ChGK Stopgame needs to be closed! Or rethink ..
Written by a person who loves ChGC and loves Stopgame and sincerely wishes all love, good and more delicious chewing gum. The author in no case has no goal of offending players, authors of questions, editorial group and administration of the Stopgame website.ru
Small excursion into history
“What? Where? When?”In his original idea, it was some kind of student chicken, in which the Soviet Nerds from all sorts of Moscow State University smoked a lot there, did not curse a little, shouted at each other, and somewhere between the matter answered tricky questions that the authors of the transmission lovingly adjusted them lovingly. This format has not taken root, but now all of the above resembles the sports ChGK quite strongly: the students and not students sprinkled with fumes after yesterday’s game day, whose IQ is longer (spoiler: Vasily Galperov) based on mu … a mu-a-editor of issues.
The television CCC, in order to preserve and expand the audience, make the program more interactive, and therefore more interesting for the viewer, began to accept issues from the audience, and also introduced a system of incentives, which even became the object of many jokes.
What? Where? When? – This is a game in which six Snobov at a table in Moscow are trying to throw ten thousand pensioners from Saratov for ten thousand
The game became the “intellectual casino”, in which both the audience and experts, raised and lost their fabulous perestroika and nineties, to the worst of the time the game went to the “bonds of the intellectual casino”, but the concept did not change.
The elite ChGK had a slightly different goal-setting: if the players have a rating of teams in the sports version before the eyes, and they have someone to compete with and who to prove what, then the players and the audience are motivated in a more cynical material method in the television version at the table. Money and prizes for the best questions and the best game work for interest and desire to progress much better than imaginary competition, which is indicated once in the release of three seconds by the tournament table. Actually, this tournament struggle itself is nothing more than the struggle for the right to play over the season again and to win/lose even more. From my experience and experience, I can say with confidence that the race behind the title of champion of the year and the “crystal owl” in television, although they are interested, to a much lesser extent than behind the gaming process itself. Experts come for the challenge for the brain and money, and the viewer comes for interesting questions, perhaps also for money. However, this is the most important thing in the ChGC: this is how one of the smartest people, sitting at the table, gives rise to the correct answer from original chaos where it seemed that it was impossible to take it without pure knowledge.
And this follows the conclusion: let it and in such a soulless and cynical way, however, the authors of the television? Where? When?”Achieved from experts and from the authors of questions (whether spectators or” full -time “questionnaires) progress and development. If you look at the questions and players at least 15-20 years ago, you will see that the level of the game of experts and the quality of questions have grown markedly. The struggle for prizes and survival in this system forced both competing parties to progress and “pump”.
Yes, I know that now the TV-HGK is experiencing far from the best times, but there is rather a problem in the fierce conservatism of the hook, masters and just aksakalov, high and almost completely tied to the “blat” system of getting into the club (of those who have come to mind completely honestly, only Madame Lazarev comes to mind), as well as an increased middle age and gradual decrease in interest: these people are almost all of them.won, but materially, God forbid to everyone.
I think you already understood what I’m getting at
After watching a bunch of ChGC games on Stopgime, some even several times, I came to a very disappointing conclusion: the games on the site have no final goal. At the moment, the situation is seen something like this: the CGC on the site is on the hairdryer, which is enthusiastically and reduces questions, and writes eyeliners, and collects players and testers, as well as literally a half-dozen children-questionnaires who still continue to write questions for games and are really interested in the topic. But this list is not the most important: not here experts. Perhaps the snobbery of the player with ten years of experience is currently talking in me, however, to win and develop, we must play and train. Otherwise it just won’t work. Of course, you can pick up the most active guys from blogs to their test server (I am for!) and specifically put them in a common boiler, so that they write to Synergy to the appropriate. However, there will be no use if experts do not understand the basic aspects of the game, they will want to train themselves, they will not be interested in victory.
The authors of questions should feel the danger of experts, understand that they are smart enough, cunning and know how to think non -standard to take a question. And they need to understand that they compete with experts, not beaten babies.
And, of course, both warring parties should understand why they do it.
And you knew that an incentive in ancient Rome called a stick that was beaten to the donkeys to go faster.
