'm dying to know - why does knowledge of the game in advance somehow equate that your team will do better that year? I know Dave has his own viewpoint that he will not be directly involved with the build, but where's the advantage?

Do people think that the GDC members order their students to build a certain type of robot because they 'know' it will win? Does game knowledge somehow help your team obtain more sponsorship, or allow you to more time to build your robot? No.

After having been on a GDC myself, I can honestly say that the advantages many teams might view to be present are somewhat, if not totally non-existent. In fact, I truly believe that the best games in the history of all FIRST programs are those that have involved team mentors in the process... they have intimate, first-hand knowledge of what it takes to compete in a yearly game challenge and what makes these games exciting and fun. You wouldn't want a group of people who have never been involved in FIRST creating a game and not understanding the dynamics of the FIRST community and what a good robotics competition entails.

If anything, I think the GDC members respect the rules more than almost anyone else - they MAKE the rules, so why would they not follow them?

(...and furthermore... what good does an accusatory post like this really do?)

It might not exactly guarantee a better robot no, but it gives you more time to study designs and possible flaws in them. I, as well as others, think that is an advantage.
No they don't order the students to do so...but don't you think if they bring their opinion to the table, the kids are more likely to listen to it, knowing they already know details to the game?
It has nothing to do with sponsorship.
No it doesn't give you more time to build, but more time to plan. Keep in mind that most people on the GDC have been doing this for a while now so they will be able to plan things out better.

I don't necessarily agree with that. A change might be a good thing. It seems as if a good amount of people have been displeased with the past 2 games. New blood might be a good thing. A totally different perspective might bring a totally new idea out for a game. I did say previously that feedback would be a good thing still.

To weed out any problems there might be.

[Greg Marra]

Wouldn't it be interesting if FIRST completely crowd-sourced the development of the next game? Using something like Kluster teams and students and mentors could collaborate to design the ultimate FIRST Robotics game.

It'd be quite an interesting path to take.

[Corey Balint]

Originally Posted by Greg Marra

Wouldn't it be interesting if FIRST completely crowd-sourced the development of the next game? Using something like Kluster teams and students and mentors could collaborate to design the ultimate FIRST Robotics game.

It'd be quite an interesting path to take.

That would be very interesting to see.

[Mike Ross]

I found this thread from a few years ago:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=27037

I don't know if the GDC still gets team mentor proposals/input, but I'm not sure knowing (or suspecting) aspects of the game would neccesarily provide a competitive advantage anyway. No one can predict exactly how a game will play out, even with 6 weeks to think it over. Sometimes teams just need an idea crazy enough to work.

[Amanda Morrison]

Originally Posted by Corey Balint

To weed out any problems there might be.

Okay, believe me, I'm definitely one to admit there are issues with FIRST and that many things could use an overhaul. Even more so, I have no reason to benefit or gain anything from this post. However, you're poking a tiger in a cage with this one.

"...any problems there might be" is a non-statement. It pretty much cemented my opinion that this thread is inflammatory for the sake of stirring things up where no issue exists. To dance around the issue and vaguely not-say that the GDC members may or may not be cheating or 'pre-planning' is not only not funny, but disrespectful to their teams.

So of the folks that were announced on the GDC at Kickoff (since we've established that whomever else you insinuated are not on the GDC), there is the FIRST Founder, the FIRST National Advisor, the FRC Director of Programs, one member of the FIRST staff, two WFFAs, one former FRC Director of Programs, an Assistant Regional Director, the FRC National Head Referee, a NASA Program Executive, an ASME Edwin F. Church Medal winner, and the RIA Joseph Engleberger Medal winner. That heavy list of titles comes from a group of only eight people.

Of the four that aren't currently employed by FIRST, their teams in 2008 had these accomplishments:

2008 VA Autodesk Visualization Award
2008 NY Regional Chairman's Award
2008 GA Rookie Inspiration Award
2008 SC Rookie Inspiration Award
2008 GA Imagery

None of these are performance-based.

And lastly, but not certainly not least - what is a 'good amount of people'? You do realize the comments made on the ChiefDelphi forums are a microcosm of the actual feedback that FIRST receives, right? It's just weird that you say that after this weekend, when I heard from folks there that the response to this year's game has been absolutely overwhelmingly positive.

I do realize the accusatory tone of my post, and I'm almost sad that it's come to researching and reading off all of these facts. However, few things get me as riled up on these forums as posts without factual information behind them, especially dancing around an issue that you have no basis to support.

If you've got a legitimate problem with the GDC, complain directly to FIRST. It is their staff and hand-picked volunteers that you're throwing under the bus, and you're not going to get any results writing about it on ChiefDelphi.

[Corey Balint]

I am aware that there are many more complaints being made. I do realize CD is a small portion of the community. Why don't I back up my claims more? I don't feel as if stating peoples names would go over much worse.
The only thing I expect to get from CD is backing from others that I do not know as well. I have gotten responses from others for other things through reputation, PM's, or messages elsewhere.
I have heard numerous people (whom I don't think fit into the category of people you listed above) say they work on the GDC. Again, the initial point of this post was to find out if the members were listed anywhere.

[Amanda Morrison]

Mentioning that you are getting private accolades for this does not mean that people reading this thread should give you credibility, and if you aren't justifying yourself it gives them less of a reason to even read this thread.

According to the Kickoff videos and transcript (which are very public), the members in alphabetical order are:

Aidan Browne
Woodie Flowers
Dean Kamen
Dave Lavery
Bill Miller
Kate Pilotte
Jeremy Roberts
Vince Wilczynski

And if that is truly your only goal of this thread, it can be shut down now.

***And my sincere and true apologies to the members, as I realize there are four ASME Edwin F. Church Medal winners, not one as previously listed.

[Corey Balint]

That is perfectly fine by me.

I'm sorry if I seemed as if I was accusing people of cheating here. This was just pure speculation that got taken out of hand a little too fast. My original question was what Amanda answered with those names.
Sorry to the GDC if they thought I was accusing them of cheating..I was not.

[Beth Sweet]

Ok, so given everyone agrees, thread shut per Amanda's request/Corey's agreement. Everybody happy