The thing is, people being good at many things is entertaining. People being good at video games isn't. And I say this as someone who likes video games, I can't imagine how tedious it would be for people who have no interest.

Liveinadive wrote:

That SF2 section would have been far more interesting had Howard been able to work out Sonicboom and countered the kicks, forcing Riley to come up with a new strategy. Im not talking about working out animation frames here, just having enough ability and knowledge of the game to change strategy.

No it wouldn't. I've spent hours of my life watching people be competent at fighting games, it's boring as fuck. Watching them both be shit but Russell Howard being so shit he was double-perfected was pretty damn funny.

In fact, the most tedious part of the whole show by far has been that motorbike racing game when pretty much everyone (except Bob Mortimer) was vaguely competent. That was seriously boring.

nick_md wrote:

I'd actually prefer it if the contestants couldn't figure out where to connect the RF cable for 5 mins and when they nail that don't have the power brick plugged in then give up lols well funny, how shit they are eh!

If they're funny with it, it'd be more entertaining than watching the vast majority of gaming.

And remember, I actually play SF2. A non-gamer would certainly have enjoyed that match more than anything 'better'.

Fucking iPad/forum just ate a post.

cockbeard wrote:

...and yet, you've been framed has been on our screens for nigh on 30 years

I did think about, for example, Total Wipeout, but I think there's a fundamental difference between the slapstick of stupid people hurting themselves, and someone being unremarkably shit at something that with a little preparation would look much better.

Despite Yoss's refusal to accept minority status, the existence of various twitch and YouTube celebrities indicates there's a clear market; people who like videogames like to see videogames played well. I used to be blown away by the videos mk used to post of world class Tetris players. The Puyo Pop (or similar) video someone else posted recently should similar levels of reflexes, planning and coordination. The crowds that gather to watch top-tier rhythm action games are another example; it's amazing to watch the moves, you don't have to be an expert to see the skill and hours of practice. I don't have the expertise to read what's going on in a top level Street Fighter match, but most of us can appreciate someone bossing Ikaruga. Likewise, I am shite at online FPSes, and generally don't enjoy your Call of Dutys and Battlefields, but I'll happily watch a clip of someone going on an uninterrupted kill streak. The fact that I have seen so many of these videos because members of this community found them entertaining and shared them with us, and they generate discussion about the skill involved demonstrates the fact that people who like videogames like to see them played well.

Yossarian wrote:

I've spent hours of my life watching people be competent at fighting games, it's boring as fuck.

Why did you spend hours of your life watching them then?

Unlikely wrote:

Yossarian wrote:

I've spent hours of my life watching people be competent at fighting games, it's boring as fuck.

Why did you spend hours of your life watching them then?

Waiting for the pad to be passed.

nick_md wrote:

I'd actually prefer it if the contestants couldn't figure out where to connect the RF cable for 5 mins and when they nail that don't have the power brick plugged in then give up lols well funny, how shit they are eh!

hahaha, cheers Nick, that's put it far better than the draft I started to write then had to do some work

Total Wipeout at least has a competitive element and we know that with a little luck and a lot of effort that people can get around so there is at least a modicum of skill on which to judge people

Any viewer can appreciate those mental moments, Daigo/Wong, 'Ruga S++ Rank runs, even a decent no alert run through a level in an MGS, and that's why I think that if it's to be competitive it needs top class players playing it

Even a non footy fan can watch a Beckham free kick or a Messi dribble and know it's quality, yet I know loads of self proclaimed footy fans who can't recognise decent play from water carrying midfielders making interceptions and recycling possession well

That's where the killer app comes in, decent commentary, you need to be able to engage and educate the audience at the same time, the commentators enthusiasm should be contagious but not to the detriment of his explanation of what's happening in front of the viewer. I'm still not so sure the world needs a "gaming" show though, especially if it's run by gamers, I'm sure most of you are old enough to remember what a pretty crap show Top Gear was way back when it was about cars, I've no doubt a gaming show built by gamers would have the same issues

