Game system and program

Abstract

To provide a game system, etc. capable of achieving a mechanism of a more meaningful evaluation among players by distinguishing between an evaluation from a friend player and an evaluation from an enemy player.SOLUTION: A game system of the present invention is a game system for executing a game in which multiple players participate, including a first player, a second player having a friend relationship with the first player, and a third player having an enemy relationship with the first player, and includes an input information reception part for receiving input information on an evaluation that the player performs at least for another player, and an evaluation processing part for performing an evaluation for the second player or the third player by the first player on the basis of the input information. The evaluation processing part performs an evaluation for the second player by the first player and an evaluation for the third player by the first player on the basis of different evaluation criteria.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 7

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a game system and a program. [Background technology]

[0002] Conventionally, a technique has been known in which a player evaluates the play of other players who have played a game together, tallying up the evaluations as evaluation points, and awarding benefits to the player based on the evaluation points (for example, Patent Document 1). [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2016-198368 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] When multiple players play a game, there are both friendly and unfriendly players. When evaluating other players, as in the conventional technology described above, evaluations from friendly players and evaluations from unfriendly players have different meanings and values. However, in the conventional technology, whether the evaluator is a friendly or unfriendly player is not taken into consideration at all, and therefore such differences in meaning and value could not be reflected in the evaluation.

[0005] The present invention has been made in consideration of the above-mentioned problems, and its purpose is to provide a game system etc. that can distinguish between evaluations from friendly players and evaluations from opposing players, thereby realizing a more meaningful evaluation system between players. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] (1) The present invention relates to a game system for executing a game in which multiple players, including a first player, a second player who is an ally of the first player, and a third player who is an adversary of the first player, participate, the game system including: an input information receiving unit that receives input information regarding evaluations made by the players of at least one other player; and an evaluation processing unit that performs an evaluation by the first player of the second player or the third player based on the input information, the evaluation processing unit performing the first player's evaluation of the second player and the first player's evaluation of the third player based on different evaluation criteria. The present invention also relates to a program for causing a computer to function as each of the above units. The present invention also relates to a computer-readable information storage medium storing the program.

[0007] According to the present invention, by using different evaluation criteria for the first player's evaluation of the second player (evaluation from the allied players) and the first player's evaluation of the third player (evaluation from the opposing players), it is possible to distinguish between the evaluations from the allied players and the evaluations from the opposing players, thereby realizing a more meaningful evaluation system between players.

[0008] (2) In addition, in the game system and program of the present invention, the game is a game in which the first player and second player compete against the third player, and the evaluation processing unit may perform an evaluation of the second player or the third player by the first player during or after the match.

[0009] (3) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may use different evaluation criteria when evaluating during a match and when evaluating after the match.

[0010] (4) In addition, in the game system and program of the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may differentiate the evaluation items used when the first player evaluates the second player from the evaluation items used when the first player evaluates the third player.

[0011] (5) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit The number of evaluation items when the first player evaluates the second player may be different from the number of evaluation items when the first player evaluates the third player.

[0012] (6) In addition, in the game system and program of the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may make the content of the evaluation items when the first player evaluates the second player different from the content of the evaluation items when the first player evaluates the third player.

[0013] (7) In addition, in the game system and program of the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may assign a different weight to the first player's evaluation of the second player than to the first player's evaluation of the third player.

[0014] (8) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may further change the evaluation criteria in accordance with the progress of the game.

[0015] (9) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may further change the evaluation criteria depending on whether the first player is in a favorable position or a disadvantageous position in the game.

[0016] (10) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may further change the evaluation criteria in accordance with the game result of the game.

[0017] (11) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may further change the evaluation criteria based on player information.

[0018] (12) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may further change the evaluation criteria based on past battle history.

[0019] (13) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may further change the evaluation criteria according to the ranking of the first player in the group to which the first player belongs.

[0020] (14) In addition, in the game system and program of the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may further change the evaluation criteria depending on information about the group to which the first player and the second player belong and information about the group to which the third player belongs.

