Cyber Rat Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I have a few arguments as to why ragequitting is awful behaviour, the biggest one being you ruin everyone else's fun and it's unsporting behaviour. Now, there has been an argument I've been seeing more and more online, it being "I paid for the game to have fun. If I'm losing, I'm not having fun, so I have the right to just quit." Does paying for a game entitle you to do this? Should game developers go out of their way to think of solutions to lessen or stop ragequitting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Maybe publishers should find ways to make losing fun to forestall rage quitting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I think ragequitting should lead into a sort of 'ragequit limbo' where you're thrown into a match or lobby with other ragequitters...then, if you ragequit there, you just wind up in another game of ragequitters. And you're stuck there. FOREVER. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 MvC3 is doing something similar to what Hot_Heart suggested and I think it's a pretty good idea. Along side K:D n all that kind of stuff the online rankings should include a kind of 'Completed Match:Quit Match' rank and just throw folks who tend to Ragequit with each other. Those who tend to complete a match through get the satisfaction of been able to play with people who also make a habit of sticking in til the end. I think it's mostly a thing with Fighting games which I don't tend to play (generally playing team-based games) so it's not much I've come across much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) The problem with enforcing penalties with ragequitters seems to always be about balance. Halo Reach tried it with their timeout penalty. If you quit 3 matches you had to sit out for 30 min. They later dropped it down to like 10 min but it seems like it never did much to abate the tide of quitters. Of course the forums were also on fire with all the people moaning about how they had been wrongfully punished because their internet dropped out or something similar. Personally I'm inclined to think that the system works pretty well (only penalizes the guilty) and developers should ignore the vocal minorities. I'm very interested to see how the MVC3 system works out. Also, Ragequitting is probably the worst with RTS. you spend an hour building up your forces and as soon as you start destroying stuff the enemy quits. All RTS games should default over to an AI when the opponent ragequits so you can at least finish wiping out their base. Edited January 20, 2011 by Yantelope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTervo Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) That idea of ragequit limbo makes me think of a segregation system for ragequitters. If someone quits more games than they win they get a "quitter" line in their profile or lobby tag or somesuch. And will typically be thrown into games with other ragequitters as a result of the tag. It would be easy enough for them to get rid of the tag- just stick in with every game they play to make it even, which would probably be like 5 to 10 games or somesuch. While I understand where the "I paid for fun" argument comes from, I don't agree with it. The idea of playing a game, generally, is to get better at it, which will make it more fun. If you drop out of any instance when you are failing, you'll never get better at the game. If i'm losing a game awfully- I may feel pretty crap about it, and feel like I suck, but I know that if I stick in with the game I'll be able to kill/defeat the opponents at least a little bit more, and that'll teach me a lot in future games. Which will make me better, and I'll have more fun. Edited January 20, 2011 by kenshi_ryden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I never quit. Even if I'm getting totally hosed. I'll always fight to the last. It's mostly because I'm an eternal optimist. I genuinely believe that until the screen says game over, there's a chance to turn it around, or at least salvage some dignity. There is no defeat so utterly complete as the person you have just thoroughly trounced quitting in a fit of despair. Why, there have been games in BFBC2 where the team-balancing has put me and my three friends attacking a full team of 12, we've been worn down to almost nothing, the first base still stands, Alpha long since destroyed in a sneak attack, Bravo still standing strong against our hopeless advance, the battlefield a smouldering ruin with not a single building standing, when, from no where another 5 or 6 people drop into our server, on our team, our numbers bolstered we overrun the team of lackadaisical defenders who have all long since switched to recon in order to increase their KD. We sweep through their defences, a tide of fury, of frustration now unleashed. Crate after crate falls under our advance, the defenders, battered, bloodied, sensing that where victory was assured, defeat now awaits them, dwindle in number. As the last crate detonates the teams are evenly balanced and I rejoice. If I quit every time I was getting pasted I'd only play half as much as I do, you can't win 'em all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I don't quit in games either. I've come from behind after 2 teammates have dropped out in Halo Reach and still won. I usually just gauge success on my personal K/D ratio so that even if the whole team is going down in flames I can still feel good about my performance and then I'm not really tempted to quit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I'm not about the KD at all. I'm all about the objective. Probably why I'm a much bigger BF fan than CoD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I never ragequit mid-match either. I've ragequit plenty of times BETWEEN matches, but I never do it until the match is over (unless it's over something that makes it completely unplayable, like horrible lag or such). Also, Ragequitting is probably the worst with RTS. you spend an hour building up your forces and as soon as you start destroying stuff the enemy quits. All RTS games should default over to an AI when the opponent ragequits so you can at least finish wiping out their base. That's interesting. I only really play Starcraft 2 online, but at least in that game I prefer it when my enemies quit when they know