Rethinking Team Contests [Archive]

Kong

01-14-2011, 11:12 AM

jim5cents

01-14-2011, 11:26 AM

1. Generally, contest lengths have been too long
2. As long as we don't repeat contests, I don't see this as a problem.
3. This is the biggest problem, but it is due to contest design. The last several contest have not been true team contests, instead, they have been individual contest that rewards the team with the best individual effort. In Tag Team, we had a player go alone for most of the contest. The outcome of that entire contest was changed because of the individual effort of another player. Nacho Cheese was 100% percent based on individual effort. Therefore, a lot of people mail it in because they don't want to put in the 8-12 hours a day to complete with those who can.
4. You need team contests, not individual contests
5. Holidays are an issue. Tri-annual contests? Or shorter contests.
6. I don't think so. I think the bulk of the players here are in it for the glory and not the payday.

joz

01-14-2011, 11:30 AM

1: I'm good with 4 contests per year
2: I'm still new to team contests. But for those that may be bored...think of a new contest to play.
3: This is probably the biggest problem with the teams as the best players get picked up by one or two teams. Not trying to diss anyone's current skill level, but the top dogs are not evenly balanced. (I don't consider myself to be a top dog)

This is what I suggest.
Bring down the team roster to 6 and create new teams with the extra players. In order to avoid having to pick who leaves, might I recommend to drop volunteers first. If not enough are willing to leave, seniority should kick in. (or we could simply scrap all teams and do a random draw with the luck of the dice roll)

4: I think the contests are good. But if you don't like them, just make one up and submit your idea.
5: That's part of the challenge.
6: Interesting. I'm good with the badge alone, but if people are willing to put some money where their mouth is...

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 12:50 PM

I do think there are far too many. Most go 4-8 weeks, and then with one month off (considering the 4/year current plan) there is almost no break. I think 2 per year is maybe the perfect number, and it would probably make each one a more special RU event. 4 is just way way too many.

I don't really think that is the case.

I don't know about intimidation, but I can agree with Jim on the time aspect. On average I have had about 1-2 hours to play in each round of the past contests. Some people have far far more which is okay I suppose, but it can make things very uneven at times.

I wouldn't say bad ideas, but I do think that some types lend themselves more to team play than others.

For example, I think something like Clash of the Titans was one of the best team contest formats for 2 reasons:

1) It required the whole team to play. It wasn't about an individual's high score as much as the total combined score from the whole team. This made every person's score important and valuable.

and most importantly...

2) The scores were hidden until the round was over. No one knew what anyone else was scoring, so each person just had to do their best. This almost completely negates the "Camper Effect" that benefits people who have enormous amounts of time. I would suggest implementing this for almost every team contest if possible.

Bad timing - holidays.

This last one was definitely bad timing.

Lack of prizes and plunder. We need real cash and loot to give away.

I don't know that that should be the case for every contest. I think for the site as a whole it might be cool to do something (maybe an indivdual contest) that might be for plunder and could bring in new people to the site, but not every contest.

So what are your thoughts. What do you want to see in future contests - both team and individual. Why do you think fewer people are participating?

I think for me, and some people on EC who have spoken to me about these types of issues, there are just too many team contests a year. It can lead to burn out for all but the ones who have almost unlimited time on the site.

I think both team and individual contests matter. It shouldn't be one or the other, but having maybe two team contests a year could significantly help lessen the burn out effect.

joz

01-14-2011, 01:12 PM

Individual contests would be cool if it pitted everyone in a free for all. The single winner would be whomever won the most rounds and gets a badge for their victory. We could set up a tournament based on genre like vertical shooters, beat em ups, platforms, puzzles, etc.. So all rounds would be the same genre and you get a cool badge that fits the contest.

CatalystiCam

01-14-2011, 01:37 PM

Participation has been going down. This thread is an attempt to determine why and to try to fix it.

Some possibilities.

Fatigue. Too many contests. Or too intense of contests.
Repetition. Just bored with the whole concept because it is no longer "new".
Intimidation. Competing directly against the 5 or 10 top tier players that we have (many of whom have multiple world records) seems futile and not worth even trying.
Bad contest ideas.
Bad timing - holidays.
[*
+-]Lack of prizes and plunder. We need real cash and loot to give away.

Some of these are fixable if we just figure out what the cause is. Example, if it is fatigue then we have fewer contests. If it is boredom we come up with some better ideas. If it is intimidation we come up with some ideas that are more balanced and fair. Etc.

So what are your thoughts. What do you want to see in future contests - both team and individual. Why do you think fewer people are participating?

1.there definitely isn't too many contests. 4 is fine but I think 1 month should be the maximum length, because, after that, people begin to lose interest it would seem.

