On March 18 2011 02:51 Superouman wrote: Most players play as green and opponent always red(that mode you select near the minimap. I don't think your article can be verified for sc2.
Yeah but that is just how that user sees it, you still pick a color in lobby.
Um, but isn't this bullshit? The top 10 UT2004 team deathmatch players would surely be using a competitive mod in their matches giving them the ability to set whatever full-bright enemy colour that they wanted. Back when I played UT2004 I would set enemy colours to a neon green. But that's assuming the researchers just downloaded demos and didn't do this study in a more controlled manner. But I can't imagine they got the top 10 players together all in one place to play thousands of matches without a competitive mod.
On March 18 2011 03:48 dvide wrote: Um, but isn't this bullshit? The top 10 UT2004 team deathmatch players would surely be using a competitive mod in their matches giving them the ability to set whatever full-bright enemy colour that they wanted. Back when I played UT2004 I would set enemy colours to a neon green. But that's assuming the researchers just downloaded demos and didn't do this study in a more controlled manner. But I can't imagine they got the top 10 players together all in one place to play thousands of matches without a competitive mod.
It may make their explanations bullshit, but wouldn't you expect to find that if all top 10 UT 2004 players use competitive mods, then the effect is evened out? The result is still amusing and worth talking about.
I mean, their statistical test is a simple chi squared, which yes, does not control for anything because they're hoping that players distribute into Blue and Red randomly enough that it doesn't matter. There could be reasons why this isn't the case of course, but I have no idea how the game teams are sorted in UT to talk about omitted variables that could cause a bias here.
there was an experiment on a korean tv show long ago.
they had two guys do pull ups in two different rooms. one in a blue room and one in a red room. also, they had them pull a lever to find out their pulling strength, same thing, once in a blue room and one more in red room.
the result: both people doing these activities in the red room was able to do more pull ups and pull harder. also, yelling while doing these activities increases strength.
On March 18 2011 03:48 dvide wrote: Um, but isn't this bullshit? The top 10 UT2004 team deathmatch players would surely be using a competitive mod in their matches giving them the ability to set whatever full-bright enemy colour that they wanted. Back when I played UT2004 I would set enemy colours to a neon green. But that's assuming the researchers just downloaded demos and didn't do this study in a more controlled manner. But I can't imagine they got the top 10 players together all in one place to play thousands of matches without a competitive mod.
It may make their explanations bullshit, but wouldn't you expect to find that if all top 10 UT 2004 players use competitive mods, then the effect is evened out? The result is still amusing and worth talking about.
I mean, their statistical test is a simple chi squared, which yes, does not control for anything because they're hoping that players distribute into Blue and Red randomly enough that it doesn't matter. There could be reasons why this isn't the case of course, but I have no idea how the game teams are sorted in UT to talk about omitted variables that could cause a bias here.
Another thing to consider is if they didn't use competitive mods. In that case, anyone who has played UT2004 relatively seriously will be aware of how difficult it was to see red players in TDM compared to the blue. Especially on the map Deck 17 which is a very popular map for TDM in the casual kind of a public server non-competitive play where they wouldn't be using a compmod.
This is pretty low resolution but you can easily see that the guys in blue are significantly easier to see and track their movements with your eyes than those who are red.
Seems to me the more logical reason would be seeding; in some SC2 tournaments the higher seeded player starts as red and the lower seeded player starts at blue. If the same happens in the games they tested their data could be corrupted.
That being said, the article really doesn't give enough info to prove what they are saying. I guess I'll have to get hold of that paper when I have a bit more time.
In euro football the best team with the most wins in each country are also all red:
Portugal: Benfica Italy: Milan (ok juve has a bit more) England: Manchester united, Liverpool Germany: Bayern munich Holland: Ajax, PSV Spain: only Atletico madrid is red and they are like the 3rd club :\
i had some discussions with some friend about this and we also think red wins more, but i'm from Benfica..
Apparently it'll make a small but measurable difference across ALL categories of real life sports. The advantage that red has over any colour can't be ignored I think. Being able to associate yourself with red and have the other guy see the opposition as red could probably make a difference in aggression of players in gsl however small that difference might be.
In the MSL tournaments, the top seeded player is assigned one color and the lower seeded player is assigned another. It seems to me possible that similar seeding phenomena are going on in other sports, although maby less official and announced. I think the nearly 10% advantage the study shows is more extreme then is really effected by pure mentalchemical-color interaction
I try and maintain 1st degree sun burns on my face. That way when I go out on the town, I'm bright red and center attention. Bitches love red faced men.
On March 18 2011 02:50 Ponyo wrote: uh, if theres something to this.. They should do purple and green!
Purple is red + blue and green is blue + yellow (which has no red in it), so clearly purple (which at least contains some red in it) would win, unless yellow is better than red.