Dealing With Quitters

(H0RSE) #121

Rahdo said the game would have auto balance…at least those are the plans. For PC and console versions.

(SockDog) #122

@ 3Suns - If you’re on Steam add me. :slight_smile: http://steamcommunity.com/id/SockDog

As I said, it’s a matter of courtesy and consideration. I don’t accept that when you play a game online with other real people that you are not in part accountable for the quality of their game too. Quitting can be inevitable but it doesn’t hurt to bow out politely, rage quitting is probably akin to not just leaving the dinner party early but doing so after a torrent of expletives.

If you want to be selfish, play on your own. If you want to and expect the other kids to play with you then extending some manners can go a long way to making everyone’s experience better. This is no different from how people interact in real life, you don’t go and play football then storm off the pitch halfway through without the rest of your teammates getting pretty pissed at you, likewise you don’t get the ball and start dicking around, or just start playing on the other side because they’re doing better.

This is the anonymity and lack of accountability speaking.

(tokamak) #123

[QUOTE=Tanzverbot;214810]So in Japan you’re not allowed to leave if you don’t like the movie? Are people allowed to go take a leak if they have to, or is that also forbidden? Do you have to pay a fine if you leave during a movie? If so, what if someone has a stroke and needs to be brought to a hospital? Does he have to pay that fine too? I’m curious how this system works.

Also, i’d like to hear more about what constitutes a flawed analogy in your eyes.[/QUOTE]

Of course they can, however cinema quitters will have to accept that they won’t get their money back, which should be a nice analogy to not getting your xp if you leave a match.\

That’s the thing, nobody is forcing you to stay in the game, it’s just that if you leave you will have to accept the consequences.

(SockDog) #124

If those consequences have value and I doubt a rage quitter really cares about XP much like someone who has to leave for a RL reason.

So really an XP penalty might, just might, keep someone playing who is bored. Great, I think that’s one of the type of gamers I’d rather did leave.

(3Suns) #125

HORSE, thank you for your reply. I read it. I think we have fundamentally different views of the social aspect of online gaming. I see Senyin has set up a new thread for that, so I will talk more over there.

Again, as regards Brink, I am satisfied that the bots, hot join, and dedicated servers will fix what I consider broken in many other console online MP experiences.

(3Suns) #126

SockDog, invite sent! Thanks!

(Rahdo) #127

my worry about even that stat is it can encourage team hopping and whatnot. global stat leaderboards for team-based multiplayer = evil :frowning:

as for quitters, the base thing brink does is allow bots to fill in and auto-balance the teams. note, this is in ‘standard’ matches… there are server options to turn this off though…

(Lequis) #128

Do not add stats, killstreaks, abnormally low recoil guns, or open/no cover maps (these are the bane of fun).

Stat’s because 99% ppl are achievement-*****s about K/D,

Killstreaks because ppl think they are pro if they can camp to get an obnoxiously OP killstreak (which rewards good players by letting them spawnkill their enemies).

Low recoil guns (that are automatic) because then it becomes a degenerative, I-have-better-aim-therefore-I-win situation.

And no cover because that flat out promotes camping behind cover (as opposed to rushing the **** out of anyone).

These would be 4 of my 10 commandments for FPSs.

(Senethro) #129

Why do you hate lightning guns? Are you a railwhore?

I think I’m getting a bit of a rep on these forums, especially by people who think I want to destroy their competitive gaming utopia. This is one line even I wouldn’t cross though. Games are partly physical, in the same way that snooker or darks are partly physical. Why shouldn’t the guy with better hand eye co-ordination win on even ground?

This assertion by you also seems to conflict directly with your next commandment. No cover? But then how would worse-aim players choose where to fight to get an advantage on the better-aim ones?

And no cover because that flat out promotes camping behind cover (as opposed to rushing the **** out of anyone).

I’m interested in this point because I think I haven’t understood it. Do you want rooms to be empty boxes and outside to be flat open fields? Maybe where nice brightly coloured soldiers in smart uniforms march in lines to be cut down by gunfire, all writing poetry about it and being doomed youth with an early 20th century flavour?

(tokamak) #130

Haven’t you heard? They already changed the name from Brink to Paschendaele.

(3Suns) #131

[QUOTE=Rahdo;215391]my worry about even that stat is it can encourage team hopping and whatnot. global stat leaderboards for team-based multiplayer = evil :frowning:

as for quitters, the base thing brink does is allow bots to fill in and auto-balance the teams. note, this is in ‘standard’ matches… there are server options to turn this off though…[/QUOTE]

This is all GOOD.

(INF3RN0) #132

Hallelujah! :wink:

(brbrbr) #133

yeah !
we all are Evil.
and community cursed/plagued with stats/experience experience :stuck_out_tongue:

“Hallelujah!” ©

(3Suns) #134

I called it. Before I explain what it is, let me just say that as regards Brink, the problem is mostly solved. The bots basically take care of most of the problems rampant quitting may create.