Now the mechanism of the stimulus of experts is “stream-ordering”. Specially took in quotation marks. If at the very beginning it worked at least somehow, then the punishment for Degrad-T-GG was completely spitting in the face of the audience: not only was there a similar stream, but during the stream the experts themselves for some reason decided that some “strata” could reject at their discretion. Of course, I myself could derail during the viewing of such a ChGK, but somewhere in the dark backyards of the subconscious there was confidence that punishments are not so working. Either the punishment should be really tough within the framework of the permissible. Karaoke Stim, stream according to I Wanna be the Guy, and thousands of possible streams or videos that are dragging on, they are dragging on, refuse or are simply afraid to do. If you do not want to create positive incentives for experts and authors/spectators, so twist the negative to the maximum!
Make Kulakov make the devil the “history of the series” of the Assassins through the loss at least, and put Kulakov himself in the captain’s chair! Yes, the next day he will run to Fenh with the question “How to play it?!”, And the topic will break from the material with which you can work.
Or go to reward to the authors and experts. Nobody asks the canvas bags of radioactive evergreen pieces of paper, but as an example: now through Stopheim the same brand Aorus is actively PR. What prevents these guys from making the release sponsor and play part of the prizes from them for experts and spectators, Mr. Kungurov? It seems to me that at least from this approach everyone will win?
5 points. What exactly can and should be done now?
1. Make punishment punishments.
In this case, real pressure will be on experts, it will be more interesting to observe the audience, to realize that if experts lose, they are waiting for more high -quality and original content. As a result, the number of questions will grow, which will gradually develop into quality. I hope someone even opens with Levin and revere.
2. So that p.1 worked better, the punishment should be known in advance.
That is, already at the time of the announcement of https://playersclubvipcasino.co.uk/ the game, so that the audience specifically knows what they are brought to and what awaits them in case of winning. And punishment should be really original. And not two in a row Stream on the “strata”.
3. A clear schedule of games and their lower frequency.
Now the ChGK comes out with a frequency of once every two to three weeks. It is better that the game be aired every 4 weeks: the authors will have more time to write, editors – for grinding and preparation, the hair dryer – for dismantling and eyeliner, and experts – for experts – to prepare.
4. The compositions of the commands need to be officially announced and also recorded in advance.
Why is it necessary: editors will be able to choose questions, in the topics of which experts will not “swim” at all (there is still no faith in the sharp pumping of their erudition), and the teams themselves will be mentioned in p.3 time to prepare. We are not talking about something breathtaking and preparing from morning to night with setting up answers of answers, a clear grinding of responsibilities, etc.D. But players should understand, what is required of them, how to organize the time of discussion, a little “get sick” a little to each other. This does not need a huge time of time: if the game is held every four weeks, the composition can be scored and determined for two and a half to three weeks. Two times for one and a half to two hours, gather in the discord, see the database of questions and at least hear from the same hair dryer about the nuances of the game-this will already make games more spectacular and relieve unnecessary questions and roughnesses.
5. Intelligible positive stimulation of authors.
If the authors of questions know that they are guaranteed to receive something tasty and beautiful in case of winning, this will again stimulate the flow of questions. Then the natural process is already – the number develops into quality. And the best, respectively, receive a reward for the best question that the manager/lead/experts will choose
Not a very cheerful conclusion
In the current form of the ChGK on Stopgame.ru is akin to the fifth part of the famous action movie from Kojima. The idea seems to be good, but stillborn, as well as not having the ultimate goal of its existence. In order for the CGC to remain interesting for everyone, including the experts themselves, they need to understand why play it. Gentlemen experts, you ask this question by opening a new game or recording a review. Try to answer now: why do you play in such a “? Where? When?”? And is this Frankenstein in general?
No, this is not a game. This is a damn thing, for which you want to beat the muzzles. Dear experts, please respect intelligence and authors-questionnaires and spectators, do not disgrace and at least pretend that you are preparing for games and training. And if you lose, then work out the punishment, and do not twist your ass! So that the development of the idea of the ChGC itself should develop, both aspects of this intellectual confrontation should develop. And at the moment, authors-questionnaires do not make sense to develop. No matter what they write, they will answer silence or slurred murmur.