[0021] (15) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may also tally up evaluation results for a player and determine an evaluation of the player.

[0022] (16) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit may grant a reward to a player based on the evaluation of the player.

[0023] (17) In the game system and program according to the present invention, the evaluation processing unit A conversion rate when the evaluation of the second player by the first player is converted into a reward may be different from a conversion rate when the evaluation of the third player by the first player is converted into a reward.

[0024] (18) In addition, in the game system and program of the present invention, the benefit granted based on the first player's evaluation of the second player may be different from the benefit granted based on the first player's evaluation of the third player. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0025] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a game system according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 2] FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of functional blocks of a server according to the present embodiment. [Figure 3] FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of functional blocks of a terminal according to the present embodiment. [Figure 4] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation screen displayed on a display unit of the terminal. [Figure 5] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation screen displayed on a display unit of the terminal. [Figure 6] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of a table storing evaluation results for each player. [Figure 7] 4 is a flowchart showing the flow of processing in the game system of the present embodiment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0026] The present embodiment will be described below. Note that the present embodiment described below does not unduly limit the content of the present invention described in the claims. Furthermore, not all of the configurations described in the present embodiment are necessarily necessary constituent elements of the present invention.

[0027] 1. Configuration Fig. 1 is a diagram showing a game system according to this embodiment. In this embodiment, the game system is configured to include a plurality of terminals 10 and a server 20. In other words, as shown in Fig. 1, the game system according to this embodiment is configured such that the server 20 that provides a service and the terminals 10 can be connected to a network.

[0028] The server 20 is an information processing device that provides online game services in response to requests from the terminal 10. The server 20 can be configured from a group of servers (authentication server, matching server, game processing server, communication server, billing server, database server, etc.).

[0029] In this embodiment, the server 20 executes a process in which players evaluate other players and a process in which players are awarded benefits based on the evaluations, and the game is executed on the terminal 10. The server 20 also manages information such as the player's account information, game results of the game executed on the terminal 10, and game media (characters, items, points, in-game currency, etc.) that can be used in the game.

[0030] The terminal 10 is an information processing device such as a mobile terminal (smartphone, mobile phone, portable game console, etc.), a personal computer (PC), a game device, etc., and is a device that can be connected to the server 20 via a network such as the Internet (WAN) or LAN. The communication line between the terminal 10 and the server 20 may be wired or wireless.

[0031] 2 shows an example of functional blocks of the server 20 of this embodiment. Note that the server of this embodiment may have a configuration in which some of the components (each unit) of FIG. 2 are omitted.

[0032] The storage unit 270 stores programs and various data for causing the computer to function as each unit of the processing unit 200, and also functions as a work area for the processing unit 200, and this function can be realized by a hard disk, RAM, etc. (e.g., database).

[0033] The storage unit 272 stores player information for each of a plurality of players participating in an online game executed in the game system of this embodiment. For example, the storage unit 272 stores, as player information, player names (player accounts), passwords, destination information (IP addresses, etc.) of the terminals 10, etc., in association with player identification information (player IDs, terminal IDs used by the players, etc.) for each of the plurality of players. The storage unit 272 also stores, as player information, information for identifying other players who have a predetermined relationship with the player (e.g., friend relationship, rival relationship). The storage unit 272 also stores, as player information, information regarding game media owned by the player in association with the player identification information.

[0034] The communication unit 296 performs various controls for communication with the terminal 10 and other servers, and its functions can be realized by hardware such as various processors or communication ASICs, programs, and the like.

[0035] The processing unit 200 (processor) performs various processes such as player information management, login / logout processing, and communication control processing based on data, programs, etc. transmitted from the terminal 10 and received via the communication unit 296. The processing unit 200 performs various processes using the storage unit 270 as a work area. The functions of the processing unit 200 can be realized by hardware such as various processors (CPU, DSP, etc.) and ASICs (gate arrays, etc.), or by programs. The processing unit 200 includes an input information receiving unit 210 and an evaluation processing unit 212.

