Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
typodupeerror Allows Players to Bet On Console Game Matches 112

eldavojohn writes to tell us of a new service, "," that allows gamers to put their money where their mouth is with respect to their console gaming skill. "BringIt supports the PlayStation 2, the PS3, the Xbox 360 and the Wii. Players challenge each other on the site, but play on their consoles. BringIt holds players' entry fees until the game is finished. After the game is done, it verifies the results and credits the winner, minus the service fee. To attract players of a broad range of skill sets, BringIt has separate tournaments meant for novice players and expert gamers. Levin compared it to the handicap system in golf or the weight-class system in wrestling.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted. Allows Players to Bet On Console Game Matches

Comments Filter:
  • Re:rigged (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 03, 2009 @04:02PM (#28932349)

    The service fee.

  • Cheating (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bjourne ( 1034822 ) on Monday August 03, 2009 @04:03PM (#28932365) Homepage Journal
    Maybe technology has advanced since last I played console games.. But wouldn't cheating be a huge issue? Cheaters were annoying when you just played fps games for fun, annoying but tolerable. Now if you are betting money and you suspect that your opponents cheat, then you would be pissed.
  • by Itninja ( 937614 ) on Monday August 03, 2009 @04:10PM (#28932447) Homepage
    What could possibly go wrong? From the rules page: "When the game is completed, both you and your opponent must report and verify the results." If my experience with the gamers on XBox Live is any indication, maybe 1 in 5 of the losers will report it. And 4 of 5 of losers will 'dispute' the results.

    Usually the way it works is like this: I am playing a ranked match against somebody named some variant of '420niggah' (classy I know) and as soon as I am about to drop a coup de grace, they just quit. YOu what would make that even more fun? Losing real money each time it happens. No thanks.
  • Rankings (Score:4, Insightful)

    by nitsew ( 991812 ) on Monday August 03, 2009 @04:12PM (#28932487)
    How do they rank players? Couldn't an expert player just pose as a novice, and win easily?
  • by sanosuke001 ( 640243 ) on Monday August 03, 2009 @04:21PM (#28932617)
    The only way I see this working is if they have a system like eBay does with positive/negative comments. If someone bails on matches on a regular basis, then nobody would play them. If you are a respectable citizen of the site, then people will trust that you will honor the bet.

    It might be a bit harder to get started but once you're established, it probably wouldn't be a big deal.

    Also, I'd like to see a ranking system be implemented. Kind of like with Go. KGS uses a pretty decent ranking system with their online software. Basing your rank off the people you've played against. Have a separate rank for each game you play. Allow "rank" games with no wager and those with a wager so that someone new can work up their rank so people would play them. Require 20-30 ranked games before they can start betting and it would probably be a very robust system. Limiting the bets based on how many total games you have would also help people get their credibility up as more people would play you if they don't have to bet $20+ on someone with no reputation on the site.
  • by clone53421 ( 1310749 ) on Monday August 03, 2009 @04:29PM (#28932709) Journal

    They're usually modded down for being off-topic and flamebait, which they usually are. It has nothing to do with censorship.

  • Re:Rankings (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Chris Burke ( 6130 ) on Monday August 03, 2009 @04:50PM (#28933011) Homepage

    How do they rank players? Couldn't an expert player just pose as a novice, and win easily?

    Yeah I was chuckling thinking about that, and hearing their CEO comparing it to wrestling weight classes.

    On the one hand, that makes no sense, because weight classes have nothing to do with separating people based on skill, but rather simple physical attributes and the unfair advantage that stems from them. Even the most skilled 110 pounder on earth is going to get smushed into the mat by a competent 275 pounder.

    On the other hand, it makes perfect sense, because wrestlers are all about gaming the weight class system as much as possible. That's why they starve themselves, and run five miles wearing a dozen sweatshirts and/or plastic bags the day before weigh-in to lose water weight, all so that when they walk onto the mat in the "150lb" weight class they're sporting the body of a 170 pounder. In practice this just means everyone is really a couple weight classes heavier than what they wrestle at. But that's because you can't easily change your weight, and your weight class is defined by what you weigh at weigh-in. You can't wrestle at 130 a couple weeks then gain some weight but stay at 130. If you could? Yeah you'd see people cutting so much weight they couldn't stand up right just so that later at a more important match they'd have an advantage.

    Anyway, I'm assuming/hoping it's a sort of ladder system and that the size of wagers is capped at each level. It's one thing to have someone sandbagging and pool shark you out of $10, yet another when Mr. Franklin gets involved.

  • by DeadDecoy ( 877617 ) on Monday August 03, 2009 @04:58PM (#28933109)
    I don't know. Considering the lengths to which people went to when money wasn't involved, I would bet that this system would tempt the even more clever cheaters to get involved. When money is involved, you could justify spending more time developing methods of gaming the system. Just look at the systems brokers setup to do stock trading: clusters which could do trading on micro-second transactions. I just hope has reasonable security experts.
  • Re:Cheating (Score:3, Insightful)

    by The Moof ( 859402 ) on Monday August 03, 2009 @05:40PM (#28933547)
    Hell, I would never do L4D, since the randomness of the level between teams can easily make or break your game. Location of tanks/witches can vary enough to screw one team pretty good, random placement of the tier 2 weapons, the number of pills/med kits, placements of items (very obscure rooms to the most obvious places).
  • by nEoN nOoDlE ( 27594 ) on Monday August 03, 2009 @08:21PM (#28934979) Homepage

    The reason eBay's system works is that both parties stand to benefit from the transaction. A buyer wants the product and a seller wants to get rid of it to a paying customer. If the transaction goes smoothly on both ends, both parties get a positive rating. Gaming is different. Everyone wants to win, but even moreso than that everyone HATES losing. If you're really good at any online game, you're automatically labeled a cheater even if you've spent hundreds of hours mastering the craft and the other person is still trying to figure out the controls. Winners can judge their opponents pretty well, but losers will think the winner is the biggest asshole on the internet. eBay's system definitely wouldn't work in this environment. In order for it to actually work, you'd need a referee, but that would require way too many resources to monitor every game.

Genius is ten percent inspiration and fifty percent capital gains.