I do not claim the truth in the last instance and I can only reason from the standpoint of the editor, expert and ordinary viewer. This post is a boiling expression of my personal opinion: CHC on Stopgame “broken” at the level, so to speak, the source code. And with each game it manifests itself more and more. And when we buy a defective game, we either wait for a patch, or make a refund.
The best comments
Such an opinion has the right to exist. But the question is here:
1. The “solving the riddle” process, as you say, is almost no. Damn it, in the last game, only Solod tried, who, incidentally, trains with us and sways as a player who is interesting. The moment of the team game was only one.
The main message is “CHC cannot be interesting if the experts are not interested and they play“ dump ”. And to make it interesting, you need an incentive, because otherwise experts do not want to stupidly “. Initially, an incentive for players was an interest, but now only Solod plays of those interested, really interested: the halper and Kungurov are too busy.
2. The argument “Well, we are all here on the fan” somehow does not work very well in the light of the ChGK. Still, the game itself is on its own on serious holes. Yes, Pak itself can be made humorous, you can invite a squad, but the essence is quite serious: these are difficult questions imprisoned for the work of the Interjoy nervous node of the collective of five in our case. If you really want a fan intellectual oppression, there is a friend.
The argument “DO NOT LOOK – DO NOT WITH” works when the originally high -quality product is being prepared, and a person who sends a negative feedback, or not in the topic, or is not able to express a constructive opinion. Here the situation is different:
There is a specific claim, and this is not the quality of questions (it is much lesser), but the quality of the game of experts. And it is terrible. And I would like to convey that if experts are cooler, then questions will have to be written cooler. And then it will be even more spectacular.
And as for the severity of the efforts, I just want to say that they are fighting out with views, and if the content produced is obviously added in quality, then the views with profits will grow and grow. Now in Russia a huge number of various kinds of quizes and intellectuals that are interesting to watch, which are interesting to play.
To the question of profits: marginality of the same “brainwear”, for example, about 80% at the largest sites.
And by analogy with the same dog lines, various kinds of special missions, affiliate programs and crossovers only benefit. But until there will be a team of questionnaires, at least the desire from the authors of the SG really win, and all these will do two and a half people plus tesers, the idea will not go far. Actually, it is already stagnant.
The problem is that I like the idea of CGC on SG, and I want to watch it, because this is a combination of two favorite things, but the implementation has already begun to stagnate. And if the stagnation does not follow cardinal changes, degradation will begin. I do not want this, and I, as a user of the site, who loves this site, as well as as a player who understands and loving the ChGC, raise this question and try to offer something constructive.
Of course, I would suggest that the spectators’ donates would gather in the bank-a kind of prize fund and most of it left the winning team, whether it be spectators or experts. The smaller one, for example, retreated 30 percent in any case – to maintain, so to speak. But no one will approve such a system.
From the very beginning, a certain random and the absence of Endgame are somewhat repelled from the very beginning. The work of the teams – well, how can it come from if they are different compositions each time, and, indeed, no special purpose or price of loss over experts hangs. The “game for the sake of a fan” format looks good in its same game (perhaps that is why it gives me much more pleasure), and there everyone is for himself – it is clear that the guys are easier, which is quite understandable.
I support the opinion that something in the format should be changed. Or more stable teams (although there are simply few people here, as I understand it), or some more clear goals at the event.
Well, by the way, I can’t help but agree. In the last issue, he played a significant role in the fact that the whole game was felt with a shaky and indefinite in a bad sense of these words. Nevertheless, the people in the comments did not complain about the level of experts, but about the blitz on Halo (which, if I do not confuse, none of the drive-up groups did not take good words about him, but which was left, apparently, due to the lack of an alternative) and on what “the hair dryer creates”, t.e, the absence for the viewer of the clearness and clarity of certain decisions (for many it remains incomprehensible why the answer is “fog” is incorrect), the pictures hanging when discussing the question – the fig solution and, in general, Vanya made the impression of a not fair femid, but simply a rebellious presenter. I, as it were, do not deny that the level of experts plays a role – I just say that the impressions of the last release mainly formed problems on the other side. Well, or, at least, they played a significant role.
