|
|
Post by godzillajoe2k4 on Apr 13, 2004 11:57:05 GMT -5
Managers, Valets, Cruiserweights, Interview segments, blood, guts, table matches etc etc etc. Is there anything left in 'real' wrestling that isn't represented?
|
|
|
|
Post by gamtime247 on Apr 13, 2004 13:32:45 GMT -5
Diva Contests!  haha, joking. I'd love if there was a way to represent championship titles on the cards somehow. even just a little clip token or something maybe. |
|
|
|
Post by Graymar on Apr 13, 2004 13:45:32 GMT -5
This may be just me...but the whole business side of wrestling...
Gate Numbers
TV Ratings
Salaries
Drawing an audiance
Etc.
Graymar
|
|
|
|
Post by godzillajoe2k4 on Apr 13, 2004 14:28:23 GMT -5
Diva Contests! haha, joking. I'd love if there was a way to represent championship titles on the cards somehow. even just a little clip token or something maybe. Yeah! I'm gonna start working on a bra and panties match chart!  |
|
|
|
Post by godzillajoe2k4 on Apr 13, 2004 14:30:08 GMT -5
This may be just me...but the whole business side of wrestling... Gate Numbers TV Ratings Salaries Drawing an audiance Etc. Graymar How could you gauge that though? Random dice rolls would kind of get frustrating. Say you're running a huge show and some chart says the attendence is crap and the ratings stink? And how do you then FIX these problems? I just assume business is booming all of the time in the MWF! (my fed) |
|
|
|
Post by Big Bri on Apr 13, 2004 15:02:27 GMT -5
To Godzilla Joe,
I understand your point, but Graymar is an accountant and I am majoring in accounting in college, and we number-crunchers have an addiction to statistics and charts that needs to be satisfied!!! (Correct me if I'm wrong Graymar).
Graymar came up with a system, although I haven't had the time to work with it or tweak it at all yet. Maybe someday we can generate something that could work well.
Big Bri
|
|
|
|
Post by Vince McMahon on Apr 13, 2004 15:06:04 GMT -5
I just assume business is booming all of the time in the MWF! (my fed) If only it was really that easy Godzilla. Trust me...it's not!  |
|
|
|
Post by godzillajoe2k4 on Apr 13, 2004 16:01:26 GMT -5
To Godzilla Joe, I understand your point, but Graymar is an accountant and I am majoring in accounting in college, and we number-crunchers have an addiction to statistics and charts that needs to be satisfied!!! (Correct me if I'm wrong Graymar). Graymar came up with a system, although I haven't had the time to work with it or tweak it at all yet. Maybe someday we can generate something that could work well. Big Bri Good luck with that. That would certainly add a whole new dimension to the game. "Sorry Star Warrior, the numbers say you're just not cutting it, we're gonna have to let you go" |
|
|
|
Post by Graymar on Apr 14, 2004 7:16:02 GMT -5
COTG is escapism...anything that draws us further in...deeper into the fantasy...or makes it more real...is a good thing.
I realize that I am in the minority...but for me...I enjoy pushing around numbers...the things I mentioned add depth to the escape. I have worked on several systems as mentioned by BigBri. I just haven't hit on a good system yet.
To those that don't enjoy this...I have no fault with that...the important thing is that we each get enjoyment out of however we want to 'run' our world!
Graymar
BTW:To Godzilajoe...I would have some randomness in it, but it would be heavily influanced by the quality of the card...that is where the sticking point is...how do you grade or assign a number to the quality of the card.
|
|
Thunder Fire Driver
Guest
|
Post by Thunder Fire Driver on Apr 14, 2004 8:46:11 GMT -5
I would have some randomness in it, but it would be heavily influenced by the quality of the card...that is where the sticking point is...how do you grade or assign a number to the quality of the card. Excellent insight. The answer ultimately is that YOU CAN'T. The aesthetics of match quality (or 'work rate' in the current lingo) are subjective referents. As a guide they have little to nothing to actually do with what draws really money. You could in essence devise a complicated star system that grades each match, and then use this criteria to score the overall 'quality' of the card....but this still wouldn't have much to do with the quantitative structure of television ratings, PPV buyrates, house show attendance, rights fees or merchandise sales. Not to mention that there is no such component as 'good' or 'bad' wrestling in an absolute sense that could form such a tool of measurement in the first place. Like any artistic medium, qualitative assessments on pro wrestling are relative to each individuals value preferences. Even among those people who share a general agreement upon the difference between what equates to 'good' or 'bad' aesthetically, the gradations and minute details of what separates 'good' from 'great', and 'great' from 'excellent' often lead to violent disagreement, which leads to the mind inducing swamp of nowhere. In terms of pro wrestling, the various boom periods in the industry often have little to no similarities aesthetically with the boom periods that have preceded it. The true catalysts for booms such as the changes in technology & economic prosperity, coupled with meeting the intransigent value preferences of the consumers is not an exact science, but a random struggle in the myst of chaos. Measuring such a phenomena in a card & dice game would be as 'scientifically accurate' as the multitude of formulas used in government planned economics. One would do just as well throwing darts at a dart board, BLINDFOLDED. |
|
|
|
Post by Graymar on Apr 14, 2004 12:48:51 GMT -5
Good comments Thunder...while I'm sure you are probably right...as a student of business and statstical models...I still hold out hope...