2. I agree with others, I love contests.

3. I think I can vouch for this. I know I'm far from the skill level of the likes of the bagels, dojah, etc. for general games. Only time I think I can stand a chance is with my best genre. Even so, I don't think it's so true speaking personally. Using Pururun as an example, I hated that game, I was on my own against Seahawk & Dudebro along with bluej & jojo and elrod too. I still tried for a while to hang in there but I wasn't too good at the game and I was facing tag teams on my own. I think I gave up within the last day. I can't vouch for others, but if people are determined enough, they'll try.

4. I'm sorry to say, but I disliked the last contest. I know it wasn't serious and maybe it was the lack of participation but I just didn't feel motivated. I had a blast in the first few rounds, but it seems everyone lost interest after that almost. I lacked time for the most part as did others but still...

For example, I think something like Clash of the Titans was one of the best team contest formats for 2 reasons:

1) It required the whole team to play. It wasn't about an individual's high score as much as the total combined score from the whole team. This made every person's score important and valuable.

and most importantly...

2) The scores were hidden until the round was over. No one knew what anyone else was scoring, so each person just had to do their best. This almost completely negates the "Camper Effect" that benefits people who have enormous amounts of time. I would suggest implementing this for almost every team contest if possible.

Very true, I was hoping we could have another one of these contests.

5. Having a christmas contest seemed alright at the time but now it just shows people didn't have the time or would rather spend time with family and friends, and why wouldn't we want that? Same goes for summer, many go for holidays I believe. I think the June and December contests should be pushed back a month each.

6. If were talking about everyone chipping a few bucks into a pool for the winners then it sounds like it would make it more fun, interesting and worth it but not everyone has that liberty or a credit card, though you can buy pre paid credit cards.
If you mean just RU forming prize money then it would make a difference, but that's up to you.

I am actually quite interested with what joz said. I think team sizes could use a little shifting. I also wish it was more fair, EC seems stacked at the moment if you know what I mean. VB sort of too...

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 01:39 PM

joz

01-14-2011, 01:48 PM

...you're right.

Kong

01-14-2011, 01:51 PM

Possible Solutions:

Shorter contests.
Contests that require more team effort.
I think everyone agrees these two are needed. We will keep these in mind when designing future contests.

Uneven time per player
I have some ideas to solve this. I don't think this can be solved in every contest but it can be improved.

I just sent an idea for the next contest to Tenser for review. It would require exactly 1 hour from each person on your team and then be over. The hour could be scheduled by each player any time over a 2 week period. I think that would solve lots of the problems - fatigue, team effort, shorter contests, even time.

Fewer contests.
I think there are lots of different opinions on this one. What ever number we choose, someone will be unsatisfied.

Redistribution of the super star players.
Smaller teams/more teams.
I think these would be best in the long run but finding volunteers to break up their team might not be smooth.

Who is for or against smaller teams and/or redistribution of power?

Prizes
Sounds like most agree this would be a good solution for individual contests, not teams.

Slime Slayer

01-14-2011, 01:57 PM

A few points from my perspective:
- 24 hours is not enough time for a game, most of VB could only pay the first portion of the games, leaving the last portion for people to beat our scores, while we just watched from work, without a chance to play again.

-People may not have participated because someone else from their team already had first place, it's hard to judge paticipation from this contest because some people wouldnt submit unless they had the new high score, a couple of occassions I had played, but didnt get first so I didnt submit anything, giving the appearance that I didnt play.

-Real life was a huge factor for me this past round, I'm a very busy person and I always have something to do, when I played I was neglecting something else everytime.

-Maybe the amount you can play could be restricted in someway, these contest have a tendency to going to whoever has the most time.

---------- Post added at 07:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 PM ----------

Also some quality control for the games, I like the randomization thing, but when something like Home Improvement comes up, it should be skipped.

---------- Post added at 07:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:57 PM ----------

Also coin op only.

joz

01-14-2011, 01:57 PM

Redistribution of the super star players.
Smaller teams/more teams.
I think these would be best in the long run but finding volunteers to break up their team might not be smooth.

Who is for or against smaller teams and/or redistribution of power?

I like the idea of breaking up all teams and rolling a die to make new teams of 6. That way everyone is on equal terms without having to make anyone feel bad for having to get booted out of their team.

CatalystiCam

01-14-2011, 02:02 PM

I just sent an idea for the next contest to Tenser for review. It would require exactly 1 hour from each person on your team and then be over. The hour could be scheduled by each player any time over a 2 week period. I think that would solve lots of the problems - fatigue, team effort, shorter contests, even time.

an hour to play? Only problem I have with this is that it would be hard to learn a game in only an hour if you don't know it.

Redistribution of the super star players.
Smaller teams/more teams.
I think these would be best in the long run but finding volunteers to break up their team might not be smooth.

Who is for or against smaller teams and/or redistribution of power?

I agree most teams probably don't want to split but I'm for it, things are a bit too one-sided at the moment. I'm also for dropping the teams numbers by 1 or 2 players to possibly remove some of the dead weight.

---------- Post added at 01:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:59 PM ----------

Also some quality control for the games, I like the randomization thing, but when something like Home Improvement comes up, it should be skipped.

