Written by a person who loves ChGK and loves Stopgame and sincerely wishes everyone love, kindness and more delicious chewing gum. The author in no way intends to offend players, authors of questions, the editorial team and the administration of the StopGame website.ru
A short excursion into history
"What? Where? When?"in its original idea, it was some kind of student smoking room, in which Soviet nerds from all sorts of Moscow State University smoked recklessly, swore at each other, shouted at each other and somewhere in between answered tricky questions that the authors of the program lovingly pushed them. This format didn’t catch on, but now everything described above is quite reminiscent of a sports ChGK: stinking of fumes after yesterday’s game day, students and non-students argue whose IQ is longer (Spoiler: Vasily Galperova) based on questions written by the wise editor.
Television ChGK, in order to maintain and expand the audience, make the program more interactive, and therefore more interesting for the viewer, began to accept questions from viewers, and also introduced a reward system, which even became the subject of many jokes.
What? Where? When? is a game in which six snobs at a table in Moscow try to cheat a pensioner from Saratov out of ten thousand
The game became an “intellectual casino”, in which both spectators and experts raised and lost money that was fabulous by the standards of perestroika and the nineties; in the worst of times, the game was played on “intellectual casino bonds”, but the concept did not change.
The elite ChGK had and still has a slightly different goal setting: if in the sports version the players have a team rating before their eyes, and they have someone to really compete with and to whom to prove something, then in the TV version with one team at the table, the players and the viewer are motivated in a more cynical material way. Money and prizes for the best questions and the best game work on interest and the desire to progress much better than imaginary competition, which is indicated once every issue for three seconds by the standings. Actually, this tournament struggle itself is nothing more than a struggle for the right to play for the season again and win/lose even more. From my experience and the experience of fellow ChGK players, I can say with confidence that although they are interested in the race for the title of champion of the year and the “crystal owl” in the TV version, they are much less interested in it than in the gameplay itself. Connoisseurs come for a challenge for the brain and money, and the viewer comes for interesting questions, perhaps also for money. However, this is the most important thing about ChGK: this is how some of the smartest people, sitting at the table, give birth from the primordial chaos to the correct answer where it seemed that it was impossible to get it without pure knowledge.
And from this the conclusion follows: albeit in such a soulless and cynical way, however, the authors of the television “What? Where? When?» achieved progress and development from experts and from the authors of questions (whether they were spectators or “regular” questionnaires). If you look at the questions and players from at least 15-20 years ago, you will see that the level of play of experts and the quality of questions have increased noticeably. The struggle for prizes and survival in this system forced both competing sides to progress and “pump up”.
Yes, I know that now TV-ChGK is going through far from the best of times, but the problem there is rather the fierce conservatism of Kryuk, the masters and simply elders, the inflated and almost entirely tied to “clan” system of getting into the club (of those who got into the club in recent years absolutely honestly, only Mrs. Lazareva comes to mind), as well as the increased average age of experts and a gradual decline in interest: these people have already won almost everything, but financially God forbid everyone is provided.
I think you already understand where I’m going with this
After watching a bunch of ChGK games on Stopgame, some even several times, I came to a very disappointing conclusion: the games on the site have no end goal. At the moment, the situation seems something like this: the ChGK on the site rests on Fen, who, with his enthusiasm, edits questions, writes summaries, and gathers players and testers, as well as literally half a dozen questioner guys who still continue to write questions for games and are really interested in the topic. But this list does not include the most important thing: there is no experts. Perhaps the snobbery of a player with ten years of experience is speaking in me now, but in order to win and develop, you need to play and train. Otherwise it just won’t work. Of course, you can take the most active guys from blogs to your test server (I’m for!) and specifically seat them in a common pot so that they write the notes in synergy. However, this will be of no use if experts do not understand the basic aspects of the game, do not want to train themselves, and are not interested in winning.
The authors of the questions must feel the danger from experts, understand that they are smart enough, cunning and able to think outside the box to take on the question. And they need to understand that they compete with experts, not beating up babies.
And, naturally, both opposing sides must understand why they are doing this.
Did you know that Stimulus in Ancient Rome was the name given to the stick that was used to beat donkeys to make them walk faster?.
