Didn't the do the skin-changing thing way back in Americas-Army? There was a certain amount of irony to the fact that a game funded by the US-army always painted your enemies as terrorists and your allies as other soldiers, no matter which side you were on.
And I imagine that it would be possible to have a game choose between various textures to display on a surface based on what team that player is on. It's just a matter of whether it's worth the trouble or not.
remiremedy [blu.knight]Join Date: 2003-11-18Member: 23112Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester
<!--quoteo(post=1705806:date=Apr 27 2009, 01:27 PM:name=Xyth)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Xyth @ Apr 27 2009, 01:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705806"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Didn't the do the skin-changing thing way back in Americas-Army? There was a certain amount of irony to the fact that a game funded by the US-army always painted your enemies as terrorists and your allies as other soldiers, no matter which side you were on.
And I imagine that it would be possible to have a game choose between various textures to display on a surface based on what team that player is on. It's just a matter of whether it's worth the trouble or not.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't think it's a matter of if it's "worth the trouble". It's an accessibility issue. Many of the maps are not symmetrical. Even the ones that are very close, like arena_lumberyard, is not actually symmetrical. Knowing that from the red side's spawn the medpack is to the left of the building is important information that would be lost if the textures were not constant. From the player's perspective in a texture swapping world, the world would magically be mirrored some of the time, which would cause a lot of confusion.
KassingerShades of greyJoin Date: 2002-02-20Member: 229Members, Constellation
edited April 2009
Hehe, the advantage of wearing the color red is not special for TF2, it's a now well known phenomena in sports psychology, with findings on it published in Nature. The fact has been known for a few years now, but there has been a lot of discussion on the reasons for this. One of the attempted explanations of the effect is that wearing red gives the impression that you are dominant.
Here are some quotes from a Spiegel article about red's dominance:
<!--QuoteBegin-Spiegel Online+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Spiegel Online)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->From studies on animals and humans, we know that red is used to signal dominance," Hill told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "Among humans, rage is associated with reddening skin, which results from increased blood circulation," the researchers wrote in their article for Nature. (...) The results of the test gave clear evidence that exposure to red "impairs performance" and can trigger an "avoidance motivation," in much the same way as a stop sign.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1705805:date=Apr 27 2009, 06:26 PM:name=Faskalia)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Faskalia @ Apr 27 2009, 06:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705805"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No, it would be just a color swap.
Why do you have to swap the geometry? Is there blue architecture and red architecture?
All you need to do is swap colors and that can be done by pretty much every renderer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Red's stuff is generally more farm themed, with wood being used a lot. Blu's stuff is more modern, mostly metal and concrete.
<!--quoteo(post=1705818:date=Apr 27 2009, 02:34 PM:name=Kassinger)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kassinger @ Apr 27 2009, 02:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705818"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Hehe, the advantage of wearing the color red is not special for TF2, it's a now well known phenomena in sports psychology, with findings on it published in Nature. The fact has been known for a few years now, but there has been a lot of discussion on the reasons for this. One of the attempted explanations of the effect is that wearing red gives the impression that you are dominant.
Here are some quotes from a Spiegel article about red's dominance:
<a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,570918,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitge...,570918,00.html</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, fantastic. How come it doesn't apply anymore, then? What changed? Your post would work really well if the advantage to playing as Red hadn't gone away.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1705830:date=Apr 27 2009, 05:44 PM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TychoCelchuuu @ Apr 27 2009, 05:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705830"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yeah, fantastic. How come it doesn't apply anymore, then? What changed? Your post would work really well if the advantage to playing as Red hadn't gone away.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Maybe through the conditioning of playing many games the "dominance" effect subsides? Way to hate on him for providing the only post that isn't pure speculation.
<!--quoteo(post=1705847:date=Apr 27 2009, 07:19 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Apr 27 2009, 07:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705847"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Maybe through the conditioning of playing many games the "dominance" effect subsides? Way to hate on him for providing the only post that isn't pure speculation.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I didn't hate on him <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" /> And people who play sports would seem to be just as susceptible to conditioning.
