Your opinon on getting penalised for quitting FPS online matches

So yeah, this applies to loads of FPS games. I just want to see what you think about it

I think its a great idea. Especially in games where it might take too long for teammates to join, or teammates can't join at all and the entire team suffers because you couldn't stick it out till the end. Hey, if you have to go to the bathroom, have to go out, or have another reason why you can't stay online for just a few more minutes, then you shouldn't have joined that match. Its really that simple.

Personally I think people being penalised for quitting for EVERY game and have a feature on the gamercard which tells everyone that if someone rarely quits quits occasionally or quits when the **** hits the fan

Personally I think people being penalised for quitting for EVERY game and have a feature on the gamercard which tells everyone that if someone rarely quits quits occasionally or quits when the **** hits the fan

alstevens83

I think its a great idea. Especially in games where it might take too long for teammates to join, or teammates can't join at all and the entire team suffers because you couldn't stick it out till the end. Hey, if you have to go to the bathroom, have to go out, or have another reason why you can't stay online for just a few more minutes, then you shouldn't have joined that match. Its really that simple.

DamianAlexander

Except its not. At all. I cant imagine anybody arguing that its actually *that* simple. How ridiculous.

I mean, have you never just 'suddenly' had the urge to use the bathroom? Ever eaten Taco Bell, for instance?

Have you never had an important phone call that you just *had* to take?

Have you never had somebody knock on your door in the middle of a match?

I could seriously make a decent length list on possible, ordinary things that could happen where somebody has to leave a match. Perhaps video games are like *top* priority in your life, but for most us 'normals', we have lives outside of them that need attending to once in a while.

Anyways, I dont think games should necessarily penalize you for quitting a match, but having something that recorded how many times you quit would be good. There's only *so* many times that you'll *need* to quit a match for whatever reason, and people that quit just so they dont lose would obviously start to get recognized by this stat-tracking.

So perhaps penalize gamers that have a certain percentage of 'quits' in some way. Say, if you quit more than 20% of your matches, then something is probably up and the game 'marks' you in some way. I dont know exactly what would be 'fair' as a punishment for this marking, though. Thats another topic altogether.

Don't care.

It isn't a big deal with games where people can join and leave games. It sucks when it happens to games where people can't join once the game starts for example Halo 3 and Gears.

[QUOTE="DamianAlexander"]

I think its a great idea. Especially in games where it might take too long for teammates to join, or teammates can't join at all and the entire team suffers because you couldn't stick it out till the end. Hey, if you have to go to the bathroom, have to go out, or have another reason why you can't stay online for just a few more minutes, then you shouldn't have joined that match. Its really that simple.

seankane

Except its not. At all. I cant imagine anybody arguing that its actually *that* simple. How ridiculous.

I mean, have you never just 'suddenly' had the urge to use the bathroom? Ever eaten Taco Bell, for instance?

Have you never had an important phone call that you just *had* to take?

Have you never had somebody knock on your door in the middle of a match?

I could seriously make a decent length list on possible, ordinary things that could happen where somebody has to leave a match. Perhaps video games are like *top* priority in your life, but for most us 'normals', we have lives outside of them that need attending to once in a while.

And the list can continue to go on, but that doesn't mean that just because you find your reason for quitting justifiable doesn't mean it is. Sure things come up, and in moments of emergency or urgency you have no choice but to turn of your system and deal with your much more important real life situation at hand, but that doesn't mean that I really care. I don't care if your wife suddenly went into labor and now you have to drive her to the hospital. Why you might ask? Because that doesn't really affect me. I'll wish you all the best, but then why should you be so easily forgiven when the guy who ragequit because he was losing too badly has no penalty? I in no way, shape, or form would ever imagine myself staying online just because I don't want to lose a few points, especially if I feel as if the emergency or my sense of urgency is so great that I have to quit, and even then, I shouldn't be really concerned with losing a fair amount of points for quitting.