Well, then I will write about the idea of fasting.(now finally I was able to read everything normally and dilute), it seems to me that your proposal can be compared with the proposal to build a five -story building on the foundation of a five -story building. And the mixture for the foundation is the time and desire of potential experts. The option “Put a fact of Alya you must play and in the event of a loss you will do the is-ku”-he doesn’t even roam, in this regard, everything happens voluntarily and a person, under such conditions, can simply abandon the game (not to mention the fact that the punishment should be for the entire team, and not for a specific person). And even more so all this will not add time to them, the relatively flexible frames of which are already distributed between personal life and work. Although with the idea that punishment needs to be selected interesting and located outside the comfort zone (but without extreme fanaticism is natural) – I agree.
Well, I note that it is also a good idea to connect a game with partnership contests.
I watched all the issues and in my opinion only somewhere in the beginning and in the latter very briefly stipulated that there was a reward. I think it is worth reminding about this with approximately the same frequency as about the donates for the blitz.
I kind of clearly and clearly made it clear that if you do not like it, no need to yell “close this garbage”, lol.
It says about completely different “Close until it turned into a trash or change the concept”. The difference at first glance is small, but very significant. A loud title is very in the spirit of a modern SG. And yes, the phrases were still torn from context.
But I must agree with the punishments: the experts have already forgotten that this is really “punishment” for the loss, and then people come to the stream to see how connoisseurs are any new, or they are tormented if they cannot in “New Expirence”. The last stream with a tape measure was simply spitting in the face of all the audience, for not only did the strata practically not try to fulfill, but also a huge number simply ignored, which repelled any desire to deliver to that stream, and to subsequent blitches or streams dedicated to the ChGC, and why why?
I apologize for, perhaps too sharp a comment, but I also had boiled. So decently boiled from users of SG and their “Wishlist”. I also wish you a sg of all the best, I also want an increase in the quality of the content. But understand that your personal desires and what the site needs is different things.
I understand that you are well versed in the ChGK and want its (program) to become more serious and thoughtful. But where did you get the idea that you need it yourself? Why did you get the idea that the authors of the site who have a bunch of another, more important work for them have a desire and time to engage in training? Even for money? Stopgame is a large portal with a ton of diverse content, and ChGC for it is just a great way to diversify a twichary channel. And he should not be something big simply because serious work on him would be damaged by some other work.
Yes, you like a fan of ChGK want to develop it. And what? Then the fan of “your game” will come, he will say that the sg-lover is a frivolous shit and will demand that the authors sweated over his favorite game. Then a fan of some other direction will come. Then one more. And yet. Listen to all the authors?
Yes, sooner or later, the hairdryer will have enthusiasm, sooner or later the quality of the questions will begin to fall much (at the moment it is only growing), sooner or later interest in the ChGK will begin to fade away. And yes, sooner or later the ChGK will be closed. Instead of it, there will be some other way to diversify the twich channel. And this, damn it, is completely normal.
You again painted my post in detail. Thanks for the efforts, but I understood him the first time. Then I will retell my comment again. So much to get light with a single type of streams Stopheim does not need. It’s simply not necessary. This is not a “club of experts”, not “intellectual casino”, etc.D. This is entertaining content that does not require most of the involved persons of serious work and at the same time like the audience. This is its value for the site. I understand that you, as a person deeply immersed in the ChGC, is unpleasant to hear. But this is a fact, humble yourself.
“Create a team of full -time questionnaires”, “For two weeks, these people will be able to gather at least once or two for two hours and see how to play and what they want from them” – this is never cosmetic changes. This is a fairly serious work that you demand from people who are not particularly necessary. Work that is not clear how it will be paid.
Okay, I seemed to express everything. I’ll go watch the real ChGK on TV, until I missed everything.
You got on the thorny path, Mr. Volkovich)
I perfectly understand the claims to the ChGC and agree with them, but the essence has already been voiced in posts from some users higher – many come in how it is at the moment. As for me, it’s sad. I am for quality content on the site. But to pelove is much easier, and requires less costs. And most importantly – people eat it. After all, many people come to stream not even to watch the process, but simply for the sake of specific authors. Blogs are plused in the same scheme. And at the same time it is very gratifying to observe that your blog has collected a bunch of pluses, and that there are those who want change. I’m still facepal from the first stream in the DND, I really hope that I will never see this anymore.