Care to elaborate? Home improvement wasn't so bad, it's games like speed coin that are.

---------- Post added at 01:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:00 PM ----------

I like the idea of breaking up all teams and rolling a die to make new teams of 6. That way everyone is on equal terms without having to make anyone feel bad for having to get booted out of their team.

Yeah, unfortunately I think the idea of making all new teams through a draft or an even mixed base would be for the best...

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 02:57 PM

As for breaking up teams, I am not in favor of that. If the majority wants that then that might be the way to go, and I will be happy to withdraw from teams in general.

EC does have some great players without question, but more than that, I believe EC has always done as well as it has because everyone on the team genuinely likes working with each other and we help motivate each other to succeed.

There are great top tier players on each team . Just using the top 25 of the leaderboard as a semi-solid example to locate top tier leaderboard players we have this:

- Mega Men: Jozman, Jable, Kong, Fogelmir, Timh, and Crispy

- GOM: Seahawk, Sabby, and Tanc24

- VB: Dojah, Elrod, Stevencassidy

- EC: Josephjo, Gamenguru, Winnebagel

I would also argue that each team has other epic players not on the leaderboard (i.e. Cam3ron, Agnostic79, Enemy Ace,
Jim5cents, Thunderlips, etc.). In my opinion, much of the problem is not with players being distributed unfairly, it has to do with teams not being able to motivate players to play or players just not having time. If the teams are redistributed, you will probably see the same issue again, only with the players who used to be active becoming inactive because they are not with their team.

I for one am in the above boat. Many of you don't know, and some of you do, but I have as of late have been strongly considering leaving team contests for good, but the thing that has kept me around is the closeness of EC's members. I guess I can't speak for everyone, but I believe all the EC members just enjoy hanging out with each other. I think that is also one of the main reasons the team has done as well as it has. EC is sort of like a team/support group, and I think that has been a major factor.

Kugyince

01-14-2011, 02:59 PM

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 03:18 PM

Bad games like Speed Coin have given us some great contest moments. Also "bad" is subjective. I enjoy tons of games most others would consider bad and dislike lots of games that most consider great.

Poll added.

I agree with that. I love a lot of games that people deem bad. True, the Speed Coin round was not only one of Seahawk's finest moments, but in my mind one of RU's greatest moments of competition.

joz

01-14-2011, 03:24 PM

That, and when would anyone have played that game if it weren't for the contest?

---------- Post added at 03:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------

There are great top tier players on each team . Just using the top 25 of the leaderboard as a semi-solid example to locate top tier leaderboard players we have this:

.

I really don't believe that I am the second best player here in RU. I'm only up there because of the sheer number of games I've played and have posted scores for. So that leader board is a bit misleading.

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 03:28 PM

That, and when would anyone have played that game if it weren't for the contest?

---------- Post added at 03:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------

I really don't believe that I am the second best player here in RU. I'm only up there because of the sheer number of games I've played and have posted scores for. So that leader board is a bit misleading.

I don't think you give yourself enough credit especially considering that you play 90% of the games you play on the keyboard. :o

jim5cents

01-14-2011, 03:34 PM

With WB, I'm against team restructuring, particularly in an automated fashion. The reason for this is because people take pride in their teams. The GOM like being grumpy. VB likes being "vicious" and so on.

If we ever did go to smaller team size, which I am in favor of, then the teams should be allowed to align themselves. Yes, I recognize what would happen is a 6 man super group was formed, but I don't see it happening. The rivalvries already in place would probably prevent that.

joz

01-14-2011, 03:57 PM

I don't think you give yourself enough credit especially considering that you play 90% 100% of the games you play on the keyboard. :o

As always, your words are too kind. But I know my skills are not that finely honed.

---------- Post added at 03:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:49 PM ----------

Sabby has a point...I sort of like your idea.

sabby

01-14-2011, 04:22 PM

Sabby has a point...I sort of like your idea.

I do?!?! I don't remember making one.:bulgy-eyes:

joz

01-14-2011, 04:23 PM

I do?!?! I don't remember making one.:bulgy-eyes:

I hate the week before school starts.

sabby

01-14-2011, 04:36 PM

:D Quite alright joz.

I guess I could say something about the topic:

My problem with the contests was the constant drama. Kong and Tenser spend countless hours creating what they believe to be fun and creative contests. These guys are smart and I commend them for all their hard work. Even with that, they are not going to have a written answer to every situation that may/may not happen during a contest. If they did, no one would participate because the rules would be pages upon pages long, lawyers would get involved, sucking any remaining fun out of what may be a great contest.

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 04:40 PM

Gamenguru

01-14-2011, 05:10 PM

Fatigue. Too many contests. Or too intense of contests.

I have no problem with 'intense' contests, but I am having an extremely difficult time keeping up with four team contests a year. I have been getting pretty close to the point of burn out myself. My preference would be two contests per year.

Repetition. Just bored with the whole concept because it is no longer "new".