To rap up what my very confusing paragraph that I can't see myself editing because I have to start going to work now. Just because your reason to quit is justifiable doesn't give the entire community the right to just quit. Not including some sort of punishment for quitting a team or even any game should result in the losing of points. If people were not affected by quitting then there would be so many people constantly quitting out because they didn't want to affect their rank and the team winning would have to suffer losing the points that they earned because the entire other team quit. Anybody remember Gears of War 2 before the patch? People would quit left and right, it was right down disgusting how annoying it was to have 3 guys quit out on your team, with no hope of getting any teammates back, and having to stick out the match because you weren't a quitter.

I just think you need to rethink this some more.

Don't care.

It isn't a big deal with games where people can join and leave games. It sucks when it happens to games where people can't join once the game starts for example Halo 3 and Gears.

istreakforfood

Which reminds me of another point: This isn't a huge deal in FPS games. Where I think the 'quitting' thing becomes a problem is 1-vs-1 games like sports games and fighting games. These are the games that encourange the sore losers of the world to just quit out when they're getting whooped in order to 'save face'.

I dislike it. I hate when I'm getting blown out, or the rest of my team quits or its laggy in Halo, and I dont want to lose EXP. I just switch to my tv and wait for the match to be over.tehsystemwarior

No one likes getting beat. But if you quit because you're getting whooped, then you're a sore loser.

It seems the days of good sportsmanship is long gone.

[QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]I dislike it. I hate when I'm getting blown out, or the rest of my team quits or its laggy in Halo, and I dont want to lose EXP. I just switch to my tv and wait for the match to be over.seankane

No one likes getting beat. But if you quit because you're getting whooped, then you're a sore loser.

It seems the days of good sportsmanship is long gone.

Hence why I think a fair punishment is in order. Without it ragequitting will govern way to many online games.

[QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]I dislike it. I hate when I'm getting blown out, or the rest of my team quits or its laggy in Halo, and I dont want to lose EXP. I just switch to my tv and wait for the match to be over.seankane

No one likes getting beat. But if you quit because you're getting whooped, then you're a sore loser.

It seems the days of good sportsmanship is long gone.

I remember people would unplug their modem in Starcraft so they won't get a loss in their stats. People still use hacks or abuse glitches to have the advantage. It's the same as it always has been. There will be people who will are good sports about it and there are sore losers.

[QUOTE="seankane"]

[QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]I dislike it. I hate when I'm getting blown out, or the rest of my team quits or its laggy in Halo, and I dont want to lose EXP. I just switch to my tv and wait for the match to be over.DamianAlexander

No one likes getting beat. But if you quit because you're getting whooped, then you're a sore loser.

It seems the days of good sportsmanship is long gone.

Hence why I think a fair punishment is in order. Without it ragequitting will govern way to many online games.

But how do you apply a 'fair' punishment, when there is obviously valid reasons people quit games? Not *everybody* quits just because they're losing. The game cannot distinguish between who's leaving for valid/invalid reasons, ya know? Think about that.

[QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]I dislike it. I hate when I'm getting blown out, or the rest of my team quits or its laggy in Halo, and I dont want to lose EXP. I just switch to my tv and wait for the match to be over.seankane

No one likes getting beat. But if you quit because you're getting whooped, then you're a sore loser.

It seems the days of good sportsmanship is long gone.

[QUOTE="DamianAlexander"]

[QUOTE="seankane"]

No one likes getting beat. But if you quit because you're getting whooped, then you're a sore loser.

It seems the days of good sportsmanship is long gone.

seankane

Hence why I think a fair punishment is in order. Without it ragequitting will govern way to many online games.

But how do you apply a 'fair' punishment, when there is obviously valid reasons people quit games? Not *everybody* quits just because they're losing. The game cannot distinguish between who's leaving for valid/invalid reasons, ya know? Think about that.

And because the game cannot distinguish between who's leaving for valid/invalid reason there should just be one flat raid point reduction or lost applied to your gamestats. It doesn't matter why you quit, you quit, you lost points because you quit. If there wasn't a point deduction too many people would feel the need to quit.

No, but if my team is gettiing crushed and spawnkilled, I dont want to sit in that match and wast my time.tehsystemwarior

Waste your time? You're gonna spend plenty of time in the future getting killed. Its best to learn how to deal with it now, so that you can properly know how to react in those situations in the future. Personally, I think its how somebody performs when the cards are down that says most about someone.