Now the mechanism for motivating experts is “punishment streams”. I put it in quotes on purpose. If at the very beginning it somehow worked, then the punishment for Degrad-ChGK was a complete slap in the face of the audience: not only was there already a similar stream, but during the stream the experts themselves for some reason decided that they could reject some “strata” at their discretion. Of course, I myself could have degenerated while watching such a CCG, but somewhere in the dark recesses of my subconscious I remained confident that punishments do not work that way. Or the punishment should be really harsh within the limits of what is permissible. Karaoke stream, stream of I Wanna Be The Guy, and thousands of possible streams or videos that Stopgame delays, refuses, or is simply afraid to do. If you really don’t want to create positive stimulation for experts and authors/viewers, then turn the negative one up to the maximum!
Make Kulakov make the damn “History of the Assassins Series” through at least a loss, and put Kulakov himself in the captain’s chair! Yes, the very next day he will run to Fen with the question “How to play this?!", and the topic will be bursting with material with which to work.
Or go to Author and Connoisseur Rewards. Nobody is asking for canvas bags of radioactive evergreen pieces of paper, but here’s an example: now the same AORUS brand is being actively promoted through Stopgame, God forgive me. What’s stopping you from making these guys a sponsor of the issue and raffling off some of the prizes from them for connoisseurs and viewers, Mr. Kungurov? It seems to me alone that at least from this approach everyone will benefit?
5 points. What exactly can and should be done now??
1. Make punishments punishments.
In this case, real pressure will be put on the experts, it will be more interesting for viewers to watch, and realize that if the experts lose, more high-quality and original content awaits them. As a result, the number of questions will increase, which will gradually develop into quality. I hope someone even Potashev and Levin will open and read.
2. To p.1 worked better, the punishment should be known in advance.
That is, already at the https://casino-seven.org time of the announcement of the game, so that the audience knows exactly what they are paying for and what awaits them if they win. And the punishments must be truly original. And not two streams in a row on “strats”.
3. A clear schedule of games and their lower frequency.
Now ChGK is published once every two to three weeks. It’s better if the game airs once every 4 weeks: the authors will have more time to write, the editors will have more time to polish and prepare, Fen will have more time to proofread and line up, and the experts will have for preparation.
4. Team compositions must be officially announced and also recorded in advance.
Why is this needed: editors will be able to select questions in the topics of which experts will not be at all “floating” (there is still no faith in a sharp upgrade of their erudition), and the teams themselves will have what is mentioned in paragraph.3 preparation time. We are not talking about something mind-blowing and preparing from morning till night with setting up answer algorithms, clearly polishing responsibilities, etc.d. But players must understand, what is required of them, how to organize discussion time, to get used to each other a little. This does not require a huge investment of time: if the game is held once every four weeks, the composition can be recruited and determined in two and a half to three weeks. Meet twice for one and a half to two hours in discord, look through the database of questions and at least hear from the same Fen about the nuances of the game – this will already make the games more entertaining and eliminate unnecessary questions and rough edges.
5. Clear positive incentives for authors.
If the authors of the questions know that they are guaranteed to receive something tasty and beautiful if they win, this will again stimulate the flow of questions. Then it’s a natural process – quantity develops into quality. And the best, accordingly, receive a reward for the best question, which is chosen by the manager/presenter/experts
Not a very happy conclusion
In its current form, ChGK is on StopGame.ru akin to the fifth part of the famous action movie from Kojima. The idea seems to be good, but stillborn, and also does not have the ultimate purpose of its existence. In order for ChGK on SG to remain interesting for everyone, including the experts themselves, they need to understand why they play it. Gentlemen, experts, you ask this question when opening a new game or writing a review. Try to answer now: why do you need to play THIS “What?”? Where? When?»? And is this Frankenstein a Game at all??
No, this is not a game. This is a damn shame that makes you want to punch people in the face. Dear experts, please respect the intelligence of both the authors of the questionnaires and the audience, do not disgrace yourself and at least pretend that you are preparing for the games and training. And if you lose, then work out the punishment, and don’t show off your ass! In order for the very idea of ChGK to develop, both sides of this intellectual confrontation must develop. And at the moment, there is no point in developing questionnaire authors. Whatever they write, the answer will be silence or indistinct muttering.
