Define a good sport!

Discuss anticipation, facts and video's of the newly announced Trackmania 2 game!

Moderators: Alinoa, TM-Patrol

For a sport, a good duel between rank 1 and rank 20 (the outsider) what odds you would like?

The outsider never wins
4
9%
The outsider wins one time every 500 matches
1
2%
The outsider wins one time every 100 matches
3
7%
The outsider wins one time every 50 matches
6
14%
The outsider wins one time every 10 matches
20
47%
The outsider wins one time every 5 matches
9
21%
 
Total votes: 43

xis101
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 154
Joined: 14 Aug 2006 01:22
Owned TM-games: TMUF
Manialink(s): gn
Contact:

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by xis101 » 17 Feb 2011 18:22

Does Nadeo plan an official league for TM2? :D
Image

Zooz
TM-Patrol
TM-Patrol
Posts: 5326
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 08:58
Owned TM-games: TMO, TMS, TMNF, TMUF
Manialink(s): zooz
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Zooz » 17 Feb 2011 19:51

Ladder not official enough for you? It was even called OFFICIAL MODE, how much more official can you get :D
But people, let's try to talk about outsiders here, since that's what he asked about! Feel free to make a new topic about official tournaments.

Florent
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1594
Joined: 09 Aug 2005 14:07

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Florent » 18 Feb 2011 08:46

I did not got the feedback from people who voted 1/100 matches or even 'never'

I would be interested to see what they think would happen if that what the case, for a tennis match for example?
with never, logically, as soon as the competition starts, we know the winner: it is the favorite.

would a sport survive to this type of environment?

In the french poll (40+ votes) the average is even lower
I think, as spectators, people want lower and lower chances for the favorite.
For me, as long as a 'god' of a sport would always win, I don't think there is much need to increase the delta between players.

I gave a close example in the french forum. If a player of a sport make this performances:
7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7
another do this
5-8-5-5-5-8-5-5-8 (not Zooz)

then, to reduce the delta, a match should be on one battle, instead of making it on five.

another interesting question could be
"what is the ideal length of a duel?"
I mean, how long would you like to play or spectate a match?

I think it is linked to this very same question. Because if the delta are really high, then people would know the outcome of the match right from the first 20% of it. If the delta are smaller, then it could keep the suspens more easily.

Normally, I would bet 90 minutes to be an ideal time, since it is like football or movies. You can install into the match, and enjoy the events.
But to be of 90 minutes, a match really need to have the good pace. It can not be 100% adrenaline all the time and the outcome should not be known in at least 80% of cases, before 80% of the match, to give a ballpark.

One solution could be to have very small matches when the difference of level is too great. It is adaptative, but I don't exactly know why, it seems to decreases the interest for matches. Like if you would not install yourself to see a match if it can last only a quarter of it's time. You can not setup a nice set only to see a part of the show. I know it exists, but it is a little frustrating to play or watch only a quarter of a 'normal' match.

jamie_macdonald
speed demon
speed demon
Posts: 1612
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 19:48
Owned TM-games: TMUF, TMNF, TMS
Manialink(s): ET
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by jamie_macdonald » 18 Feb 2011 09:52

Florent wrote:I did not got the feedback from people who voted 1/100 matches or even 'never'

I would be interested to see what they think would happen if that what the case, for a tennis match for example?
with never, logically, as soon as the competition starts, we know the winner: it is the favorite.

would a sport survive to this type of environment?
I don't think it would, A "shed load" of sports across the world all rely on user participation, and often the participation is not "the sport itself".

...I am of course hinting towards gambling and other related sporting sales and user contributions,

With the odds so firm, who would gamble, or bet with friends, or buy a t-shirt to try help edge their team/sportsman-woman to the top with a little support? I think this "extra caricular" involvment counts for alot more than just the sport itself, it adds to the feel of involvment and keeps the passion high as you feel like you partake and make a difference.