[0036] The input information receiving unit 210 receives input information (input information transmitted from the terminal 10 of the player) relating to an evaluation made by the player on at least another player.

[0037] The evaluation processing unit 212 performs an evaluation by the first player of a second player (a player on the first player's side) or a third player (a player on the first player's side) based on the input information received by the input information receiving unit 210. The evaluation is performed during the game (during the match) or after the game (after the match). The evaluation processing unit 212 tally up the evaluation results for the players based on the input information and determines an evaluation of the players. Furthermore, the evaluation processing unit 212 grants a benefit to the players based on the evaluation of the players.

[0038] The evaluation processing unit 212 performs an evaluation of the second player by the first player and an evaluation of the third player by the first player based on different evaluation criteria. For example, the evaluation processing unit 212 may make the evaluation items (number of evaluation items and / or content of evaluation items) when the first player evaluates the second player different from the evaluation items when the first player evaluates the second player, or may make the weight (coefficient) given to the first player's evaluation of the second player different from the weight given to the first player's evaluation of the third player. Furthermore, when granting a reward to a player based on the evaluation of the player, the evaluation processing unit 212 may use a different conversion rate when converting a first player's evaluation of a second player into a reward than when converting a first player's evaluation of a third player into a reward, or may use a different reward granted based on the first player's evaluation of the second player than when granting a reward based on the first player's evaluation of the third player. Furthermore, the evaluation processing unit 212 may use different evaluation criteria when evaluating during a match and when evaluating after a match.

[0039] In addition, the evaluation processing unit 212 may determine whether or not the first player is playing a game in accordance with the progress of the game (for example, if the first player is playing a game in the front). The evaluation criteria may be further changed depending on whether the first player is in a favorable or unfavorable position in the game, or may be further changed depending on the game result. Furthermore, the evaluation processing unit 212 may further change the evaluation criteria based on player information and past match history, or may further change the evaluation criteria depending on the ranking of the first player in the group to which the first player belongs. Furthermore, the evaluation processing unit 212 may further change the evaluation criteria depending on information about the group to which the first player and the second player belong, and information about the group to which the third player belongs.

[0040] An example of functional blocks of the terminal 10 of this embodiment is shown in Fig. 3. Note that the terminal of this embodiment may have a configuration in which some of the components (each unit) of Fig. 3 are omitted.

[0041] The input unit 150 is a device for inputting (detecting) input information from the player, and outputs the player's input information (operation information) to the processing unit 100. The functions of the input unit 150 can be realized by input devices such as a touch panel, a touch pad, a mouse, directional keys or buttons, a keyboard, or the like.

[0042] The storage unit 170 stores programs and various data for causing the computer to function as each unit of the processing unit 100, and also functions as a work area for the processing unit 100, and this function can be realized by a hard disk, RAM, etc.

[0043] The display unit 190 outputs the image generated by the processing unit 100, and its function can be realized by a display such as a touch panel, LCD, or HMD (head mounted display) that also functions as the input unit 150.

[0044] The sound output unit 192 outputs the sound generated by the processing unit 100, and this function can be realized by a speaker, headphones, or the like.

[0045] The communication unit 196 performs various controls for communication with the server 20 and other terminals 10, and its functions can be realized by hardware such as various processors or communication ASICs, programs, and the like.

[0046] Note that the programs and various data stored in an information storage medium or storage unit of the server 20 for causing a computer to function as each unit of the processing unit 100 may be received via a network, and the received programs and data may be stored in the storage unit 170. Such cases of receiving programs and various data and causing a terminal to function are also included within the scope of the present invention.

[0047] The processing unit 100 (processor) performs processes such as display control processing, image generation processing, and sound generation processing based on input information (operation information) from the input unit 150, a program, and data received via the communication unit 196. The functions of the processing unit 100 can be realized by hardware such as various processors (CPU, DSP, etc.) and ASICs (gate arrays, etc.), or by programs. The processing unit 100 includes a game processing unit 110, an image generation unit 120, and a sound generation unit 130.