Not really an issue for me.

Intimidation. Competing directly against the 5 or 10 top tier players that we have (many of whom have multiple world records) seems futile and not worth even trying.

I'm not sure if I agree with the player intimidation thing, but what can be intimidating (or frustrating) to me is going up against players who have virtually unlimited time to play, and always feeling like you are trying to accomplish within a couple of hours what someone else took 12 hours to accomplish.

Bad contest ideas.

WB brought up a good example with the Clash of the Titans contest. That was one of the best team competition ideas I've seen so far, because combining multiple player scores really encouraged whole team participation.

I would also like to reitterate what was previously stated about 'hiding scores' during team competitions. The issue that was mentioned about players setting scores early on, only to have others come behind and beat them would be a non-issue if all scores were hidden during contests. I think 'hidden scores' would help to even out the playing field in general. It would force players to play solely based on their overall skill from the beginning, instead of just waiting around until someone else posts a score and logs off.

Bad timing - holidays.

Definitely. I don't think that people should ever have to choose between time with their families during the holidays and duty (for lack of a better word) to their RU team.

Lack of prizes and plunder. We need real cash and loot to give away.

Tangible awards/prizes sounds like it could be an interesting idea. However, the hope of winning prizes has never been the motivating reason that I compete on RU.

So what are your thoughts. What do you want to see in future contests - both team and individual. Why do you think fewer people are participating?

If players are feeling anything like I have been, then they are getting a little burned out from too many competitions. I have been pretty close to stepping back from team play myself recently, but have stayed around so far because I like hanging out with the people on EC. For this reason I am against splitting up the teams.

Do we have some good players on EC, sure, and so do all of the other teams. However, gaming skills have always been a secondary requirement to joining EC. The first requirement (and you can ask anyone on the team) is that you be a cool person to hang with. We've never been interested in just getting players because they are good players. Splitting up the team (in my opinion) is not an option.

Mareeps

01-14-2011, 05:13 PM

Personally i think 3 contests would be enough for a year. This past contest seemed to come right after the last.

StarfoxFan2009

01-14-2011, 05:39 PM

here's the thing though, in my particular case i can't get AOX to work on the laptop but it works on the acer computer

Wolf

01-14-2011, 05:51 PM

I love team contests, but for some reason I didnt play that much in this one, I think the main reason was the 24 hour window I was used to the marathon tournment or the tag team one that I was elimationed in the first round lol.

I have some ideas for new team contests if you are looking for ideas?

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 06:11 PM

As always, your words are too kind. But I know my skills are not that finely honed.

Nah. It's true. I am always amazed at guys like you and Tails who do so well using only a key board. I would love to see how high you could reach if you used a controller.

Kugyince

01-14-2011, 06:13 PM

Speaking as a player only my three issues with the contest were:

1. Time Consumption. 90% of my time on RU is spent modding. It has been about two weeks since I've played a game here. This potentially can be worked around.

2. Bickering. It's not enjoyable to play with grown men who at times act half their age.

3. Rules Lawyering. See above. Way too much of a headache.

I'm in favor of two team contests a year. One during each equinox thus avoiding the winter holidays and summer vacations. We can supplement those contests with single player contests during the off seasons.

joz

01-14-2011, 06:15 PM

I say the more the better Wolfman.

---------- Post added at 06:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:13 PM ----------

I'm in favor of two team contests a year. One during each equinox thus avoiding the winter holidays and summer vacations. We can supplement those contests with single player contests during the off seasons.

This sounds like a good idea. I'm for this.

Wolf

01-14-2011, 06:17 PM

one idea is a baseball type of scoring so you have the whole team contribe. I have to think of rules and stuff for this idea but I would like to do something like this.

Kong

01-14-2011, 06:28 PM

I don't think random team assignment would be good. Like WB said, many people specifically want to be on their team and not just randomly shuffled around.

Also coin op only.Discuss. Does everyone agree with coin-op only?

Wolf

01-14-2011, 06:31 PM

I think coin op is better

joz

01-14-2011, 06:32 PM

1--Discuss. Does everyone agree with this?

2--I don't think random team assignment would be good. Like WB said, many people specifically want to be on their team and not just randomly shuffled around.

1: I think that's probably a good idea.

2: I can understand that. However, I still think that the teams need to go down in size though.

elrod21

01-14-2011, 06:34 PM

Guess I should add my 2 cents.

1. For me it wasn't fatigue as I am relatively new here. But I can see how 4 contests a year can be a bit much.

2. I don't think anyone is bored with it. Competitions are always exciting.

3. Intimidation doesn't enter into my mind. I fully respect the abilities of my opponents and some game types I may feel gives them an advantage, but I will always give it a try when I can. I can see how some might feel intimidated though.

4. I don't think the Contest ideas are really bad in general. There may be tweaks that can be done here and there to make them better.