I do not claim to be the ultimate truth and can only speak from the perspective of an editor, an expert and an ordinary viewer. This post is a boiling expression of my personal opinion: the ChGK on StopGame is “broken” at the level, so to speak, of the source code. And with every game this becomes more and more evident. And when we buy a defective game, we either wait for a patch or make a refund.
Best comments
This opinion has a right to exist. But the question here is this:
1. There is almost no “process of solving the riddle”, as you say. Damn it, at the last game only Malt tried, who, by the way, trains with us and improves as a player who is INTERESTED. There was only one moment of team play.
The main message is “ChGK cannot be interesting if the experts are not interested and they play to “fuck off”. And to make it interesting, you need an incentive, because experts simply don’t want to do otherwise.”. Initially, the incentive for players was interest, but now, of those who are interested, really interested, only Malt plays: Fen leads, and Galperov and Kungurov are too busy.
2. The argument “well, we’re all here for fun” somehow doesn’t really work in the light of ChGK. Still, the Game itself is on serious grounds. Yes, the pack itself can be made humorous, you can invite a degrad squad, but the essence itself is quite serious: these are complex questions, tailored to the work of the interauricular nerve node of a team of five, in our case, people. If you really want fun intellectual oppression, there is Brother-in-law.
The argument “If you don’t like it, don’t watch it” works when an initially high-quality product is being prepared, and the person sending negative feedback is either out of touch or unable to express a constructive opinion. Here the situation is different:
there is a specific complaint, and this is not the quality of the questions (it is to a much lesser extent), but the quality of the game of experts. And it’s terrible. And I would like to convey that if the experts are cooler, then the questions will have to be written cooler. And then it will be even more spectacular.
As for the severity of the efforts made, I just want to say that they are compensated by views, and if the content produced obviously improves in quality, then views will also increase with profits. Nowadays in Russia there are a huge number of different kinds of quizzes and intellectual games that are interesting to watch and interesting to play.
On the issue of profits: the margin of the same “Brain Slaughterhouse”, for example, is about 80% on the largest platforms.
And by analogy with the same Kinologs, various kinds of special issues, affiliate programs and crossovers are only beneficial. But until there is a team of questionnaires, at least a desire on the part of the authors of the SG to really win, and all this will be done by two and a half people plus testers, the idea will not go far. Actually, it is already stagnating.
The problem is that I like the IDEA of CHGK on SG, and I WANT to watch it, because it is a combination of two favorite things, but the implementation has already begun to stagnate. And if stagnation is not followed by fundamental changes, degradation will begin. I don’t want this, and I, as a user of the site, which this site loves, and also as a player who understands and loves ChGK, raise this issue and try to offer something constructive.
I would, of course, suggest that donations from spectators be collected in a bank – a kind of prize fund and most of it goes to the winning team, be it spectators or experts. The smaller part, for example 30 percent, went to the site in any case – for maintenance, so to speak. But no one will approve of such a system.
From the very beginning, I was also somewhat put off by some randomness and the lack of an endgame. Team coordination – well, where does it come from if they are of different composition each time, and, indeed, no special goal or price of loss hangs over the experts. The “game for fun” format looks good in the same Game of Our Own (perhaps that’s why it gives me much more pleasure), and there it’s every man for himself – it’s clear that it’s easier for the guys, which is quite understandable.
I support the opinion that something in the format needs to be changed. Or more stable teams (although there are simply not enough people here, as I understand it), or some clearer goals for the event.
Well, by the way, I can’t help but find fault and disagree. In the last release, he played a significant role in making the entire game feel shaky and uncertain in a bad way. Still, the people in the comments complained not about the level of experts, but about the Halo blitz (which, if I’m not confused, none of the chasing groups said good words about it, but which was left, apparently, due to the lack of an alternative) and about what “Fen creates”, t.e lack of clarity for the viewer of certain decisions (for many it remains unclear why the answer “fog” is incorrect), the pictures hanging during the discussion of the issue are a crappy solution and in general Vanya gave the people the impression of not a fair Themis, but simply a careless presenter. I’m not denying that the level of experts plays a role – I’m just saying that the impressions of the last release mainly shaped the problems on the other side. Or, at least, they played a significant role.