[0048] The game processing unit 110 performs processing to progress the game (a game in which a first player teams up with a second player and plays against a third player) based on input information from the input unit 150 and information received from the server 20. The game processing unit 110 also transmits input information regarding the evaluations that players make of other players, which is input via the input unit 150, to the server 20. Note that the player may be allowed to evaluate not only other players but also himself (self-evaluation).

[0049] The image generating unit 120 performs drawing processing based on the results of various processes performed by the processing unit 100. This generates an image and outputs it to the display unit 190. For example, the image generation unit 120 may generate an image (a so-called three-dimensional image) seen from a virtual camera (a given viewpoint) in a virtual space.

[0050] The sound generation unit 130 performs sound processing based on the results of various processes performed by the processing unit 100 , generates game sounds such as background music, sound effects, or voices, and outputs them to the sound output unit 192 .

[0051] The game system of this embodiment may also be configured as a server system. The server system may be configured with one or more servers (such as an authentication server, a game (event) processing server, a communication server, a billing server, and a database server). In this case, the server system performs processing in each unit of the processing unit 100 based on operation input (data input to an input unit of the terminal) transmitted from one or more terminals (e.g., a smartphone, a mobile phone, a portable game console, etc.) connected via a network, generates image generation data for generating an image, and transmits the generated image generation data to each terminal. Here, the image generation data refers to data for displaying an image generated by the method of this embodiment on each terminal, and may be image data itself or various data (such as object data and game processing result data) used by each terminal to generate an image. In this way, the processing of the input information receiving unit 210, the evaluation processing unit 212, and the game processing unit 110 may be configured to be executed entirely by the server, entirely by the terminals, or distributed between the server and the terminals.

[0052] 2. Method of this embodiment Next, the method of this embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings. The game system of this embodiment is configured to execute a game in which a player (first player) teams up with a teammate player (second player) and competes against an opponent player (third player). After participating in the competitive game (after the match), or while participating in the competitive game (during the match), the players can evaluate their teammate player and opponent player.

[0053] FIG. 4 shows an example of an evaluation screen displayed on the display unit 190 of the player's terminal 10 when the player evaluates another player. The evaluation screen ES displays a pull-down menu PD for selecting a player to be evaluated, multiple evaluation items, and check boxes CB corresponding to each of the evaluation items. The player operates the pull-down menu PD to select and set a player to be evaluated from multiple other players, including teammates and opponents. In this example, teammate player "A" is selected as the player to be evaluated. The player also evaluates the player selected as the player to be evaluated by checking the check boxes CB corresponding to any evaluation item. In this example, two of the four evaluation items, "good attack" and "nice follow-through," are checked. When the player operates the send button SB, input information including information for identifying the player who performed the evaluation and the player to be evaluated, and evaluation points corresponding to the checked evaluation items (the number and / or content of the evaluation items), is transmitted to the server 20 as evaluation information.

[0054] In this embodiment, a player's evaluation of a teammate player and a player's evaluation of an enemy player are based on different evaluation criteria. Specifically, the evaluation items used when a player evaluates a teammate player are different from the evaluation items used when a player evaluates an enemy player. For example, as shown in FIG. 5, when an enemy player "B" is selected as the evaluation target on the evaluation screen ES, the number and content of the evaluation items change. That is, the evaluation item "nice follow-up" that existed when an enemy player "A" was selected as the evaluation target (FIG. 4) is no longer present, and evaluation items "unpleasant as an enemy" and "want to fight again" are added. Note that when a player evaluates a teammate player, the evaluation items used when a player evaluates an enemy player are different. Only the number of evaluation items may be changed when evaluating an opponent player, or only the content of the evaluation items may be changed, or both the number and content of the evaluation items may be changed. Furthermore, the evaluation items used by a player to evaluate a teammate player and the evaluation items used by a player to evaluate an opponent player may at least partially overlap, or may be completely different. Furthermore, the number of evaluation items used by a player to evaluate an opponent player may be greater or fewer than the number of evaluation items used by a player to evaluate a teammate player.