5. Bad timing. This I can see. Family had to come first and I didn't get to play when I normally would because of it.

6. I think the rewards that are already in place work. It gives the winning team players bragging rights which should be enough in my opinion. My fear is money could potentially make the civil less civil. It has a funny way of making people take a competition like this too seriously and I don't believe that would be healthy for this site.

I wasn't aware that there have been contests where you couldn't see the posted scores. As WB already pointed out that would avoid camping and level the playing field as you just do your best with the time you have then wait and see what happens.

I also echo the sentiment that 24 hours wasn't enough time for a round. I actually would have preferred this last contest if it had been 48 hours and 5 wins to take the competition. In 24 hours you may only get one shot at trying a game and if you have never played it before it may take to your second attempt to get into the "flow" of the game to post a decent score.

No matter what though I really appreciate all the hard work that goes into making these contests and running them and the site for free. It can be a thankless job sometimes I'm sure but just wanted to say thanks for creating such a great place to play the classics and compete with like minded individuals. Wish I had found it much sooner. :D

Kugyince

01-14-2011, 06:34 PM

Not at all. Too many good console only games out there to go coin-op only.

Thunderlips

01-14-2011, 06:37 PM

I'm still the new kid in town but here's some thoughts...

I'd like to first thank those that put in the time setting these contests up for us. All we have to do is show up and play so big ups to you. Prize money is not necessary its all about the fun and sportsmanship.

I enjoyed being in a team contest. I dont feel I have the time to be a threat in individual contests so it was great to be able to chip in when I could. Nobody played more then half the rounds I'm sure, its just not possible as an adult. Whoever is playing 12 hours per round :o thats unhealthy even for an unemployed twenty-something in mom's basement. I think and hour is reasonable though I admit to putting in more time the final night as we faced elimination (much to my wifes displeasure :quiet:)

I could be wrong but when E.C. got rolling and took the lead it seemed participation from the other two teams dropped right off. Sure the time zone thing was tough and people were away but bottom line E.C. won because they were the best "team". I'm not so keen on the "if you cant beat them, redistribute them" concept. It would be more satisfying to beat them in a contest as they are now then a watered down E.C.

If the idea of giving each player only an hour to post their best score can be done and policed for a future team contest I like the concept.

Dudebro

01-14-2011, 07:26 PM

1. Honestly the contest times blur together for me so I don't care how many we have. But, since I know it effects some people to the point of being impossible I say we go to 2-3 times a year instead and see how that goes.

2. I don't think anyone is really bored with the concept, if they are they probably went inactive anyways.

3. Yeah. It is intimidating to log on and see huge scores from several different people in a game I've never played before. That was even worse this contest due to the 24 hour rule. Hiding contest scores would kinda help but in an "out of sight out of mind" kind of way.

4. Absolutely not. I can't think of a contest that was bad really. This one wasn't my thing but obviously some people loved it and had lots of fun. Can't please everyone.

5. For sure. Obviously I don't care about the holidays but it seems like most everyone else had limited time because of it. I'd like to think that's what happened to 90% of GOM but honestly I still have no idea.

6. I think real prizes might make the situation worse. More pressure to do well and less about the fun. Single contests seems like a great idea for this. I might even have some crappy PS2 games to give away, if I can find them.

So what are your thoughts.Team contests 2-3 times a year and more individual contests, even user submitted ones. For the single contests I'd love to see some user made ones, approved by the proper authorities though(unless there's no badge then it wouldn't matter).

Not at all. Too many good console only games out there to go coin-op only.
100% agree with this. Why would we even consider only doing coin op? That makes no sense to me.

Tails

01-14-2011, 07:51 PM

I for one am in the above boat. Many of you don't know, and some of you do, but I have as of late have been strongly considering leaving team contests for good, but the thing that has kept me around is the closeness of EC's members. I guess I can't speak for everyone, but I believe all the EC members just enjoy hanging out with each other. I think that is also one of the main reasons the team has done as well as it has. EC is sort of like a team/support group, and I think that has been a major factor.
I've honestly thought of leaving contests too, due to demand, and this one totally conflicted with my schedule, which gave me half the time to play and most I didn't even like. But yes, everyone in EC has a bond. If one of us struggles another helps them succeed. It's always been this way, now EC can show it isn't WB and 8 other guys as some of you thought in other contests.

Fatigue. Too many contests. Or too intense of contests. - TOO MANY. I am infavor of 2, 3 is most.
Repetition. Just bored with the whole concept because it is no longer "new". - No, I like this way. Dodgeball and Clash of the titans were my favorites.
Intimidation. Competing directly against the 5 or 10 top tier players that we have (many of whom have multiple world records) seems futile and not worth even trying. - When you are on a short leash with no time, why even bother? I think it's a time issue with me if anything.
Bad contest ideas. - I think ones need to be reused like Dodgeball. That'd be cool to see.
Bad timing - holidays. - Yes, totally.
Lack of prizes and plunder. We need real cash and loot to give away. - No, that'd get more complaining.