I think this kind of stuff is Vital to a sport becoming a "proper sport" a sport can exist without of course, alltough it's not the be all and end all to it's existance. It just helps ALOT! :thumbsup:

xis101
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 154
Joined: 14 Aug 2006 01:22
Owned TM-games: TMUF
Manialink(s): gn
Contact:

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by xis101 » 18 Feb 2011 11:44

Florent wrote:another interesting question could be
"what is the ideal length of a duel?"
I mean, how long would you like to play or spectate a match?
That depends on whether you spectate just for knowing the winner or you spectate the match for pure "love" of the sport.
In first case you would leave after a clear decision is given (maybe a 4-0 in football). In second case you would like to continue to watch the match to see for example the great skill of the better team and a possible 5-0 or 6-0.

If you want to delay the decision who wins, you could invent a point system like the following. You split your match in 10 parts for example. First round the winner gets 1 point, the second round 2 points etc. until tenth round 10 points.
In the end the winner could gain maximum 55 Points (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10) and would win with more than the half of the points (27,5). That means the match wouldn´t be decided before the seventh of ten rounds or 70% of the match (1+2+3+4+5+6+7 = 28 Points).

jamie_macdonald
speed demon
speed demon
Posts: 1612
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 19:48
Owned TM-games: TMUF, TMNF, TMS
Manialink(s): ET
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by jamie_macdonald » 18 Feb 2011 11:51

Interesting idea of incramental scores keeping the match deciding points until toward the end of the game XiS. As far as i'm aware that's a concept fairly unknown and not really used in the mainstream,

It almost has the effect of a handicap but without removing the "dominating team/players" ability to win with skill greater than the "challenger". (Closing the odd's without wrecking the game/sport or actualy placing penalty on the leader(s)).

A very good concept in all i say :thumbsup:

tcq
speedy pilot
speedy pilot
Posts: 380
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 08:09
Location: Germany

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by tcq » 18 Feb 2011 21:46

First of all, i voted the 1/10th option. In my idea, the underdog should have a chance, but this one should be on a reasonable level (as mentioned by xis, it's more likely that a lower team will win in soccer if you compare the chance to basketball). If you compare this to tm and take the zooz comment
Zooz wrote:But there you missed one huge factor, training time... Longer map = more nolifing required to win. Yes, even on 'easy' maps, although the effect is a bit less there I guess, since people will reach a peak of fastest possible times.
I might make a longer post later, but I didn't sleep :P
you see that training time will take a huge amount of the win possibilty compared to other sports. In my opinion, the real champion should win nearly always under different circumstances (like different maps and modes (like rounds/TA/cup) and different styles (tech/speed)). But if you take the training time into account (look at the oxy level in the GC7 rally final map (i just assume that he trained really long and hard for that map)), in tm nearly every driver (A) can beat every driver (B), if driver A trained more and longer than driver B.
To come back to the "reasonable level" of winning by an underdog, this has a lot to do with the style of competiton, the maps and the duration. As zooz mentioned, the longer a map, the more training you need for it. So i would conclude that, the shorter the map, the higher the possibility to get a win for the underdog (here we go back to xis comparison with the sports and the higher score differences). If the maps would be made shorter, then there comes the problem of the consistensy factor (which should be really high for a real champion).This is, because on short maps and a high playcount of this maps, the underdog will get a higher possibility to get a few clear runs into the finish. This wouldn't be nice to spectate for the audience (at least this is my opinion). I would more like to increase the possibility for the underdog to win, but keep it more interessting for the audience by choose the game mode laps on short maps (because here you got the chance to get an underdog to take the win, but also got the consistensy factor of the champion into account). This would match with Florents comment.
Florent wrote: One solution could be to have very small matches when the difference of level is too great. It is adaptative, but I don't exactly know why, it seems to decreases the interest for matches. Like if you would not install yourself to see a match if it can last only a quarter of it's time. You can not setup a nice set only to see a part of the show. I know it exists, but it is a little frustrating to play or watch only a quarter of a 'normal' match.
Furthermore, i think it's way more interessting to get duel between the campion and many other players (instead of a 1vs1).
xis101 wrote: If you want to delay the decision who wins, you could invent a point system like the following. You split your match in 10 parts for example. First round the winner gets 1 point, the second round 2 points etc. until tenth round 10 points.
In the end the winner could gain maximum 55 Points (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10) and would win with more than the half of the points (27,5). That means the match wouldn´t be decided before the seventh of ten rounds or 70% of the match (1+2+3+4+5+6+7 = 28 Points).
If this would be compared with xis really intelligent counting system, this could be a pretty nice spectacle.
Florent wrote: another interesting question could be
"what is the ideal length of a duel?"
I mean, how long would you like to play or spectate a match?
To take into account Florents question about the duration of a nice duel, in my opinion it depends on the amount of this duels. If they would be only every 2 weeks or so, then it could be between 90 and 120min, but if it would be once a week, then it shouldn't be longer than 60-70 min. e