<!--quoteo(post=1705848:date=Apr 28 2009, 01:21 AM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TychoCelchuuu @ Apr 28 2009, 01:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I didn't hate on him <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" /> And people who play sports would seem to be just as susceptible to conditioning.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->You didn't exactly hate, but you were dismissive, which considering it's the best post in this thread, is a bit harsh. Edit: Okay, it's a so-so post. It links to a piece with no substantiated statistical data. It talks about Boxing and Taekwondo, but for how many Olympics, how many matches? How much of a trend is it? We don't actually know because the piece has no real substance, it just glosses over some research that some guys did.
How many sports do you know that are consistantly Red vs. Blue? (Edit: actually the article answers this: think Olympics)
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In an article published in the Journal of Sports Sciences in early 2008, Hill and Barton expanded their analysis to include the teams of England's Premier League from 1947 to 2003. Their statistical analysis determined that football teams wearing red had a disproportionately higher rate of both winning home games and securing the title than teams wearing either yellow or orange. The findings were unequivocal: Three out of the four most successful English clubs donned red jerseys for home games: Manchester United ("The Red Devils"), FC Liverpool ("The Reds") and FC Arsenal.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This side of the research is where it becomes weak. Yellow or Orange? There are barely any teams that wear yellow or orange. Was it disproportionally higher than those wearing Blue? -because that would cover a lot more teams in the Premier League.
Anyway I don't put much credence in the researchers, because they say Red is the colour Humans use for dominance, when in fact it's totally dependant on culture. Generally speaking, white is a dominant colour because it is a display of wealth (a rich person can wear all white and not worry about getting dirty, the working class has traditionally worn darker clothes that can hide the dirt). But in Viking society, pink clothing was a sign of strength, because it showed you had dirtied your white cloths with blood, and proven yourself as a warrior.
The researchers really don't deserve any notoriety: they've written a poorly researched and anecdotal piece, and considering they went to the same Uni I did, they should have done better.
KassingerShades of greyJoin Date: 2002-02-20Member: 229Members, Constellation
How harsh a post is depends entirely how you read it, and writing being without facial expressions and tone of voice, it can be read differently. I didn't really see Tychoo as that dismissive, only as wanting further explanation. I was more disappointed of the impression Crispy's edit gave me (retracting praise!) , therefore I bother to reply. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The researchers really don't deserve any notoriety: they've written a poorly researched and anecdotal piece, and considering they went to the same Uni I did, they should have done better.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It seems to me you're saying because the spiegel article wasn't that great, the research must be bad. It was published in a peer-reviewed journal, and Nature at that, not the newsmagazine.
Looking back to where I orignally read about it, I found some numbers quoted. This is from a science news site in Norwegian, so I didn't link to it in my OP. 55% of tae kwon do, boxing and wrestling matches (and 60% when the skill gap was small) were won by the person wearing red. And who wears red is chosen by chance. They also looked at 5 Portuguese football teams who have two sets of clothes with one of them red and the other completely without red. They had statistical significant tendency to play better in red than in their other wardrobe.
And as for the explanation for these results, that will just be guessing for now. (And by the way Crispy, do you use "generally speaking" as just a manner of speaking, or are you contradicting yourself?)
But hey, this thread reminded me of something I read in popular science reporting, and I posted about it.
Links: Nature item. Sadly you can't read the journal article itself without paying up. <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7040/full/435293a.html" target="_blank">http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/...ll/435293a.html</a>
Figure from journal article <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7040/fig_tab/435293a_F1.html#figure-title" target="_blank">http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/...ml#figure-title</a>
I know all about the red thing! I've known it for years! It makes perfect sense to me! What DOESN'T make sense is why it USED TO apply to Team Fortress 2, and now DOES NOT! I was wondering if anyone could explain it, and we haven't made a lot of progress which I guess is understandable but still. Really weird.
edit: and because Crispy was unfairly beating you up, I'll vouch for that Nature article (I can read the whole thing because my University gives me access). Crispy, you say that colors vary between cultures, but that's looking at stuff that's a lot less innate. We're talking about deep-seated stuff that has evolved over millions of years. Red is associated with aggressiveness in animals, and sticking red crap on them makes them more dominant. Humans blush and pale, and that makes you more or less red. The study's statistics at least from what I can tell look perfectly fine and it got into Nature which means it's got at least a modicum of respectability. I don't know where you get off telling scientists that everything they say is wrong because you've got some ideas about clothing or something.
edit 2: this is the original article, not that second one. Haven't read that yet.