Anyways, I am sick and tired of every contest being a complaint. I won't go on but I'm tired of it. Why can't we have fun instead of someone hawking at something when it don't go their way? =/

Wolf

01-14-2011, 07:52 PM

the one day I was thinking about doing a video game marathon which would be mastering 26 games by myself I might try that. if anyone like that idea maybe we can do that has a free for all contest

Demon-Mask

01-14-2011, 07:58 PM

Okay, so I've never participated in one of these contests, so my input is probably invalid, but I'll give it a shot anyway.

Placing a contest near the holidays, a time which people spend with their families, is bad for participation.

There are too few teams, or too few members allowed per-team, meaning that there isn't many people who are even eligible to participate in these contests, as you must be a member of one of these teams to participate.
I have a good solution for this:
You set up several tiers of teams, top tier being those that exist now, and then some lower tier teams, of which there will be more of, but the same number of members per team. Have each contest multi-tiered, as in there will be a top-tier winner and a winner in each tier, as well as an overall winner.
More people would be eligible to participate, meaning more would. Take me for example, I've been interested in a few of these contests in the past, yet I have no team affiliation, as it should be since I am not a top-tier gamer. So, I am not eligible to participate in these contests, therefore I don't. If I were eligible, I would participate. I don't have many high-scores, as I am not a score driven gamer, but if there were a contest involved, I'd be more interested in playing for competition, at which point my true skills would shine through, though I guess they'd be shockingly dull.

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 08:00 PM

Not at all. Too many good console only games out there to go coin-op only.

Agreed Ten. I don't see why it would only be kept to Coin Op for the simple reason that it would dramatically limit the pool of games you can choose from for contests. Also, I agree that there are many great systems to ignore.

Dudebro

01-14-2011, 08:05 PM

now EC can show it isn't WB and 8 other guys as some of you thought in other contests.
I always thought WB was one guy controlling like 3-4 accounts?!?! I just figured he was really into role playing.

Demon-Mask

01-14-2011, 08:07 PM

I still like my tier idea. But maybe that's just me wanting a shot at the contests like all of you gaming gods, though I'm just a knight.

Tails

01-14-2011, 08:08 PM

I always thought WB was one guy controlling like 3-4 accounts?!?! I just figured he was really into role playing.
:p

Wolf

01-14-2011, 08:08 PM

lol I know it all along winnebagel is also gamenguru and bluej

joz

01-14-2011, 08:11 PM

Dudebro

01-14-2011, 08:11 PM

@DM- I think your idea would be too complicated. Maybe I'm wrong but half way through your explanation I felt like it was too much.

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 08:26 PM

I always thought WB was one guy controlling like 3-4 accounts?!?! I just figured he was really into role playing.

:o

http://bensonz.com/clayface.jpg So you knew? All this time you knew?

I am also...

http://www.mrdowling.com/images/702spartacus.jpg Spartacus!

Gamenguru

01-14-2011, 08:30 PM

I always thought WB was one guy controlling like 3-4 accounts?!?! I just figured he was really into role playing.

Wow, so did I DB. I guess you learn something new every day. ???

;)

joz

01-14-2011, 08:30 PM

I am also...

http://www.mrdowling.com/images/702spartacus.jpg Spartacus!

:in-love:

Winnebagel

01-14-2011, 08:39 PM

:in-love:

:lol: I hoped you would get that cross pollinated reference. You are awesome friend. :)

CatalystiCam

01-14-2011, 08:54 PM

First off, I don't know why you guys want to solely play coin op games. It makes no sense really. sorry if that offends you but if a game has a good scoring system, then why not include it.

I guess people are right (whoever said that, I'm sorry). Bad games like speed coin, Home improvement or 145 K III make it interesting sometimes. I'm really proud to say I won a game as annoying and laughable as home improvement personally. ;)

@ Dm, I love a challenge, as cool as the tier idea is it can be really fun to be the underdog against someone really good, though I mostly lost those match-ups, they are fun. 2 on 1 against me... Not so much lol

I actually want 3 team contests a year. 2 is a bit less than I'd please and 4 is really too much. Not to mention with 3 times a year we can regulate it to miss the two holidays still. I don't mind keeping four, but then I'm out on Christmas and summer anyways. For sure summer, I'm gone to the lake all summer.

Either way, tails and them are right, contests should be about fun, that is it.

Slime Slayer

01-14-2011, 10:25 PM

My reasoning behind saying coin-op only:
-There are 8000+ coin-ops on the site, thats plenty
-No cheating possible
-Quick games, I'd rather be able to make 10 attempts at a coin-op then 2 attempts on a console game
-The games are designed for competitive play
-More interesting games
-Alot broader variation in the games themselves, for example the worst graphics on the site are coin-ops, and the best graphics on the site are coin-ops, this goes for esentially all categories: sound, gamplay, ect.