Well, I’ll write right away about the idea of the post.(now I’ve finally been able to finish reading and understanding everything properly), it seems to me that your proposal can be compared with a proposal to build a skyscraper on the foundation of a five-story building. And the mixture for the foundation is time and the desire of potential experts. The option “let’s face it, you have to play and if you lose, you’ll make an IS” doesn’t matter; in SG, in this regard, everything happens voluntarily and a person, under such conditions, can simply refuse to play (not to mention the fact that the punishment should be for the team as a whole, and not for a specific person). Moreover, all this will not add time to them, the relatively flexible scope of which is already distributed between personal life and work. Although I agree with the idea that punishments need to be chosen that are interesting and outside the comfort zone of the players (but without extreme fanaticism, of course).
Well, I’ll note that somehow linking the game with partner competitions also seems like a good idea.
I watched all the episodes and in my opinion only somewhere in the beginning and in the last they very briefly stated that there was a reward. I think it’s worth reminding about this with approximately the same frequency as about donations for blitzes.
I kind of made it clear that if you don’t like it, don’t yell “Close this trash heap”, lol.
Here they are talking about something completely different: “Close it before it turns into a trash heap or change the concept”. The difference is small at first glance, but very significant. And the loud headline is very much in the spirit of modern SG. And yes, the phrases were taken out of context.
But I have to agree with the punishments: the experts have already forgotten that these are really “punishments” for losing, and then people come to the stream to see how the experts happily discover something new for themselves, or suffer if they cannot get into a “new experience”. The last stream with roulette was simply a spit in the face of all viewers, because not only did the strata practically not try to perform, but also a huge number were simply ignored, which discouraged ANY desire to donate to that stream, and to subsequent blitzes or streams dedicated to ChGK, because why?
I apologize for the perhaps too harsh comment, but I’m also boiling. It’s pretty much boiling over from SG users and their “wants”. I also wish SG all the best, I also want the quality of content to increase. But understand already that your personal desires and what the site needs are two different things.
I understand that you are well versed in ChGK and want its (transmission) version to become more serious and thoughtful. But what makes you think that SG itself needs this?? What makes you think that the authors of the site, who have a lot of other, more important work for them, have the desire and time to do training?? Even for money? Stopgame is a large portal with a ton of varied content, and PGC for it is just a great way to diversify the Twitch channel. And it shouldn’t be something more simply because serious work on it would come at the expense of some other work.
Yes, as a fan of ChGK, you want it to be developed. And what? Then a fan of “Own Game” will come and say that the s—–brother-in-law is a frivolous piece of shit and demand that the authors sweated over his favorite game. Then a fan of some other direction will come. Then another one. And one more thing. Authors listen to everyone?
Yes, sooner or later Fen’s enthusiasm will dry up, sooner or later the quality of questions will begin to drop significantly (at the moment it is only growing), sooner or later interest in ChGK will begin to fade. And yes, sooner or later ChGK will be closed. Instead, there will be some other way to diversify the Twitch channel. And that’s completely fucking normal.
Once again you described your post in detail to me. Thanks for your efforts, but I understood it the first time. Then I will repeat my comment again. Stopgame DOESN’T NEED to bother so much with a particular type of stream. There’s simply no need. This is not a “Club of Connoisseurs”, not an “intellectual casino”, etc.d. This is entertaining content that does not require serious work from the majority of those involved and is still liked by viewers. This is its value for the site. I understand that it is unpleasant for you, as a person deeply immersed in the ChGK, to hear this. But it’s a fact, come to terms with it.
“Create a team of full-time questionnaires”, “in two weeks these people will be able to get together at least once or twice for two hours and see how to play and what they want from them” – these are by no means cosmetic changes. This is quite serious work that you DEMAND from people who don’t really need it all. Work that is unclear how it will be paid.
Okay, I think I said everything. I’ll go watch the real ChGK on TV before I miss it all.