Graymar
|
|
|
|
Post by Casey Jones on Apr 14, 2004 13:23:12 GMT -5
Really, the game is missing Eugene. Eugene rules.
Seriously though,
I agree with the sentiments that match quality does NOT effect buyrates for the most part, or Hogan and Warrior wouldn't have been on top when they were, right?
Way I see it working is each guy has a star power rating. The way it could work is you add star power to match quality to determine how much the match was really over with the paying audience.
Guys like Ursa Major(I'm only on 2095...he's still a jobber, so I'll pick on him) could have negative or low star powers. We decide how good a match was ourselves, since it IS subjective here.
So if Ursa Major had a good match, it wouldn't really effect ratings or money or anything like that; I mean, it's Ursa Major. Say he had a 5 star match, but had a negative 5 rating in his personality(with negatives being bad instead of good here like in power and agility ratings). That would balance out to average fan response.
Now if Star Warrior had a 5 star match the response would be astronomical.
With the GWF, most of the top guys ARE the best workers because of the way their cards are set up. BUT with the rolls of the dice, Star Warrior vs. Thantos could totally suck and Sectarian vs. Mutant could steal the show.
Just something to think about I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by Graymar on Apr 14, 2004 13:50:28 GMT -5
Casey,
Interesting comments...Star Power is part of it...
I change star power or DRAW after each match...through the first of 2090, the stars are
Thantos 2,960
Star Warrior 1,520
Wolf 1,420
While the bottom is:
Death Masque -160 (based on Death Knight's card)
Pulsar Prime -50 (Again based from the original Pulsar card)
Vanity 35
These are the number of fans that will pay to see each other fight. So, over 4,400 fans want to see Thantos v Star Warrior...but people stay away from a Vanity - Pulsar Prime match. These can ( and significantly do) change over time. Executioner was a near 0 performer but has built up to 335 DRAW after carrying the Holo-Vid title for about 8 weeks.
Graymar
|
|
|
|
Post by CaseyJones on Apr 14, 2004 14:29:27 GMT -5
The only real flaw in that is that nobody realistically is going to just pay to see one match for the most part, especially one of the curtain jerker matches(like saying 40 people would come see Ursa vs. Creeper or something wouldn't really happen).
Not that I can think of a way to get things more realistic. Maybe some kind of percentage system with the star system and match quality getting people more excited to see the next card(because really, how hot your last card was has a HUGE effect on how hot your next card will be). Plus, if there's two non stars that have good matches wrestling, I might buy a PPV just for that one match. I did that stuff with WCW a lot to see like Rey vs. Ultimo or something.
The problem with THAT is the fact that your first card would have like NOBODY there if you used that system, since nobody has seen anything yet...
|
|
|
|
Post by godzillajoe2k4 on Apr 14, 2004 14:36:04 GMT -5
But 'star power' doesn't really mean anything either.
Mark Calloway did NOTHING in WCW as Mean Mark
In WWF as Undertaker he was monster over.
Unless you're gonna start creating your own gimmicks for guys
|
|
|
|
Post by CaseyJones on Apr 14, 2004 14:42:51 GMT -5
Well you'd have to have star power either be subjective too, like how we think the guy would get over, or a number given to us by Tom like how he would think the guy would get over.
Keep in mind that a combo of that and how they perform in matches, which is up to the dice really, and how good the match was, which is up to our tastes, would determine how a guy really draws.
This way, a guy who totally dominated could go to the top, even if his matches weren't that great. Say Chaos kills everyone in 30 seconds or something....it wouldn't be a good match, but he'd be an absolute monster in the fans eyes, so that'd have to count.
But if Lord Nexus has wins or even losses that were really long, drawn out matches with lots of near falls and all that fun stuff, that'd have to help him out too.
This could work in reverse as well. Getting squashed in 4 seconds could hurt you doubly for not having a good match and getting squashed. The fact that you lost a close match might hurt you, but if it was a good match it could balance out.
Just other possible variables to play with. We're dealing with trying to quantify that intangible that makes a wrestler have "it" but what is "it" exactly?
|
|
|
|
Post by j on Apr 14, 2004 21:17:35 GMT -5
But 'star power' doesn't really mean anything either. Mark Calloway did NOTHING in WCW as Mean Mark In WWF as Undertaker he was monster over. Unless you're gonna start creating your own gimmicks for guys I kinda see this like Raven and Jack of Diamonds being in the middle of the pack for years, then they jumped to the CPC and they are huge stars now. |
|
|
|
Post by WTIC on Apr 15, 2004 7:43:12 GMT -5
Is there anything left in 'real' wrestling that isn't represented?
I finally developed my own by timing a show's worth of WWE matches and counting how many actual moves were done in a match and came up with a formula from there.
Other than that, the game itself has just about everything else I can think of. Any missing elements have been created by fellow Promoters already, or officially created by The Man Himself! |
|
|
|
Post by CaseyJones on Apr 15, 2004 12:44:51 GMT -5
A timing system would be really cool.
|
|
haha, joking. I'd love if there was a way to represent championship titles on the cards somehow. even just a little clip token or something maybe.