[0055] Furthermore, instead of checking the checkboxes CB for the evaluation items, the player may directly input evaluation points or select from evaluation point options (for example, options on a five-point scale) to evaluate their teammate or opponent player. In this case, the upper limit of the evaluation points that can be input (selected) may be different when evaluating a teammate player and when evaluating an opponent player. For example, the upper limit of the evaluation points when evaluating an opponent player may be higher or lower than the upper limit of the evaluation points when evaluating a teammate player.

[0056] The server 20 aggregates (totals, averages) the evaluation results for each player to determine (confirm) the evaluation of each player, but at that time, different weights are assigned to the evaluations from teammates (the player's evaluation of the teammate) and the evaluations from opponent players (the player's evaluation of the opponent). Specifically, the evaluations from teammates and opponent players are aggregated separately, and the aggregated values ​​are multiplied by different coefficients (an example of weights) and then added together to determine the final evaluation points. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of a table that stores the evaluation results for each player. The table shown in FIG. 6 is stored in the storage unit 272 of the server 20. In the example shown in FIG. 6, the aggregated value of evaluation points for player "A" based on the evaluations of allied players is "500," and the aggregated value of evaluation points for player "A" based on the evaluations of opponent players is "200." The aggregated value of evaluation points for player "A" based on the evaluations of allied players is multiplied by a coefficient "1.0," and the aggregated value of evaluation points for opponent players is multiplied by a coefficient "1.5." The sum of these evaluation points is "800 (500 + 200 × 1.5)." Similarly, the aggregated value of evaluation points for player "B" based on the evaluations of allied players is "400," and the aggregated value of evaluation points for player "B" based on the evaluations of opponent players is "300." The sum of these evaluation points is "850 (400 + 300 × 1.5)." Here, based on the idea that evaluations from allied players tend to be lenient and therefore evaluations from opponent players are more valuable, a larger coefficient is multiplied on evaluation points based on evaluations from opponent players than on evaluations based on evaluations from allied players. On the other hand, based on the idea that ratings from friendly players are more reliable because there is a possibility that opposing players may intentionally give bad ratings (deliberately not give good ratings), the coefficient multiplied on evaluation points based on ratings from friendly players may be larger than the coefficient multiplied on evaluation points based on ratings from opposing players.In addition, instead of using a different coefficient to multiply the evaluation points based on the evaluation from the friendly player and a different coefficient to multiply the evaluation points based on the evaluation from the opposing player, it is also possible to use a different additional value (another example of weighting) to be added to the evaluation points based on the evaluation from the friendly player and a different additional value to be added to the evaluation points based on the evaluation from the opposing player.

[0057] The server 20 grants each player a bonus based on the evaluation (evaluation points) of each player. Bonuses include characters and items that can be used in the game, points and in-game currency, tickets used to participate in lottery events in which characters and items can be acquired, effects such as temporarily increasing the ability value (status) of the player's character, and titles given to players. Here, the conversion rate when converting an evaluation from a friendly player (a player's evaluation of a friendly player) into a bonus may be different from the conversion rate when converting an evaluation from an enemy player (a player's evaluation of an enemy player) into a bonus. For example, the evaluation points required to convert (exchange) into bonus "A" may be set to The evaluation points based on the evaluation from the allied player may be set to "500" and the evaluation points based on the evaluation from the enemy player may be set to "100" (the conversion rate for converting the evaluation points based on the evaluation from the enemy player to the bonus "A" may be higher than the conversion rate for converting the evaluation points based on the evaluation from the allied player to the bonus "A"), or vice versa. Also, the bonus granted based on the evaluation from the allied player may be different from the bonus granted based on the evaluation from the enemy player. For example, the bonus "A" may be granted based on the evaluation points "100" based on the evaluation from the allied player, and the bonus "A'" which is more valuable (for example, rarity) or more abundant than the bonus "A" may be granted based on the evaluation points "100" based on the evaluation from the enemy player, or vice versa.

