According to recent research the Red Team is significantly more awesome than the Blue Team.
Multiplayer gaming has long been battling to be taken seriously as a sport and it looks like the sports statistics gatherers are finally cottoning on as researchers at the University of Copenhagen have just posted the results of
a study into trends in multiplayer gaming - the results of which are actually quite interesting.
Researchers from the university recorded over 1,340 games of firm multiplayer favourite
Unreal Tournament 2004 and studied how many times each team won in these random battles between Red and Blue.
Oddly, though you'd expect the results to more or less even out in order to reflect the extremely arbitrary nature of team allotment in
UT2004 that actually didn't turn out to be the case - the Red team was able to win 55 percent of all victories. In a random sample of this size that 5 percent difference is pretty significant.
What's even more bizarre though is that the researchers note that this correlates well with similar studies in other physical sports, where teams decked out in red typically enjoy a slight advantage over other players.
The boffins of Copenhagen have ventured forth a reason for this, stating that "
the color red may act as a psychological distractor for men, possibly because men flush and turn red when they're angry."
If you ask us, that seems like flimsy reasoning. We'd say that the Red Team wins more often because they are
awesome - but what do we know? We're colourblind. Let us know your ideas in
the forums.
The results of this study (rather than their conclusion) seem fair enough to me.
the direct conclusion of this research is painfully obvious, people like tomatoes and therefor don`t want to squash red things.
.....an obvious psychological distractor.
Must be some truth behind it :B
However, give me blue any day. Blue is awesome.
Another good reason for Brightskins.
/me runs
No, it does to some people. I bet that you and I are the only people in this thread that think blue is a brighter colour than red. To everyone else, they appear about the same.
In UT3 blue to me seems easier to spot, but I suppose this is not the point of the article at all, so I'll just quiet down ;)
LMFAO, that is some funny ****!
I fear, though I have little evidence, that this might be a function of another, more insidious problem: teamstacking.
My username is usually .smoothie though, and I prefer strawberry flavored smoothies to blueberry/raspberry flavored. My name is more appealing when displayed in red, I guess. Even before my username was smoothie, I enjoyed playing on the red team.
I believe that, since red is a color of urgency and passion, it gets you pumped to complete your mission.
In smaller games where sound and stealth is a factor, yes SAS and Marines do indeed have the upper hand
try a 2v2 Sniper match on crossfire, the marines are hard to spot while the opfor has the "red flag 'SHOOT ME NOW!' beret" to quote one of my friends.
Aimbot much? :)
(joking, of course)
I have noticed that in some maps on cod4 I have an extra hard time picking out targets simply because it takes me longer to realize what they look like. I know it sounds easy, but alot of the time I will not shoot just because I like to play on FF matches, and that extra split second or two can make a huge difference.
No, I just had lessons from Fatal1ty. ;)
Right at the bottom.
All down to map design though - I bet we could all manufacture a map where the red team is guaranteed to lose. :p