If there are problems in the argumentation of this post, no problem. I just wanted to write the stuff which came into my mind =)

Frostbeule
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 173
Joined: 06 Oct 2007 23:17
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU, TMUF, TMNF

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Frostbeule » 28 Feb 2011 15:42

seems like i missed this topic...

(this is specifically about TMNF and the esport scene there):

while i agree with most people that there should be a 1/10 chance for an "outsider" to win a race, i really don't believe that the finalist mode (that some organizers still use and some don't) is the best way for that.

but since the finalist mode is introduced since 2008 and some people hate it and some people think it's alright, i think it's best to use a system that unites these 2 groups.

the mode i would propose that people (the biggest events, but also smaller of course) used in competitions (1v1v1v1 or more) would be the ESL Cup mode. If you aren't familiar with it, here's a brief explanation:

it's the same as finalist mode in that you reach a certain point and then you become a finalist. however, when you become a finalist you still continue getting points. so say the pointlimit is 100, and Player A is at 96 points and win a round and thus get 10 points; he is now at 106 points and he's a finalist. if he wins another race he wins the match, but if he doesn't and gets 2nd in the round, he build up his points to 112 points and keeps his finalist status. the others can still catch up to him, and if Player B say in the next few rounds does that and ends up with 120 points while Player A have 119, HE is the finalist now and can take it home. Also, if they end up on the same points they are BOTH finalists, and can take it home if they win a round. you can download the mode here: http://www.svenstucki.ch/hp/node/9

i just think this specific mode adds alot more depth and alot more possibilities to how a match can end which makes it a whole lot more exciting. in compare to the normal finalist mode, where either 2 things happen: 1. the player that becomes finalist wins the first round he is finalist (since that's when he got the best chance, after that he will continue to get more nervous) or the player collapse and end up not being on the podium. this becomes very repetitive after a while (and trust me, ive seen it ALOT of times).
i also think it will truly create the 1/10 situation that's been discussed. with normal finalist mode, i think that is more like 1/5.

but more importantly, changing to this mode would unite the 2 groups like i already mentioned, and that's what a good esport need - unity.

now for other things or ideas i have that would and/or do make this game a better esport, here's some things i've thought about:
General:
-have thousands in the seconds (atleast when there's a draw between players). - this is kinda obvious really.
-make the game attractive for streams. (spectate in normal cam2, being able to see slide stripes etc) - attracts more newcomers to the sport.
Other Game modes:
-the Tennis mode in 1v1 (you play to 6, but you have to win with more than 1 point if it's 5-5. it's being used in EPS.Germany today with great success). - superior to the normal 1v1.
-in 5v5, make it so:
1st=10p
2nd=8p
3rd=7p
4th=6p
5th=5p
6th=4p
7th=3p
8th=2p
9th=1p
10th=0p

this would make it more important to get 1st place, which would create more "heroes". let's say it's 6-6 in a match and someone takes that 1st place; it will be very important, and that player will get alot of status. same with the one who gets last place, you could call that player the "non-hero". i think this adds extra excitement to a 5v5 match.
Also, i believe it creates more draws, which i also think makes a 5v5 match more exciting.

well, just some thoughts of a good esport and ideas to make it better that i had laying around. obviously there's a lot more to it than this, this is more focused on how the actual sport could work. the surroundings of a esport are also very important to make it successful. the freezone part for example doesn't exactly help, even though i guess it's unavoidable.