Are you saying that blushing is an act of dominance? Because it sounds like you're taking a list of older tendencies and trying to keep them tagged onto today's society, ignoring a whole lot of evolution and changes that have happened in the meantime.
Did you read the counter-argument made to that first Nature article? The quote given was: <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The shirt colour worn by sportsmen can affect the behaviour of the competitors but Hill and Barton show that it may also influence the outcome of contests. By analysing the results of men's combat sports from the Athens 2004 Olympics, they found that more matches were won by fighters wearing red outfits than by those wearing blue; they suggest that red might confer success because it is a sign of dominance in many animal species and could signal aggression in human contests. Here we use another data set from the 2004 Olympics to show that similar winning biases occur in contests in which neither contestant wears red, indicating that a different mechanism may be responsible for these effects.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I will admit that the unbelievably poor quality of the Speigel article influenced my appraisal of the research, which I have not read. Maybe I should write a paper about how meaningful information, when introduced within the context of an awful journal, can be seen to appear less valid by individuals prone to cynical behaviour, and send it off to Spiegel.
Comments
That could be fixed easily:
if player_side = original_red and always_blue = true then swap_colors(ef73, dc37)
Or is there anything else themed, besides the 2 colors?
No, it would be just a color swap.
Why do you have to swap the geometry? Is there blue architecture and red architecture?
All you need to do is swap colors and that can be done by pretty much every renderer.
And I imagine that it would be possible to have a game choose between various textures to display on a surface based on what team that player is on. It's just a matter of whether it's worth the trouble or not.
And I imagine that it would be possible to have a game choose between various textures to display on a surface based on what team that player is on. It's just a matter of whether it's worth the trouble or not.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think it's a matter of if it's "worth the trouble". It's an accessibility issue. Many of the maps are not symmetrical. Even the ones that are very close, like arena_lumberyard, is not actually symmetrical. Knowing that from the red side's spawn the medpack is to the left of the building is important information that would be lost if the textures were not constant. From the player's perspective in a texture swapping world, the world would magically be mirrored some of the time, which would cause a lot of confusion.
Here are some quotes from a Spiegel article about red's dominance:
<!--QuoteBegin-Spiegel Online+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Spiegel Online)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->From studies on animals and humans, we know that red is used to signal dominance," Hill told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "Among humans, rage is associated with reddening skin, which results from increased blood circulation," the researchers wrote in their article for Nature. (...) The results of the test gave clear evidence that exposure to red "impairs performance" and can trigger an "avoidance motivation," in much the same way as a stop sign.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,570918,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitge...,570918,00.html</a>
Why do you have to swap the geometry? Is there blue architecture and red architecture?
All you need to do is swap colors and that can be done by pretty much every renderer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Red's stuff is generally more farm themed, with wood being used a lot. Blu's stuff is more modern, mostly metal and concrete.
Here are some quotes from a Spiegel article about red's dominance:
<a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,570918,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitge...,570918,00.html</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, fantastic. How come it doesn't apply anymore, then? What changed? Your post would work really well if the advantage to playing as Red hadn't gone away.
Maybe through the conditioning of playing many games the "dominance" effect subsides? Way to hate on him for providing the only post that isn't pure speculation.
I didn't hate on him <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" /> And people who play sports would seem to be just as susceptible to conditioning.
How many sports do you know that are consistantly Red vs. Blue? (Edit: actually the article answers this: think Olympics)
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In an article published in the Journal of Sports Sciences in early 2008, Hill and Barton expanded their analysis to include the teams of England's Premier League from 1947 to 2003. Their statistical analysis determined that football teams wearing red had a disproportionately higher rate of both winning home games and securing the title than teams wearing either yellow or orange. The findings were unequivocal: Three out of the four most successful English clubs donned red jerseys for home games: Manchester United ("The Red Devils"), FC Liverpool ("The Reds") and FC Arsenal.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This side of the research is where it becomes weak. Yellow or Orange? There are barely any teams that wear yellow or orange. Was it disproportionally higher than those wearing Blue? -because that would cover a lot more teams in the Premier League.