The simple fact is that you're quitting because you're losing. Its the definition of a sore loser.

I mean, if everybody quit because they were losing, then no game would ever get finished. Dont be a part of the problem. Finish the game you're playing, even if you're losing. Do it out of respect for the competition, and out of respect for yourself. Its just a video game, after all. Dont let your ego take it too hard.

[QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]No, but if my team is gettiing crushed and spawnkilled, I dont want to sit in that match and wast my time.seankane

Waste your time? You're gonna spend plenty of time in the future getting killed. Its best to learn how to deal with it now, so that you can properly know how to react in those situations in the future. Personally, I think its how somebody performs when the cards are down that says most about someone.

The simple fact is that you're quitting because you're losing. Its the definition of a sore loser.

I mean, if everybody quit because they were losing, then no game would ever get finished. Dont be a part of the problem. Finish the game you're playing, even if you're losing. Do it out of respect for the competition, and out of respect for yourself. Its just a video game, after all. Dont let your ego take it too hard.

And because the game cannot distinguish between who's leaving for valid/invalid reason there should just be one flat raid point reduction or lost applied to your gamestats. It doesn't matter why you quit, you quit, you lost points because you quit. If there wasn't a point deduction too many people would feel the need to quit.

DamianAlexander

So how on earth is that 'fair'? :?

Its fair only to those who quit because they're being sore losers. It most unfair to those who quit because they have a perfectly valid reason to.

What you're asking is not 'fair' at all. Its a blanket punishment.

No, I'm not quitting because I'm a sore loser, I'm quitting because I'm smart. The other team will win no matter what, and I don't feel like wasting my time in an impossible situation, call it what you want, but I think its smart more then anything else. It has nothing to do with an ego, it has to do with being bored.tehsystemwarior

So winning is the only thing that matters to you? And if you cannot win, you feel the need to quit?

Thats *exactly* what a sore loser is, man.

You call it smart, but I consider it a very unsportsman-like way to go about things. Shows you have no respect for your competition. You'd rather deprive them of a valid victory rather than admit you were bettered.

You need to learn how to deal with losing. Everybody does. Its a strong characteristic to have, and you will be respected for it.

[QUOTE="DamianAlexander"]

And because the game cannot distinguish between who's leaving for valid/invalid reason there should just be one flat raid point reduction or lost applied to your gamestats. It doesn't matter why you quit, you quit, you lost points because you quit. If there wasn't a point deduction too many people would feel the need to quit.

seankane

So how on earth is that 'fair'? :?

Its fair only to those who quit because they're being sore losers. It most unfair to those who quit because they have a perfectly valid reason to.

What you're asking is not 'fair' at all. Its a blanket punishment.

What's wrong with blind justice? You're being judged on quitting, not on anything else. There is no if, ands, or buts, there is just quitting. If you quit out of a match you deserve to lose points. There needs to be a sort of point or stat lost when doing so or else everybody would just quit because of "Fair" reason like losing.

[QUOTE="seankane"]

[QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]I dislike it. I hate when I'm getting blown out, or the rest of my team quits or its laggy in Halo, and I dont want to lose EXP. I just switch to my tv and wait for the match to be over.tehsystemwarior

No one likes getting beat. But if you quit because you're getting whooped, then you're a sore loser.

It seems the days of good sportsmanship is long gone.

What's wrong with blind justice? You're being judged on quitting, not on anything else. There is no if, ands, or buts, there is just quitting. If you quit out of a match you deserve to lose points. There needs to be a sort of point or stat lost when doing so or else everybody would just quit because of "Fair" reason like losing.

DamianAlexander

You said there should be a 'fair' penalty, but blind justice is not 'fair' whatsoever. Its quite the opposite.

There's ways to go about it that would create a bit more 'fairness' without having to blanket punishment anybody that quits. It would take more work, sure, but resorting to 'lazy' measures to fix things is not respectable, if you ask me.

[QUOTE="DamianAlexander"]

What's wrong with blind justice? You're being judged on quitting, not on anything else. There is no if, ands, or buts, there is just quitting. If you quit out of a match you deserve to lose points. There needs to be a sort of point or stat lost when doing so or else everybody would just quit because of "Fair" reason like losing.

seankane

You said there should be a 'fair' penalty, but blind justice is not 'fair' whatsoever. Its quite the opposite.