[0058] Thus, according to this embodiment, by having players evaluate their allies and opponents based on different evaluation criteria (by using different numbers and contents of evaluation items, different weights given to the evaluations, different conversion rates when converting evaluations into rewards, and different rewards granted based on the evaluations), it is possible to distinguish between evaluations from allies and opponents, and to realize a more meaningful evaluation system between players.

[0059] Furthermore, different evaluation criteria may be used when a player evaluates another player (a friendly player or an opposing player) during a match than when a player evaluates another player after the match. For example, when a player evaluates another player (a friendly player or an opposing player) during a match, the weighting of the player's evaluation of the other player (or the upper limit of evaluation points when evaluating the other player, or the conversion rate when converting the player's evaluation of the other player into a reward) may be higher than when a player evaluates the other player after the match. This is based on the idea that evaluations during a match are more credible than evaluations after the match because they are evaluations made before the match result is announced, are not influenced by the match result, are still fresh in the player's memory, and are made even during the match. On the other hand, post-match evaluations are evaluations made after all play is over and are not evaluations made in the middle of playing, so they are more credible than evaluations made during the match. Therefore, the weighting of post-match evaluations may be higher than the weighting of evaluations made during the match. In addition, the content and number of evaluation items that a player uses to evaluate another player may be different depending on whether the player is evaluating the other player during a match or after the match.

[0060] Furthermore, in this embodiment, not only are the evaluation criteria different for the evaluation of a teammate player and the evaluation of an opponent player, but the evaluation criteria may also be changed depending on the progress of the competitive game in which the player participated (e.g., whether the player is winning or losing) and the game result (win or loss, point difference). For example, if a player is winning (or has won) a competitive game, the weight given to the player's evaluation of the teammate player (or the upper limit of evaluation points when evaluating the teammate player, or the conversion rate when converting the player's evaluation of the teammate player into a benefit) may be lower than when the player is losing (or has lost) in the competitive game, or vice versa. Furthermore, if a player is losing (or has lost) in a competitive game, the weight given to the player's evaluation of the opponent player (or the upper limit of evaluation points when evaluating the opponent player, or the conversion rate when converting the player's evaluation of the opponent player into a benefit) may be higher than when the player is winning (or has won) in the competitive game, or vice versa. Furthermore, the content and number of evaluation items that a player uses to evaluate other players may be changed depending on whether the player is in a dominant position or a subordinate position in a competitive game.

[0061] In addition, the evaluation criteria can be further modified based on player information (such as whether they are friends or rivals, their level, their game history, the type of character and weapon they use, etc.). For example, when a player evaluates another player (a friendly player or an opposing player) who is a friend of the player, the weight given to the player's evaluation of the other player (or the upper limit of evaluation points when evaluating the other player, or the conversion rate when converting the player's evaluation of the other player into a reward) may be lower than when evaluating another player who is not a friend, or vice versa. Furthermore, when a player evaluates another player who is a rival, the weight given to the player's evaluation of the other player may be higher than when evaluating another player who is not a rival, or vice versa. Furthermore, the content and number of evaluation items used when evaluating a player may be different depending on whether the player is evaluating a friend (or rival) or a non-friend (or non-rival) player. Furthermore, when a player evaluates another player who is at a lower level (or has a shorter gaming history) than the player himself, the weighting given to the evaluation of that other player by that player may be higher than when evaluating another player who is at a higher level (or has a longer gaming history), or vice versa. Furthermore, the content and number of evaluation items used when a player evaluates another player who is at a lower level (or has a shorter gaming history) than the player himself may be different from when evaluating another player who is at a higher level (or has a longer gaming history). Furthermore, the higher the player's level (or the longer the gaming history), the more evaluation items the player uses when evaluating.