they have no chance, and I do the same (though always prefaced with a sincere "gg" before I do), cause I feel like slugging it out to the end is kind of a waste of time when the result is predetermined. I look at it kind of like chess: you only play till checkmate, you don't actually take the king. So at least when I do that I'm not ragequitting, I'm just acknowledging that I've lost and moving on to my next match. Though I will say that I find it irritating when people do it too early, like the very instant you get a hit on one of their buildings. When I do it it's usually like all my production facilities are completely destroyed and they're pounding on my resource operation, and I have no hope of reinforcements. Also though it's less of an issue in Starcraft 2 for people who DO want to finish wiping out the base, cause you can hit "keep playing" after the victory thing pops up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I'm not about the KD at all. I'm all about the objective. Probably why I'm a much bigger BF fan than CoD. Yeah, I remember trying to play Battlefield 2 on PC. It was awful if you didn't have a team of friends because as a lone wolf you couldn't do a whole lot. I don't like being dependent upon teammates because too often I am playing by myself and random people are crap 90% of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I pay for my fun too. Ragequitters ruin my fun. Fuck the lot of em. I'm quite fond of MvC3's padded room solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 There's a difference between quitting and ragequitting. In SC2 people tend to quit when they have no chance. This is especially true of GSL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Is there no 'surrender' option? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 That's exactly what it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Oh, I've just read Ethan's post. Sounds like he already said as much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I was being more general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirandello Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) Maybe publishers should find ways to make losing fun to forestall rage quitting. I agree with that. Kind of hard, though, since even if you make losing fun, everybody likes winning more. Edited January 20, 2011 by Pirandello Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr W Phallus Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Maybe publishers should find ways to make losing fun to forestall rage quitting. But the developers have already made a fun game (presumably if people are playing it). Just because you are losing doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. I find if I'm losing hopelessly in something like Halo (which usually happens because one or more team mates has quit the game) then I just accept I'm not going to win and concentrate on smaller, more achievable goals such as doing best out of my team. If you're really getting dominated by the opposing team and they're much better than you then playing against them is going to be much more beneficial than quitting and gaining nothing anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slatz_grobnik Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Now, there has been an argument I've been seeing more and more online, it being "I paid for the game to have fun. If I'm losing, I'm not having fun, so I have the right to just quit." Proper response: then rent a movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Just remove the anonymity from it. If you quit in the middle of a team sport nobody wants to play with you anymore. If you quit in the middle of a one on one game then generally people are just gonna make fun of you. Making all the quitters play with each other seems pretty fair to me. It's better than labeling quitters as such outright and giving people the option to avoid them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I tend to stick around but after a while, around a dozen rounds, even I get tired by the butt rape that can happen in games like BFBC2 and will quit half way. That is when even screwing around can't save the round for me. However, I usually to quit between matches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr W Phallus Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 I tend to stick around but after a while, around a dozen rounds, even I get tired by the butt rape that can happen in games like BFBC2 and will quit half way. That is when even screwing around can't save the round for me. However, I usually to quit between matches. It occurs to me that most of my experience with rage quitters is from playing games like Halo, where it's usually small teams and no one can join once the game has started. In something like TF2 I don't even notice people rage quit because the teams are so big, people can drop in any time and there's usually an auto balance option so it totally depends what you are playing. Also it's understandable that someone would want to quit playing a game like TF2 where a match lasts much longer whereas Halo your looking at about 5 minutes depending on the map and game mode and the worse you play the quicker it's over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) Yeah, ragequitters are far worse in a game like Halo. In reach I get left all alone and it's 4-1 and I don't want to quit out because then it's mark against me. The problem is I'm pretty much screwed from that point, it's no fun and my stats are gonna get flushed down the crapper. At that point I pretty much just hide and make it as long as I can without dying. Really there should be some sort of rule that allows the last person left on a team to quit without penalty since it's not really fun for either side at that point. Ragequitting on COD really isn't such a big deal because new people just drop in mid-game and you go from there. Also I can never get my Win/Loss ratio up on that game because 9/10 times I join a new game it drops me in a match where I'm losing 250-0 with 60 seconds left. Edited January 20, 2011 by Yantelope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 The only time I'll quit in the middle of a game is if my entire team quits and it's just me against 6-8 people. By then, what's the point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.