Anyway I don't put much credence in the researchers, because they say Red is the colour Humans use for dominance, when in fact it's totally dependant on culture. Generally speaking, white is a dominant colour because it is a display of wealth (a rich person can wear all white and not worry about getting dirty, the working class has traditionally worn darker clothes that can hide the dirt). But in Viking society, pink clothing was a sign of strength, because it showed you had dirtied your white cloths with blood, and proven yourself as a warrior.
The researchers really don't deserve any notoriety: they've written a poorly researched and anecdotal piece, and considering they went to the same Uni I did, they should have done better.
They lose almost every match they play.
This is proof.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The researchers really don't deserve any notoriety: they've written a poorly researched and anecdotal piece, and considering they went to the same Uni I did, they should have done better.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It seems to me you're saying because the spiegel article wasn't that great, the research must be bad. It was published in a peer-reviewed journal, and Nature at that, not the newsmagazine.
Looking back to where I orignally read about it, I found some numbers quoted. This is from a science news site in Norwegian, so I didn't link to it in my OP. 55% of tae kwon do, boxing and wrestling matches (and 60% when the skill gap was small) were won by the person wearing red. And who wears red is chosen by chance. They also looked at 5 Portuguese football teams who have two sets of clothes with one of them red and the other completely without red. They had statistical significant tendency to play better in red than in their other wardrobe.
And as for the explanation for these results, that will just be guessing for now. (And by the way Crispy, do you use "generally speaking" as just a manner of speaking, or are you contradicting yourself?)
But hey, this thread reminded me of something I read in popular science reporting, and I posted about it.
Links:
Nature item. Sadly you can't read the journal article itself without paying up.
<a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7040/full/435293a.html" target="_blank">http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/...ll/435293a.html</a>
Figure from journal article
<a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7040/fig_tab/435293a_F1.html#figure-title" target="_blank">http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/...ml#figure-title</a>
Norwegian article
<a href="http://www.forskning.no/artikler/2005/mai/1116497355.82" target="_blank">http://www.forskning.no/artikler/2005/mai/1116497355.82</a>
edit: and because Crispy was unfairly beating you up, I'll vouch for that Nature article (I can read the whole thing because my University gives me access). Crispy, you say that colors vary between cultures, but that's looking at stuff that's a lot less innate. We're talking about deep-seated stuff that has evolved over millions of years. Red is associated with aggressiveness in animals, and sticking red crap on them makes them more dominant. Humans blush and pale, and that makes you more or less red. The study's statistics at least from what I can tell look perfectly fine and it got into Nature which means it's got at least a modicum of respectability. I don't know where you get off telling scientists that everything they say is wrong because you've got some ideas about clothing or something.
edit 2: this is the original article, not that second one. Haven't read that yet.
The auto-join algorithm was broken and resulted in people being more often assigned to the red side.
Then they fixed it.
Did you read the counter-argument made to that first Nature article? The quote given was:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The shirt colour worn by sportsmen can affect the behaviour of the competitors but Hill and Barton show that it may also influence the outcome of contests. By analysing the results of men's combat sports from the Athens 2004 Olympics, they found that more matches were won by fighters wearing red outfits than by those wearing blue; they suggest that red might confer success because it is a sign of dominance in many animal species and could signal aggression in human contests. Here we use another data set from the 2004 Olympics to show that similar winning biases occur in contests in which neither contestant wears red, indicating that a different mechanism may be responsible for these effects.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I will admit that the unbelievably poor quality of the Speigel article influenced my appraisal of the research, which I have not read. Maybe I should write a paper about how meaningful information, when introduced within the context of an awful journal, can be seen to appear less valid by individuals prone to cynical behaviour, and send it off to Spiegel.
Oh, yes. Please do! :O