But for Halo:Reach, Bungie finally realized that quitting in the Halo games is a real problem, and they are about to implement the suggestion I made back in 2007. The Penalty Box, or in their words, “The Quitter Ban”. LMAO.

"Lastly, and all new for Reach, we have a new type of ban called a Quitter Ban. This is a relatively soft ban, so we will be using it quite aggressively, activating after only a handful of quits and lasting a rather long time. What does it do? A player with a Quitter Ban will be temporarily unable to re-enter Matchmaking for 15-30 minutes following any further quits. "

Vindicated!

Thing is, we have two copies of ODST in the house, and with split-screen there has been a lot of Halo:Reach beta played in the house (all not by me). The single biggest complaint was that in almost every match, someone quit. More times than not, it ruined the match completely. My boys are ecstatic.

(DarkangelUK) #135

I’d rather they went away from P2P and got dedicated so someone can replace a quitter. As has been said many times in this thread, there’s a whole load of legit reasons for having to leave a match, and punishing people for it isn’t the answer. The problem with the Halo games is, when someone leaves, they can’t be replaced… the adverse affect of someone quitting is their own fault.

(signofzeta) #136

P2P only really works when you have one player vs one player. For example, RTS and Sports Sims.

If you have like at least more than 4 players, then dedicated servers are the way to go.

P2P also works when the matches are short.

This is the reason why I think Dota from Warcraft III is a dumb mod. Once you leave, nobody to replace. And people there tend to get agitated against quitter, and ban people for quitting, which I think is stupid, and should be the game’s P2P structure’s fault, not the player. Also, the matches are long, like an hour long. Do you know how difficult it is to drag a dota player off a family computer just so you could do something else on it?

When I played ETQW on the 360, it has a lobby system, where you have to wait for people to join in first, then it only starts when people are ready. But there are some occasions where I get to join a match in progress, so I don’t know if it is P2P or dedicated, but it looks like P2P.

So that means, you can have someone replace someone in P2P, but someone should tell me if ETQW on the 360 is really actually P2P, because I could join the match in progress, but yet it has a lobby.

(SockDog) #137

How about quitting multiple times? I can see where unexpected things come up but if life is so in the way that you need to quit multiple matches in a row, well maybe you shouldn’t be playing an online multiplayer game right then.

As far as idle/bots are concerned, they’re a fair stopgap but if they’re not the reason you play online.

I’d like to see a similar kick/ban implemented. Get 3 kicks for griefing or idling within a time frame and you get a game wide tempban.

Given L4D2’s vote this week I’m wondering if they won’t be adopting something similar soon.

(3Suns) #138

Since I first started this thread, it has be revealed that the 360 version will not have dedicated servers but will use P2P. That has huge implications for the impact of quitters.

signofzeta, what you are talking about is “host migration”. It prevents the room from shutting down altogether when the player, who just happens to be host, quits. SD needs to be sure they have this feature included. If they don’t, then they are implementing a very old P2P system, and I for one, will be very disappointed.

(signofzeta) #139

[quote=3Suns;226048]Since I first started this thread, it has be revealed that the 360 version will not have dedicated servers but will use P2P. That has huge implications for the impact of quitters.

signofzeta, what you are talking about is “host migration”. It prevents the room from shutting down altogether when the player, who just happens to be host, quits. SD needs to be sure they have this feature included. If they don’t, then they are implementing a very old P2P system, and I for one, will be very disappointed.[/quote]

I don’t mean that. I mean that, it has a lobby like system, characteristic of P2P, but yet, I can join mid match, which is characteristic of dedicated servers. That is what I was wondering about in ETQW on 360.

The only way to really deal with quitters without really taking their privileges away is putting a huge badge saying “look at me. I’m a quitter”.

(ultraddtd) #140

[QUOTE=3Suns;225927]I called it. Before I explain what it is, let me just say that as regards Brink, the problem is mostly solved. The bots basically take care of most of the problems rampant quitting may create.

But for Halo:Reach, Bungie finally realized that quitting in the Halo games is a real problem, and they are about to implement the suggestion I made back in 2007. The Penalty Box, or in their words, “The Quitter Ban”. LMAO.

"Lastly, and all new for Reach, we have a new type of ban called a Quitter Ban. This is a relatively soft ban, so we will be using it quite aggressively, activating after only a handful of quits and lasting a rather long time. What does it do? A player with a Quitter Ban will be temporarily unable to re-enter Matchmaking for 15-30 minutes following any further quits. "

Vindicated!

Thing is, we have two copies of ODST in the house, and with split-screen there has been a lot of Halo:Reach beta played in the house (all not by me). The single biggest complaint was that in almost every match, someone quit. More times than not, it ruined the match completely. My boys are ecstatic.[/QUOTE]

Why not just allow matchmakign to fill in the empty slots? MW2 may not be the best game out there, but I rarely run into the problem of not having enough players in a game. People quit and others join. Sometimes almost immediately. I always thought it was annoying that in Halo you couldn’t join a game mid match, that if my friends were playing I couldn’t hop in, even if there was space on their team. Maybe Halo should have adopted that approach and hopefully Brink will.