On the flip side, the evenings and weeks I've spent at GameCityNights and at GameCity itself in Nottingham have been great, and they did that by curating various events that whilst they are clearly games influenced could just as easily not have been. A directors commentary of Limbo from the soundtrack designer, a classical concert in a church where the music happened to be the guy who did red alert. Decent guests with something to say and a decent curator (in fact Ian would be a great choice I think) and no real emphasis on structure

Play a game with a guest if you must, but make it a feature rather than the core, I appreciate star in a car wouldn't work as people at home can practise unless the game was never released, in which case how do you cash in on the popularity, though I think spy party would be a perfect one on one game to play as a feature

cockbeard wrote:

Any viewer can appreciate those mental moments, Daigo/Wong, 'Ruga S++ Rank runs, even a decent no alert run through a level in an MGS.

No they can't. Most people have no clue how tricky those things are. Sport can be worked out by the casual viewer as it's all about physical movements of the body which we all have experience of, if you don't have any experience of something, you've no clue how difficult it is to do, at least not without a ton of explanation. How does the casual viewer know, for instance, with Daigo/Wong what was involved in that? For all they know it involved holding in one direction to parry everything and then pressing one button to counterattack.

You can see the guy with next to no energy, you then see a clearly signposted special move against him, you see the screen light up and then he wins

Honestly, I've shown that video to people who've never played SF3 and others who've only a cursory knowledge of fighters, and almost all have been immediately impressed. For anyone else you have commentary, that's the commentators job

GamesMaster is hands down the most successful games based TV show ever made and that had competent to pro level players. That being said, when it went too pro it was dull.

Setting aside format and guests there is another problem with competitive gaming as something to watch and that is that despite what many people might think, there is quite a small number of 2 player versus games that are accessible and can give a modicum of entertainment to spectators.

This was precisely the problem I had with my Office Gaming League. Far too often what you would think would be great is actually shit and it can be for a number of reasons.

Bear in mind we are talking about people who don't play game at all or that much.

1. The controls are too complicated. This can result in button mashing and boredom for all involved.
2. Levels/tracks have to be learned. Resulting in repeatedly crashing into walls, getting lost and boredom & frustration setting in.
3. LAN setup required or split screen. LAN is the worst of the lot as you just can't follow it. Split screen is a compromise but again is hard to follow. - boring to watch.
4. A single game just takes too long.

That sees off FPS games, racing games, most sports games* and I'd argue versus fighters - all for one or more of the reasons I cite above. In other words the vast majority of games - certainly modern ones.

These are the games that in my experience have been successful because they avoided the above problems:

1. Combat (Tank Pong) 

2. Tetris - 2 player versus - 1st to 25 lines with garbage on.  Not having the 25 line limit was boring because the game lasts too long as casual/noobs don't play fast enough and haven't played Tetris competitively.

3. Tap Runner (Wii). 

4. Typing of the Dead.

5. *Virtua Tennis - the exception to the rule. Because you can see the whole court on the screen.

6. Baku Baku

I have had some success but less so with score attack / time attack games but these aren't true versus games and thus don't really qualify as the "cut and thrust" is lost:

1. Daytona USA 
2. Kaboom!
3. Star Soldier (2 min mode of a shmup)
4. Pacman CE

I have had a partial success with one split screen game - Versus Super Monkey Ball - probably because the game is genius and the courses I selected were on the simpler end of the scale.

I'm not saying these would be a success on TV (a 2 min game of Combat would feel endless - though with the inevitable editing it would be OK) but this is the sort of thing that has the best chance.

Yossarian wrote:

Those all assume at least some knowledge of video games, though.

Yes because some prior knowledge is the only way to get a telly programme on the telly (honourable mention goes out to Kabaddi here)

But then how many people do you know who have no gaming knowledge, I sincerely doubt that anyone under fifty hasn't played a few hours. I mean we grew up with consoles everywhere in front of us and we're all heading swiftly towards 40, I'm pretty sure that makes "people with prior knowledge of games" a pretty large demographic

Tried to watch this a few days ago - turned it off after a few minutes I just couldn't stomach it. I knew it was going to be bad as soon as the 'mock pixel/retro' intro started.

Not for me.