Analysis of player's in-game performance vs rating: Case study of Heroes
  of Newerth

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

We evaluate the rating system of "Heroes of Newerth" (HoN), a multiplayer online action role-playing game, by using statistical analysis and comparison of a player's in-game performance metrics and the player rating assigned by the rating system. The datasets for the analysis have been extracted from the web sites that record the players' ratings and a number of empirical metrics. Results suggest that the HoN's Matchmaking rating algorithm, while generally capturing the skill level of the player well, also has weaknesses, which have been exploited by players to achieve a higher placement on the ranking ladder than deserved by actual skill. In addition, we also illustrate the effects of the choice of the business model (from pay-to-play to free-to-play) on player population.

Related collections

Most cited references 6

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Individual differences in chess expertise: a psychometric investigation.

Elsbeth Stern, Roland H. Grabner, Aljoscha Neubauer (2007)

Starting from controversies over the role of general individual characteristics (especially intelligence) for the attainment of expert performance levels, a comprehensive psychometric investigation of individual differences in chess expertise is presented. A sample of 90 adult tournament chess players of varying playing strengths (1311-2387 ELO) was screened with tests on intelligence and personality variables; in addition, experience in chess play, tournament participation, and practice activities were assessed. Correlation and regression analyses revealed a clear-cut moderate relationship between general (and in particular numerical) intelligence and the participants' playing strengths, suggesting that expert chess play does not stand in isolation from superior mental abilities. The strongest predictor of the attained expertise level, however, was the participants' chess experience which highlights the relevance of long-term engagement for the development of expertise. Among all analysed personality dimensions, only domain-specific performance motivation and emotion expression control incrementally contributed to the prediction of playing strength. In total, measures of chess experience, current tournament activity, intelligence, and personality accounted for about 55% of variance in chess expertise. The present results suggest that individual differences in chess expertise are multifaceted and cannot be reduced to differences in domain experience.