lamancy in the games

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by Drew

let me restate my question.... because most of you have been commenting immensly, The fact of lameness being with the IDEA!!!! of the game not the Whole idea of robotics,

Ok, lets talk about the basic concept of this years game:

1. shooting balls through a goal from a distance, similar to basketball or rollerball (the original movie)

2. shooting or dumping balls into two floor level goals, similar to hockey or soccer, except there are two goals instead of one

3. Defined offense and defense periods. Many people are saying (complaining?) that this years game is the most... whats the word.. brutal ever, and that many robots are being damaged and flipped within the acceptable guidelines of the game

4. An auton period that for most matches determines the outcome of the match (statistically so far). This means robots cant blow off auton and do nothing - they have to do something if they want to win.

5. Six robots on the field at the same time.

6. edited to add: I forgot about King of the Hill on the ramps for 25 points at the end!

so what would you add to make the game more interesting and challenging? Explosions? Chainsaws?

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by Richard

A couple of years ago FIRST invited teams to participate in a game design challenge. This may have been repeated since then -- I haven't searched recently. If FIRST offers this again, you should try it, Drew. It might give you a new appreciation for the difficulty of designing a really good game. And BTW, I think the last several games have been really good.

Teams and individuals have been invited to submit game concepts and ideas for the past several years. In all likelihood, this invitation will be extended again this year after the close of the 2006 season. Keep an eye on these fora for the announcement of the request to submit ideas. As you observe this year's game, think about what you like and don't like. Jot down a few notes and reminders to yourself. Then when the season is over, review your notes, create your own game and submit it. I can guarantee that everything submitted will be read and reviewed and considered.

-dave (still thinking fondly of the Krispy-Kreme-throwing game - too bad we could never figure out how to get the inflatable clowns to fit into the wet suits)

[Scott358]

I'm not going to try to convince anyone that this year's game is or isn't "lame", as "lame" is a matter of opinion, but....

I will try to convince those who feel they have something to say, they should:

1. Do it without insulting anyone (as "lame" is a pretty harsh term to those responsible for whatever you're calling lame).

2. Have something constructive to say to improve things.

My mom taught me that if you don't have something nice (or at least something constructive) to say, don't say anything. I have found that this is a good rule to live by.

[Cactus_Robotics]

Originally Posted by sparksandtabs

well, FIRST could do a water game because technically water doesn't have a shape, it is the shape of its container.

a water game....someone please hurt me for saying that

Oooh please not this again.

[BHS_STopping]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

Ok, lets talk about the basic concept of this years game:

1. shooting balls through a goal from a distance, similar to basketball or rollerball (the original movie)

2. shooting or dumping balls into two floor level goals, similar to hockey or soccer, except there are two goals instead of one

3. Defined offense and defense periods. Many people are saying (complaining?) that this years game is the most... whats the word.. brutal ever, and that many robots are being damaged and flipped within the acceptable guidelines of the game

4. An auton period that for most matches determines the outcome of the match (statistically so far). This means robots cant blow off auton and do nothing - they have to do something if they want to win.

5. Six robots on the field at the same time.

6. edited to add: I forgot about King of the Hill on the ramps for 25 points at the end!

so what would you add to make the game more interesting and challenging? Explosions? Chainsaws?

I still can't see why people enjoy destruction when it comes to robotics.

When you say "robotics competition", 98% of people think "BattleBots".
When you say "DARPA Grand Challenge", people just stare at you with gaping mouths.

But I guess this is what FIRST is all about: Spreading the productivity of education and science to a society of high opportunity and dreams. I think that robotics will soon evolve into a spectator sport (televised, like BattleBots) that is almost (if not more) interesting than football or soccer. My thoughts alone are enough to eliminate the word "lame" form my vocabulary when it comes to FIRST.

[KarenH]

As I've watched the games the last few years, I've noticed this phenomenon:

At the start of a regional, the game does look pretty lame. Last year, and at one regional this year, my team had me do scouting, so each match I focused on just one robot. I seemed to get a lot of really boring robots early in the regional--the ones that just sit there, or go in circles, or do other lame things. Face it, there a lot of lame robots out there early in the regionals. There are lame matches, too--one robot against three, for example.

But I think this is because many, if not most, teams are still getting their robots up to speed--if they're not still building them!

As the matches continue, the robots get better because they've been tweaked or fixed. The drivers get more practice. The autonomous code is finally capable of doing something useful. As a result, the matches get a little more interesting.

Saturday afternoon, when top robots take the field, with top drivers at the controls, the game can become very exciting. Every one is putting out maximum effort. There are less penalties, because people have figured out the game. The contests are a whole lot hotter (and, yes, this year, the computer scoring can make things REALLY tense, especially when the referees have to contradict the computer errors in the finals... )

I think this is true in any sport. It's the pro and college games that get televised, not the 8th grade PE classes. Why? Because the better players are more fun to watch.

I first noticed this phenomenon in the 1984 Olympics when I went to see a sport I'd only read about: dressage (sort of like dancing for horses). As a horse lover, I was eager to see it. But in the earlier rounds, it looked really lame. The riders appeared to flop around on their horses, all uncoordinated. I was thinking, "Is this IT??" It was so boring we left our seats for an hour or two. When we came back, it was like seeing a different show. Horses and riders were working together, and the gold medalist, a German man on an athletic bay horse, put on an unforgettable show with his victory lap. He and his horse worked perfectly together. That one performance alone would have made our time and money spent there worthwhile.

[the_short1]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Pucks in hockey.

WOW! im surprised your not canadian! . ..
.. i think tahts a great idea... playing hockey with robots... lots of teamwork.. passing the puck.. good traction needed..lots of weight for pushing vs being able to stop without a lot of momentum... . i like.. i like a lot..

i might just have to make a post about that!

... this year the game is like football (field goals into the uprights.. . and the low goals are touchdowns...).. think about it ...

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

[hockey pucks] are round!

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Not from the point of view of the stick they aren't...

I like the idea of using a game piece whose shape varies depending on the robot's point of view. Maybe the object discussed in this thread would make a good game piece?

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler
Pucks in hockey.

I dont know. That white ring in the center of the FIRST logo sure looks a lot like a hockey puck to me (donutized hockey puck).