You have embarked on a thorny path, Mr. Volkovich)
I perfectly understand the complaints against ChGK and agree with them, but the essence has already been voiced in the posts from some users above – many people are satisfied with the way it is at the moment. I think it’s sad. I am for quality content on the site. But getting away with it is much easier and costs less. And most importantly, people eat it. Many people come to streams not even to watch the process, but simply for the sake of specific SG authors. Blogs are added according to the same scheme. And at the same time, it’s very gratifying to see that your Blog has collected a lot of advantages, and that there are those who want change. I’m still facepalming from the first DnD stream, I really hope that I’ll never see THIS again.
In short, I’m not here for the sake of making constructive suggestions, because you’ve already brought in a bunch of very good ideas, but simply for the sake of moral support. I hope that this topic will at least somehow influence ChGK and it will become really interesting to watch (I turned on the stream with the Degrad squad somewhere in the middle, spat on it and cut it off).
Actually I happened there. I was even a captain. I recommend taking a closer look at the ancient history of fighting games!
Introduced clear wording of proposals so that there would be no accusations of childish foot stomping and “stupid hate”.
5 points. What exactly can and should be done now??
1. Make punishments punishments. In this case, real pressure will be put on the experts, it will be more interesting for viewers to watch, and realize that if the experts lose, more high-quality and original content awaits them. As a result, the number of questions will increase, which will gradually develop into quality. I hope someone even Potashev and Levin will open and read.
2. To 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 knows exactly what they are paying for and what awaits them if they win. And the punishments must be truly original. And not two streams in a row on “strats”.
3. A clear schedule of games and their lower frequency. Now ChGK is published once every two to three weeks. It’s better if the game airs once every 4 weeks: the authors will have more time to write, the editors will have more time to polish and prepare, Fen will have more time to proofread and line up, and the experts will have for preparation.
4. Team compositions must be officially announced and also recorded in advance. Why is this needed: editors will be able to select questions in the topics of which experts will not be at all “floating” (there is still no faith in a sharp upgrade of their erudition), and the teams themselves will have what is mentioned in paragraph.3 preparation time. We are not talking about something mind-blowing and preparing from morning till night with setting up answer algorithms, clearly polishing responsibilities, etc.d. But players must understand, what is required of them, how to organize discussion time, to get used to each other a little. This does not require a huge investment of time: if the game is held once every four weeks, the composition can be recruited and determined in two and a half to three weeks. Meet twice for one and a half to two hours in discord, look through the database of questions and at least hear from the same Fen about the nuances of the game – this will already make the games more entertaining and eliminate unnecessary questions and rough edges.
5. Clear positive incentives for authors. If the authors of the questions know that they are guaranteed to receive something tasty and beautiful if they win, this will again stimulate the flow of questions. Then it’s a natural process – quantity develops into quality. And the best are awarded at the choice of experts/leader/manager.
I only agree that punishments for losing should be a real punishment, and not a sad parody of it. Although the example with Kulakov is, of course, stupid.
Interesting opinion.
I, as an ordinary viewer, like to watch ChGK even without any incentives. The most interesting thing about it is the process of solving questions by “experts”.
The quibble with the team of experts is also not clear. In our case, the “experts” are the authors of SG. Degrad squad – in a hurry, like “The first game of the spring series. KVN stars against TV viewers".
I agree about the stillborn, when Fen gets tired and/or the audience stops writing questions, the show will close on its own.
If you look at Kinologov, they just turned from a more or less serious program about cinema into a funny discussion of films.
Actually, I don’t see the point in turning a fan section into something serious.
Indeed, in the first two or three games the enthusiasm of the players was felt. And then everyone, except the presenter, somehow relaxed. – We can’t answer? – Well, okay, no problem, say the first thing that comes to mind. We’re not in any serious danger anyway. Lost interest a little.
P.S. I would like to know if testers are a fixed set of privileged people, or if you can somehow become one of them?
With your words you only confirmed everything that I wrote in the comments above. What kind of appeal is this to fictitious obligations, they called their game, and therefore owe someone. Who do they owe? And if they don’t do as you want, then they have no conscience and responsibility?
You can find problems with ChGK, but everything written here is just a discrepancy with your expectations.
Z.Y. And by the way, when someone inserts Dark Souls anywhere, it seems to me like a person with a flag waving it and shouting: “I have low self-esteem, so I compare everything to Dark Souls to look hardcore”.
No Comments yet!