In short, I’m not here for the sake of making constructive proposals, because you have already made a heap of very suitable ideas, but simply moral support for the sake. I hope that this topic will somehow affect the ChGK and it will be really interesting to watch (the stream with the degrad-squad turned on somewhere in the middle, spit and chopped off).
Actually I happened there. It was even the captain was. I recommend that you study better the ancient fighting history!
Made intelligible formulations of proposals so that there are no accusations in the children’s topany with a leg and “dumb cheat”.
5 points. What exactly can and should be done now?
1. Make punishment punishments. In this case, real pressure will be on experts, it will be more interesting to observe the audience, to realize that if experts lose, they are waiting for more high -quality and original content. As a result, the number of questions will grow, which will gradually develop into quality. I hope someone even opens with Levin and revere.
2. So that p.1 worked better, the punishment should be known in advance. That is, already at the time of the announcement of the game, so that the audience specifically knows what they are brought to and what awaits them in case of winning. And punishment should be really original. And not two in a row Stream on the “strata”.
3. A clear schedule of games and their lower frequency. Now the ChGK comes out with a frequency of once every two to three weeks. It is better that the game be aired every 4 weeks: the authors will have more time to write, editors – for grinding and preparation, the hair dryer – for dismantling and eyeliner, and experts – for experts – to prepare.
4. The compositions of the commands need to be officially announced and also recorded in advance. Why is it necessary: editors will be able to choose questions, in the topics of which experts will not “swim” at all (there is still no faith in the sharp pumping of their erudition), and the teams themselves will be mentioned in p.3 time to prepare. We are not talking about something breathtaking and preparing from morning to night with setting up answers of answers, a clear grinding of responsibilities, etc.D. But players should understand, what is required of them, how to organize the time of discussion, a little “get sick” a little to each other. This does not need a huge time of time: if the game is held every four weeks, the composition can be scored and determined for two and a half to three weeks. Two times for one and a half to two hours, gather in the discord, see the database of questions and at least hear from the same hair dryer about the nuances of the game-this will already make games more spectacular and relieve unnecessary questions and roughnesses.
5. Intelligible positive stimulation of authors. If the authors of questions know that they are guaranteed to receive something tasty and beautiful in case of winning, this will again stimulate the flow of questions. Then the natural process is already – the number develops into quality. And the best are already awarded at the choice of experts/leading/manager.
I only agree that the punishment for loss should be really punishment, and not a dull parody of this. Although the example with Kulakov, of course, is stupid.
Interesting opinion.
I, as an ordinary viewer, like to look at ChGC even without any incentives. The most interesting thing in it is the process of solving the “experts” of issues.
Nit -picking to the team of experts is also not clear. In our case, “experts” are the authors of SG. Degrad detachment – hurried as “The first game of the spring series. KVN stars against viewers “.
I agree at the expense of the stillborn when the hair dryer is getting tired and/or spectators stop writing questions, the program will close by itself.
If you look at dog handlers, they seem to have turned into a funny discussion of movies from a more or less serious movie program.
Actually, I do not see the point of removing the fan tribe to something serious.
Indeed, in the first two or three games, players’ enthusiasm was felt. And then everyone except the host somehow relaxed. – We can’t answer? – Well, okay, not a problem, say the first thing that came to mind. We still do not threaten anything serious. Interest is slightly lost.
P.S. I would like to know, testers are a fixed set of privileged people, or in them you can somehow get?
In your own words, you only confirmed everything that I wrote in the comments above. What kind of appeal to fictional obligations are, they called their game, and therefore should someone. To whom they should? And if they do not do as you want, then they have no conscience and responsibility?
ChGK can find problems, but everything written here is only a mismatch of your expectations.
H.S. And by the way, when someone inserts Dark Souls no matter where he gets, it seems to me as a man with a flag who waves them and shouts: “I have low self-esteem, so I compare everything with Dark Souls to look like a hardcore”.
however, sometimes stupidity simply passes with age – it already depends on both the child himself and on the control of parents.