Bluej

01-14-2011, 10:30 PM

Fatigue. Too many contests. Or too intense of contests.
I agree. I think there should only be 2 contests a year and then individual ones in-between so each person can decide. I wasn't able to play this round due to the holidays and I had some personal stuff happen.
Repetition. Just bored with the whole concept because it is no longer "new".
Not bored. I like contests as long as they aren't very long.
Intimidation. Competing directly against the 5 or 10 top tier players that we have (many of whom have multiple world records) seems futile and not worth even trying.
No this isn't an issue.
Bad contest ideas.
I like some of the ideas in the past and I agree I think it should be more a team effort.
Bad timing - holidays.
Yes, very bad timing.
Lack of prizes and plunder. We need real cash and loot to give away.
No the badge idea is fine for team contests.

So what are your thoughts. What do you want to see in future contests - both team and individual. Why do you think fewer people are participating?

Bad timing and people are tired (holidays). I know for myself the last contest before this one was very long and grueling. I liked some of the games from the last one (like Pururun and others) so coin-up only wouldn't be very fun.

I like the idea of the hidden scores I think it would even out the playing field.

I’m against splitting up the teams unless the individual team wishes to.

Dudebro

01-14-2011, 10:54 PM

Quick games, I'd rather be able to make 10 attempts at a coin-op then 2 attempts on a console game
Good point.

-The games are designed for competitive playGood point.

-More interesting gamesCompletely subjective.

Alot broader variation in the games themselvesI don't see this at all. There's some variety but compared to other consoles it's a joke. Or it is from what I've tried.

CatalystiCam

01-14-2011, 11:32 PM

I think we could hold certain contests that are specifically coin op only, but don't limit them all to that.

Gamenguru

01-14-2011, 11:41 PM

Sorry, but I don't get the whole coin-op argument at all. Why would we want to limit the contests and not include all possible games that are available use?

There are a lot of great games on the consoles that never appeared in the arcades. Also, console games are not the only games that are lengthy, there are many coin-op games that take a long time to beat as well.

Pretty much just scratching my head at this point guys. ???

Dudebro

01-15-2011, 12:32 AM

Don't worry GG we're all a little confused I think.:lol: Cam has a point, good idea for some contests but not all. I think that would be a good compromise.

Slime Slayer

01-15-2011, 12:44 AM

I can understand that most people wont see my point of view on the coin-op subject, but to me, my arguments are valid.

I just see such a wider variety in them, as opposed to the consoles, where you already pretty much know what your getting. I have already played at least half of the console games on the site, (I am a bit of an emulation freak) so that probably has something to do with it.

Josephjo

01-15-2011, 03:57 AM

Yes - 2 contests a year

No - split teams up

Yes - limit players time in future contests - if it can be done.

Prize money is not necessary its all about the fun and sportsmanship.

http://i54.tinypic.com/5nw0mh.jpg IMO prizes are not a good idea. People are saying things have been too intense already. Believe me, things could get far worse if money/prizes are involved.

Slime Slayer

01-15-2011, 04:04 AM

T-sirts would be a good prize.

---------- Post added at 10:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 AM ----------

Random dvd's or ps2 games are a bad prize.

Josephjo

01-15-2011, 04:07 AM

T-sirts would be a good prize.

---------- Post added at 10:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 AM ----------

Random dvd's or ps2 games are a bad prize.

I'm fine with T-shirts. I just have a problem with R.U getting invaded by a load of Prize hungry pro's from Twin Galaxies. Who crush all my scores in one afternoon and I end up in the gutter.:(

Dudebro

01-15-2011, 04:41 AM

Nah I think you guys misunderstand. These DVDs and other assorted junk is literally that, junk. T shirts would be awesome but they'd also cost money. The stuff currently being floated as prizes was trash at one point I think.:lol: I forget it's exact origin but I doubt it cost Kong much if anything.

As far as I know no actual cash was considered as prizes. I think it was meant to be those disposable credit or points cards.

I just have a problem with R.U getting invaded by a load of Prize hungry pro's from Twin Galaxies.
Think they'd bother for some Madden on PS2? ;)

Slime Slayer

01-15-2011, 04:56 AM

The Billy Mitchell's and Todd Roger's of the world don't want to separate themselves from the official records, too many good gamers out there. By making it really hard for someone to,,,,,bedtime.

Wolf

01-16-2011, 12:36 AM

here are some rules I though of for the baseball idea I have
-If a team has ten members the tenth members can be used has a pinch hitter for someone that is not active.
-Teams' captains comes up with the lineup for example

#1 Member 1
#2 Member 2
#3 Member 3
#4 Member 4
#5 Member 5
#6 Member 6
#7 Member 7
#8 Member 8
#9 Member 9

-There is a total of 9 rounds(innings) so there will be 9 games
-The max points per round is ten
-The player up has 3 attempts to meet the score required for a single, double, triple, or homerun if not the player is out and the next player comes up.

these are the only rules I though of so far tell me what you think of it?

