|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: lamancy in the games
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, You all seem to be straying to far as to saying about how we win every competition and then your god or something and trying your very best to criticize the opposite of what I say. Debatable topic indeed but were talking about the lameness of the game idea rather than the lameness of the competition... maybe that will have some more mixed feelings
|
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: lamancy in the games
Quote:
Or you might end up giving us an even better game. We'll never know until you try it. |
|
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: lamancy in the games
Quote:
-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) |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: lamancy in the games
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. |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: lamancy in the games
Quote:
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? Last edited by KenWittlief : 29-03-2006 at 15:58. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: lamancy in the games
Quote:
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. Last edited by BHS_STopping : 29-03-2006 at 23:35. |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: lamancy in the games
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. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: lamancy in the games
Lame? I don't think so.
Last year when I first saw the game, I'll admit my first reaction was "that's it?" I mean, sure it was easy to understand from the audience POV, but.. it can't be hard or anything. As build season wore on, I was proven wrong- there were so many ways of going about this project! Then during competitions, I found myself holding my breath so many times, hoping that my team wouldn't fall over as it tried to cap, and it always seemed like forever when I was waiting for the score to come up. This year, at kickoff my first thought was that the game would fail to please. While I guess that's true for some.. This year has been so exciting for me! You can never really tell which way the matches will go- even with robots that seemed to have identical capabilities, I can never tell what will happen. As of now, I'm very fond of this year's game. It's easy for the audience to understand, there's options in what you can do, and it's a challenge for veterans and rookies equally. Teams can choose to specialize, or try get everything done. In my book, this game is marked as a success for the GDC. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: lamancy in the games
Quote:
Last edited by Rick TYler : 29-03-2006 at 15:32. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Hats off to the Cal Games 04 Volunteer | Ken Leung | Off-Season Events | 8 | 06-10-2004 03:23 |
| Register for California Robot Games 2004 Now! | Ken Leung | Off-Season Events | 0 | 19-07-2004 22:40 |
| Question about the game's name.. | Jack | General Forum | 5 | 10-01-2004 16:49 |
| Cal Games 2003 Charity Donations | Chris I | Western Region Robotics Forum | 0 | 12-09-2003 22:32 |