Florent
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1594
Joined: 09 Aug 2005 14:07

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Florent » 06 Mar 2011 13:08

we are not here to talk about the mode, but simply the quality of a well balanced one.

the question you should raise is to know is when you suggest a mode, does it fall between 5 and 10. It can depends of the mode, of the maps, of the number of points, of the number of racers etc.

so, in your mode, if you make a race between the #1 and the #20, does the change that the #20 wins are greater or smaller than the other one? What are they, in your oppinion? which direction should you dig to answer true spectator concerns, even before talking about a camera or thousands of seconds? I believe it has to be the uncertainty.

we will be able to talk about a mode only after this, in my oppinion.

Frostbeule
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 173
Joined: 06 Oct 2007 23:17
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU, TMUF, TMNF

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Frostbeule » 06 Mar 2011 14:54

Florent wrote:we are not here to talk about the mode, but simply the quality of a well balanced one.

the question you should raise is to know is when you suggest a mode, does it fall between 5 and 10. It can depends of the mode, of the maps, of the number of points, of the number of racers etc.


well, people did suggest modes that people can use previously in this topic that would be well-balanced so i felt i could do it aswell for my territory, i dont see the harm or why it would not fit. also i don't see the harm in putting in some other more general points that i have in what would help make a better esport.

like i wrote i THINK this mode falls perfectly or close enough into the 1/10 area which i (and most other people it seems) prefer - when played on esport-maps and 1v1v1v1. number of points... well why not 100-120.
ive spectated this mode some recently (eps.uk finals) and i like it a lot and the players and spectators did aswell. it creates a lot of possibilities of how a race can end, and also it creates awesome stories.
but especially and foremost it unites those who likes the finalist mode and does who don't. ive already written it but i feel like for there to be a successful esport, the community must be united in what mode they primarily use. we see this in all other major esport titles and it is essential. that's something we don't have atm. i believe and hope we will see alot more of this mode in the future.
Florent wrote:so, in your mode, if you make a race between the #1 and the #20, does the change that the #20 wins are greater or smaller than the other one? What are they, in your oppinion? which direction should you dig to answer true spectator concerns, even before talking about a camera or thousands of seconds? I believe it has to be the uncertainty.

we will be able to talk about a mode only after this, in my oppinion.
sorry, but i don't quite get what you mean here? please write it again so i can understand! time after time you've proven that you are clueless when it comes to define a good esport. leave it to those who know it and breathe it instead. do yourself and everyone else a favor. and no, i won't apologize for this statement.

Florent
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1594
Joined: 09 Aug 2005 14:07

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Florent » 06 Mar 2011 15:53

Frostbeule wrote:time after time you've proven that you are clueless when it comes to define a good esport. leave it to those who know it and breathe it instead. do yourself and everyone else a favor. and no, i won't apologize for this statement.
ok, please apologize for this statement or I will simply never chat with you again

bye

Frostbeule
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 173
Joined: 06 Oct 2007 23:17
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU, TMUF, TMNF

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Frostbeule » 06 Mar 2011 16:31

did we ever chat? from my experience this is always what happened: you write something, i write something, you ask for an apology, i refuse to as that's silly, you tell me that you will never write to me again unless i apolgize. i believe more people than me got the same experience with you.

neverending cycle.

bye florent.

Florent
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1594
Joined: 09 Aug 2005 14:07

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Florent » 06 Mar 2011 16:43

bye mister Kalle Videkull

Frostbeule
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 173
Joined: 06 Oct 2007 23:17
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU, TMUF, TMNF

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Frostbeule » 06 Mar 2011 17:42

bye bye! (this is fun, wanna continue saying bye to each other for a couple of more posts?)

Zooz
TM-Patrol
TM-Patrol
Posts: 5326
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 08:58
Owned TM-games: TMO, TMS, TMNF, TMUF
Manialink(s): zooz
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Define a good sport!

Post by Zooz » 06 Mar 2011 18:55

gee Florent, how do you always manage to get into fights with the best players of your game? Already in 2004 with the Grouik, and now it still happens... :P

Post Reply