CatalystiCam

01-16-2011, 12:55 AM

That's actually a really cool idea honestly wolf. Would there be different score requirements per amount of bases though, is that what you mean in the one bit there?

Wolf

01-16-2011, 01:00 AM

yeah like score one for single and so on home run should be very hard to get

CatalystiCam

01-16-2011, 01:01 AM

isn't it then possible that every player can advance?

Wolf

01-16-2011, 01:12 AM

what do you mean?

CatalystiCam

01-16-2011, 01:32 AM

well, if there is a set score you have to beat to advance then... Oh, I forgot about the point factor. Well, when a person gets an out, are they out of the contest?

Slime Slayer

01-16-2011, 01:37 AM

Nice idea WM, I see a lot of potential.

Wolf

01-16-2011, 01:41 AM

no they are not of the contest they are out intil the next time they are up like real baseball

---------- Post added at 07:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:41 AM ----------

@sc thanks

Demon-Mask

01-16-2011, 11:37 AM

Did you ever ask to join any team? That's what I did the first time. I agree that there need to be more teams, but there just aren't too many members willing to play. It took me roughly about a month to gather 7 members willing to join a team.
A couple of times, I did. One of the times was when ArcadeOX wasn't compatible with Firefox 3.6, so I was unable to complete the challenge I was asked to complete. The other time, well I was supposed to impress world-class gamers by getting some near-impossible score in Gradius {or some game like that, they are all the same to me}, or simply take, and keep, a high-score from a world-class gamer. That was a challenge I was not up to.

Even if the tier idea is no good, how about more teams, or more people per team?

jim5cents

01-16-2011, 01:24 PM

A game idea that I have been kicking around in my head is called "Handcuffs".

This game will allow a decrease of the possible "intimidation" factor, plus allow for some different match ups

Prior to each round, dice rolls will take two players from separate teams and match them up. The duos will then compete for a high score. The winning group will then each get a point for their main team (GOM, EC, MM, or VB) Play to 10 points. If there is a tie at 10 points, then a final head to head round take place between the two teams.

Wolf

01-17-2011, 08:46 PM

another idea I have
Track and field events

for track events do this
100- easy game to master
200- easy game to master
400- easy and long game to master
800- medium game to master
1600- medium and long game to master
3200- hard and long game to master
110 hurdles- hard and quick game to master
300 hurdles- hard and longer game to master
4x100- 4 easy games to master team event
4x400- 4 easy and long games to master team event
4x800- 4 medium games to master team event

pole vault, Long, triple, and high jump- 3 attempts to give the highest score
Discus, Shot put, and Javlin- 3 attempts to give the highest score

5 points for 1st
3 points for 2nd
1 point for 3rd
for relays
5 points for 1st

---------- Post added at 02:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:44 AM ----------

each team can put 3 members per event and for the relays 4 members work on mastering a game. they will all master the game or they will work on the same save.

joz

01-20-2011, 12:17 PM

I guess the teams are staying as they are.

StarfoxFan2009

01-25-2011, 01:59 AM

i don't mind the contests tbh

thetedster

02-02-2011, 09:21 AM

Personally I've never done the team contests because I know nobody with the exception of Tails on RU. The idea of being on a kickball team where you can't even see the skill someone has outside of their masterys on RU is disheartening to me. I'd rather do individual contests, and personally I love the mastery contests I just wish the games were a bit more popular and fun to play. Some of the games chosen seem impossible to complete (Out Run, Batman Returns on Jesus difficulty, etc). The formula in my mind of a good contest is do something that they compete at that is impossible for them to master. a Speed run, a score contest on a game that's good but somewhat unpopular, etc.

just my 2 cents.

Ted

Wolf

03-18-2011, 11:19 PM

3 more ideas I have

Season contest

Teams get a schdule to play the other teams, at the end of the regular season then there is the post season where the best team plays the 4th and the 2nd plays the 3rd, and the winner play each other

Game Madness(Individual contest)
Players are seeded by their rank in the arcade and broke up in four different groups. Double elimation will play in this too.

Example of Game Madness
Group 1

1. Winnebagel vs 8. Josh of Silence
2. Dojah vs 7. Runhipperun
3. 902silverminer vs 6. Ace.of.Spade1
4. Justinm26 vs 5. Joshdeal

Let's Say the Top four win.
1. Bagel vs 4. Justin
2. Dojah vs 3. 902silverminer
5. Josh vs 8. Josh
6. Ace vs 7. Run
Then
1. Bagel vs 2. Dojah
5. Josh vs 6. Ace

2. Dojah vs 5. Josh

1. Bagel vs 2. Dojah if Dojah wins they play again if Bagel wins, Bagel wins championship

Game Madness(Team contest)

Each of the teams breaks up into groups of two and are placed into four different groups. Double elimation can be played. Seeds can either be made by ranks or dice rolls and then the group placement can be done by a dice roll but a team cant have more than one team in the same group. The team that wins the contest is the team that win the overall contest. There is the championship for each group and then the championship by the group champs.