Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MConte05
I would have to disagree with you on that, simply because a lot of rookie teams don't have the time or resources to be able to do an animation or website, plus the animation is a lot of times a personal thing, only one or two people work on it. So technically if this is their first time doing it, they should have a chance to be a rookie. Being a rookie in the animation is just as hard as being a rookie in the robotics competion; alot of times the rookies of the animation have to figure out the program on thier own, develop their own stories and finally, get everything together for the first time, not knowing any tips or tricks. While teams with more experience in doing the whole animation thing should, in turn be able to turn in higher-quality animation simply because they have more experience.....
Just my $0.02
|
We definitely disagree.
Let's imagine the following hypothetical situation. The "animation team" for a team consists of just one student, who starts to develop an animation for the 2004 competition. The animation is started at the same time as every other team, and worked and developed throughout the season. As submission time nears, the animation team decides that they are not happy with the quality of their efforts, and do not submit in 2004. However, the team continues to work on the animation over the spring, summer and fall, improving it with each iteration. By the time the 2005 competition rolls around, it is a photo-realistic quality, near-professional product.
Why in the world should that team be allowed to participate in the 2005 competition as a "rookie team" entry? At that point, the team has over a year's worth of experience with the software. The animation has nearly a year of development effort behind it. Every other legitimate "rookie" team gets just six weeks to learn the software, develop their ideas, and create their animation.
It would be beyond reason to put a group like the team described above in the same class as the true "rookies" and then try to call it fair. And yet, as we have seen in this and a few other threads, we know that some teams are going to try this. "Rookie" status should be determined by your experience and knowledge base, and not by your entry status from last year. If the full team has been in existance for more than one year, then they have had the opportunity to gain that experience and knowledge. If the team, not FIRST, makes the decision to opt out of the 2004 competition, then I believe that they should live with the ramifications of that decision (just like professionals have to do every day).
-dave