Thoughts about the future FIRST games

[David55]

I'm sure almost every FIRST participant has had a conversation with someone about FIRST. Whether it's a relative, a friend, a teacher or the guy sitting next to you on the plane, they all want to hear about the robotics competition. The question I usually get asked is: "what does your robot do?"
After giving a short explanation about Aim High and the robot's operation, I get asked: "well, what is it good for?"

Being asked this question several times, I came to think about what we really achieve with these 1200 teams participating in a robotics competition.
I know the main goal of FIRST is to inspire students and attract them to the world of science and technology. For this, obviously, you need a fun and attracting game. As Dean states in many speeches and interviews, FIRST's goal is to make science and technology as appealing as sports are to teenagers. Again, for this, a fun "sports style" game in needed.
But does having a fun game mean that we can't do something productive to society?

Let me give an example: FIRST has been in Israel for only 2 years, but Israeli high schools have been participating in robotics competitions for almost a decade. Many high schools have participated in a contest called Fire Fighting Robot Contest . In this contest, high school students from around the world build a fully autonomous robot that has to find it's way through a model apartment, avoid obstacles and blow out a candle, then return to it's beginning spot. Although this is done on a small scale it is easy to see the real world application that these robots can do. Very innovative designs and mechanisms can later be developed on a bigger scale and help solve the problem of extinguishing fires without dangering fire fighters.
Take a look at the DARPA grand challenge: fully autonomous vehicles have to navigate through the desert while avoiding obstacles and finding the shortest route, using GPS way points. The robots developed for this competition can later be used for various causes: getting humanitarian aid to far and isolated places , bringing military supplies to the battlefield etc.
If we take a look at this year's game, we can see that although there were very creative and innovative solutions, nothing new was discovered (ball shooters and collectors have been around for a while in sports). Most importantly, none of these robots solved any real world problems. Did we succeed in inspiring youth and attracting them to the world of science and technology, probably. But I think that in a competition on this scale (30000+ students) something beyond that is needed.

I am sure many real world problems can be applied to an FRC game. Take a look at FLL: the challenges are fun and at the same time make the students find solutions to real world problems. An FRC game can be fun, and at the same time do something that society can benefit from later on. In such a game, large corporations can later use the solutions teams came up with to help solve real world problems on a global scale. Just be seeing the amazing ideas teams came up with for this year's game, you can only imagine what ideas teams can come up with for solving real problems.

We are a great power. We are a group of 30,000 intelligent and creative minds. Why not use this power to help the world?

I apologize if anyone is bothered or offended by this post. I am not trying to criticize or complain to the GDC or FIRST, but just trying to share my point of view about the future FIRST games. Will this post change the future of FIRST?, probably not. But hopefully it will change, even a little, the way Dave or anyone involved in the game design process think about the future games.
Please share your thoughts about this idea.

David

(moderators, I know this belongs in the game design forum, but I would like it to get more exposure in the general forum)

[Tim Baird]

Originally Posted by David55

nothing new was discovered (ball shooters and collectors have been around for a while in sports). Most importantly, none of these robots solved any real world problems. Did we succeed in inspiring youth and attracting them to the world of science and technology, probably.

You hit the nail on the head with the second sentence in your quote. The point of FIRST is not to design new inventions or to solve the world's problems. That is what occurs after you've been in FIRST.

By participating in FIRST, high school students are learning more and more about the world of science and technology that is present and growing around them. Without FIRST, they might have never seen many of the wondrous things that are being created and developed everyday. By learning and being exposed to these things, they will then want to go on to college, learn more about the different fields, and then someday land a job where they can then begin designing new inventions. This is exactly what happened to me in high school, and I am eternally grateful for FIRST, what I learned through it, and the people that I worked with to get where I am today.

FIRST is just a single step in a multi-step process. Rome wasn't built in a day, and neither are solutions to the world's problems.

[i like dirt]

[quote=David55]I know the main goal of FIRST is to inspire students and attract them to the world of science and technology. For this, obviously, you need a fun and attracting game. As Dean states in many speeches and interviews, FIRST's goal is to make science and technology as appealing as sports are to teenagers. Again, for this, a fun "sports style" game in needed.


Exactly a "sports style" game. It doesn't have to be applied to the real world or a new invention. It's supposed to be like other sports. I mean when was the last time you saw a sport like baseball or basketball applied to the real world.

[Simon Strauss]

Originally Posted by i like dirt

Exactly a "sports style" game. It doesn't have to be applied to the real world or a new invention. It's supposed to be like other sports. I mean when was the last time you saw a sport like baseball or basketball applied to the real world.

Yeah, but if you look at FIRST's potential we could just as easily address important issues and still have active, audience captivating games. I'm not saying we should have FLL type games where the only purpose is to address issues directly but instead like the 2004 game (there may be others before my time). Games where scores could be easily approximated by the audience, had an exciting extra point ending and some physical contact, the major issues being argued for sport type games to keep FIRST appealing, but addressed the issue of step climbing which some teams came up with very creative solutions for. Imagine the world issues that could be solved by a simple jello based game.
-Simon

[Jherbie53]

If they want to give us real world problems in the game, its OK. If they want to keep giving us "sports" in the game, its OK. I know we are all going to say that FIRST is about getting high school students interested in the different 'tech' fields out there. But it really doesn't matter if we solve a problem now or in 6-7 years when we're out of college. When FIRST gives us a game each year, its just that, a game. We brainstorm, design, build, and compete for the purpose of having fun. If we just so happen to come up with world changing features or designs, we do, and if we don't, we don't. The design committee is always giving us new and exciting challenges to accomplish each and every year, and I've always been amazed by what my team and other teams have built to over come the very same challenge that they delivered.

Right now I can wait until January for the game, whatever it will be about. I'm sure its going to be interesting, as will the future of fire fighting, thanks to teams like 67, the HOT team and 322, the FIRE team.

[irishninja]

Honestly, if this robot had to solve problems I wouldn't have nearly as much fun. It sounds terrible, but it's true. When there is a real problem, everything is a lot more serious. Yes, we are learning about technology, and science, and math, but we are also having fun doing it.

I just don't think I would have as much fun if I was doing something that is a "real world" problem.

[Beth Sweet]

David, I have argued this for a while now (see my "FIRST solving world issues" post). I want to see something on a robot that can make a difference in daily life. Slowly, I think some aspects might be filtering in.

One of my mentors, for instance, is an alum of Team 33, the Killer Bees. One of the accomplishments that he brags is that something designed for their (2003? 2004?) robot is now being used on DaimlerChrysler cars.

Personally, I would prefer to have something that would be able to really make a difference. I would like to see something where a robot solves problems. Realistically, I'm not sure if that type of thing is a possibility in this program. That would take a lot of money, a lot of time and a lot more expertice than we can ask in this competition.

I do love the idea though. Please keep dreaming big, we need people in this world who aren't afraid to!

[Jeremiah Johnson]

You know. To address the solving problems using robots thought. You can put an infinite number of sensors on a robot and the programing could be as long as the Bible written four times over, but that can still never compare to the problem solving ability of the human brain. Great, we can build robots that do anything realistically. But what FIRST is about, is getting these kids to think about these problems at an early age. When taught at an earlier age, people have a longer time to develop a solution to a problem. FIRST is just 4 or 5 steps in the infinite staircase of science and technology.

You have to get students interested before they start to think about something. How do you do that? With an exciting game. I love to throw stuff at people, now I know how to build a robot to do it for me. I'm going to stop with the self-inspirational thoughts now...

Thanks for thinking...