[0062] The evaluation criteria may also be changed based on the player's past match history. For example, when a player evaluates another player (a friendly player or an opposing player) with whom the player has previously played against, the weighting of the player's evaluation of the other player (or the upper limit of evaluation points when evaluating the other player, or the conversion rate when converting the player's evaluation of the other player into a reward) may be higher than when evaluating another player with whom the player has not previously played against, or vice versa. Furthermore, the content and number of evaluation items used when evaluating a player may be different depending on whether the player is evaluating a player with whom the player has previously played against or a player with whom the player has not previously played against. Furthermore, the weighting of the player's evaluation of the other player, or the content and number of evaluation items used when evaluating the player, may be different depending on whether the player is evaluating a player who won a previous match against the player or a player who lost a previous match against the player.

[0063] The evaluation criteria may also be modified depending on the player's rank in the group to which the player belongs (e.g., leader, sub-leader, or no title). For example, when a player evaluates another player who is lower in rank than the player, the weight given to the player's evaluation of the other player (or the upper limit of evaluation points when evaluating the other player, or the conversion rate when converting the player's evaluation of the other player into a reward) may be higher than when evaluating another player who is higher in rank than the player, or vice versa. Furthermore, the weight given to the player's evaluation of the other player, or the content and number of evaluation items used in the evaluation, may be changed depending on the player's rank and the rank of the other player evaluated by the player. Furthermore, the higher the player's rank, the higher the weight given to the player's evaluation of the other player, or the more evaluation items used in the evaluation.

[0064] Furthermore, the evaluation criteria may be further modified according to information on the group (ally group) to which the player and his / her allies belong, and information on the group (enemy group) to which the enemy player belongs. Group information may include, for example, the number of players in the group, the level of the players, and the proportion of players with a high win rate. For example, if the allies' group has more players than the enemy group, or more players with a high level or win rate, the weighting that the player gives to the evaluation of the enemy player (or the weighting of the evaluation of the enemy player) may be modified. The upper limit of points, the conversion rate when converting the player's evaluation of the opponent player into a reward, etc. may be set higher than the weighting when a player evaluates a friendly player. This is based on the idea that the evaluation is more credible because it is an evaluation of an opponent player who has done well in a group with a small number of players (or a weak player with a low level or win rate). On the other hand, based on the idea that it is easy to stand out in a group with a small number of players (or a weak player with a low level or win rate), and therefore less credible, the weighting, etc. given to the evaluation of an opponent player may be set lower than the weighting, etc. given to the evaluation of a friendly player. Furthermore, the content and number of evaluation items when a player evaluates a friendly player and when evaluating an opponent player may be changed depending on the information of the friendly group and the information of the opponent group.

[0065] 3. Processing Next, an example of the processing of the game system (server 20) of this embodiment will be described with reference to the flowchart of FIG.

[0066] After the competitive game ends, the input information accepting unit 210 accepts input information regarding the evaluations made by the players of the competitive game to the other players from the terminals 10 of the players who participated in the competitive game (step S10). Here, the evaluation processing unit 212 receives information specifying the other players selected (set) as evaluation targets by the players on the evaluation screen ES from the terminals 10, determines whether the other players are friendly players or enemy players based on the information, determines the number and contents of evaluation items according to the determination result, and transmits information to the terminal 10 for displaying the determined evaluation items on the evaluation screen ES.

[0067] Next, the evaluation processing unit 212 tally up the evaluation results for the players based on the input information (information identifying the player making the evaluation, information identifying the player to be evaluated, and evaluation points) received by the input information receiving unit 210, and determines the evaluation of the player (step S11). Here, for each player to be evaluated, the evaluation processing unit 212 tally up the evaluation points based on the evaluations from teammate players and the evaluation points based on the evaluations from opponent players, and calculates the total evaluation points by multiplying each tally by a different coefficient and adding them up.

[0068] Next, the evaluation processing unit 212 grants a bonus to the player based on the evaluation of the player (total evaluation points) (step S12). Items, etc. granted to the player as a bonus are registered in the player information as items, etc. owned by the player. When converting evaluation points into a bonus, the evaluation processing unit 212 may use a different conversion rate for converting evaluation points (aggregated value) based on evaluations from allied players into a bonus than for converting evaluation points (aggregated value) based on evaluations from opposing players into a bonus. Furthermore, the evaluation processing unit 212 transmits information to the player's terminal 10 for displaying the evaluation of the player (total evaluation points) and the bonus granted to the player on a result screen. Furthermore, in addition to the evaluation of the player, the evaluations of allied players and the evaluations of opposing players may be displayed in a list on the result screen.

[0069] The present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments, and various modifications are possible. For example, terms cited in the specification or drawings as broadly defined or synonymous terms can be replaced with broadly defined or synonymous terms in other descriptions in the specification or drawings. [Explanation of symbols]

[0070] 10...terminal, 20...server, 100...processing unit, 110...game processing unit, 120...image generating unit, 130...sound generating unit, 150...input unit, 170...storage unit, 190...display unit, 192...sound output unit, 196...communication unit, 200...processing unit, 210...input information receiving unit, 212...evaluation processing 270: memory unit; 272: storage unit; 296: communication unit

Claims

1. A game system for executing a game in which a plurality of players participate, including a first player, a second player who is an ally of the first player, and a third player who is an adversary of the first player, an input information receiving unit that receives input information regarding an evaluation made by the player on at least another player; an evaluation processing unit that performs an evaluation by the first player of the second player or the third player based on the input information, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the first player's evaluation of the second player and the first player's evaluation of the third player are based on different evaluation criteria.

2. In claim 1, the game is a game in which the first player and the second player compete against the third player, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the first player evaluates the second player or the third player during or after a match.

3. In claim 2, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the evaluation criteria are different when evaluating during a match and when evaluating after a match.

4. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the evaluation items used when the first player evaluates the second player are different from the evaluation items used when the first player evaluates the third player.

5. In claim 4, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the number of evaluation items when the first player evaluates the second player is different from the number of evaluation items when the first player evaluates the third player.

6. In claim 4, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the content of the evaluation items when the first player evaluates the second player is different from the content of the evaluation items when the first player evaluates the third player.

7. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that a weight given to an evaluation by the first player of the second player is made different from a weight given to an evaluation by the first player of the third player.

8. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the evaluation criteria are further changed depending on the progress of the game.

9. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the evaluation criteria are further changed depending on whether the first player is in a dominant position or a subordinate position in the game.

10. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the evaluation criteria are further changed depending on the game result of the game.

11. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the evaluation criteria are further changed based on player information.

12. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the evaluation criteria are further changed based on past battle history.

13. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system further comprising: changing the evaluation criteria in accordance with the ranking of the first player in a group to which the first player belongs.

14. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that the evaluation criteria are further changed according to information on a group to which the first player and the second player belong and information on a group to which the third player belongs.

15. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that evaluation results for a player are compiled and an evaluation of the player is determined.

16. In claim 1, The evaluation processing unit A game system that provides a player with a reward based on an evaluation of the player.

17. In claim 16, The evaluation processing unit a conversion rate when the evaluation of the first player for the second player is converted into a reward, and a conversion rate when the evaluation of the first player for the third player is converted into a reward; A game system characterized in that the conversion rate when the game is played is different from the conversion rate when the game is played.

18. In claim 16, The evaluation processing unit A game system characterized in that a benefit granted based on the first player's evaluation of the second player is different from a benefit granted based on the first player's evaluation of the third player.

19. A program for executing a game in which a plurality of players participate, including a first player, a second player who is an ally of the first player, and a third player who is an adversary of the first player, an input information receiving unit that receives input information regarding an evaluation made by the player on at least another player; causing a computer to function as an evaluation processing unit that performs an evaluation of the second player or the third player by the first player based on the input information; The evaluation processing unit A program characterized in that the first player's evaluation of the second player and the first player's evaluation of the third player are performed based on different evaluation criteria.

Images