There's ways to go about it that would create a bit more 'fairness' without having to blanket punishment anybody that quits. It would take more work, sure, but resorting to 'lazy' measures to fix things is not respectable, if you ask me.

When I said "fair" I meant something that wasn't outrageous, or a point loss too great to recover from. Something that would be fair to the offense. I like what Cogar said, if you quit out once a week, month the point reduction would be small but non-the-less you would lost points.

When I said "fair" I meant something that wasn't outrageous, or a point loss too great to recover from. Something that would be fair to the offense. I like what Cogar said, if you quit out once a week, month the point reduction would be small but non-the-less you would lost points.

DamianAlexander

The way I see it, no one should be punished *at all* for quitting if they absolutely need to. I shouldn't have to take even a small point loss because I had to stop and answer the door.

Like I said, I'm not against punishments for quitting, but there needs to be some stat-tracking to punish only players who quit a little *too* much for it to be a coincidence. This would have the same effect of deterring quitters, but being fair to those of us who cant continue because reality beckons.

[QUOTE="DamianAlexander"]

When I said "fair" I meant something that wasn't outrageous, or a point loss too great to recover from. Something that would be fair to the offense. I like what Cogar said, if you quit out once a week, month the point reduction would be small but non-the-less you would lost points.

seankane

The way I see it, no one should be punished *at all* for quitting if they absolutely need to. I shouldn't have to take even a small point loss because I had to stop and answer the door.

Like I said, I'm not against punishments for quitting, but there needs to be some stat-tracking to punish only players who quit a little *too* much for it to be a coincidence. This would have the same effect of deterring quitters, but being fair to those of us who cant continue because reality beckons.

Alright then, since you're so keen on this, how many quits would it take, under your system of course, to finally insure some point loss?

[QUOTE="seankane"]

[QUOTE="DamianAlexander"]

When I said "fair" I meant something that wasn't outrageous, or a point loss too great to recover from. Something that would be fair to the offense. I like what Cogar said, if you quit out once a week, month the point reduction would be small but non-the-less you would lost points.

DamianAlexander

The way I see it, no one should be punished *at all* for quitting if they absolutely need to. I shouldn't have to take even a small point loss because I had to stop and answer the door.

Like I said, I'm not against punishments for quitting, but there needs to be some stat-tracking to punish only players who quit a little *too* much for it to be a coincidence. This would have the same effect of deterring quitters, but being fair to those of us who cant continue because reality beckons.

Alright then, since you're so keen on this, how many quits would it take, under your system of course, to finally insure some point loss?

lol 'no one should be penalized for quitting if they absolutely need to,' and who the hell would judge that? I think everyone getting the same penalty for quitting no matter what is by far the best and more fair option and if 'reality beckons' a little too often, then maybe you should think about not playing MP games when you dont have the timechaoscougar1

What are you talking about 'not having the time'? I cant control when people come knock on my door, or when I get an important phone call or when my dog is chewing up something of value. Maybe you live in some solitary world, where there's nothing to do except video games, but I have an outside life that needs attending to once in a while. And sometimes, that once in a while happens to be when I'm playing a video game, and the video game certainly does *not* take priority.

See, there's nothing 'fair' about blanket punishments whatsoever. Its like giving out the same punishment to somebody who killed somebody who was trying to rape them as somebody who just wanted to rob somebody. Blanket punishments are the 'epitome' of unfairness. There's rarely things in life where the circumstances are the exact same from case-to-case.

If you want to punish somebody for quitting cuz they had to answer the door, then thats hardly fair. You hopefully realize that, even if you wont admit it. And since its not impossible for the game to keep track of stats for how many times somebody quits, it seems woefully inadequate to blanket punish people when its possible to punish only the people that really need punishing.

Laugh all you want, but you have a *very* poor argument.

Alright then, since you're so keen on this, how many quits would it take, under your system of course, to finally insure some point loss?

DamianAlexander

If you bothered to read my posts, you'd have seen that I proposed a system where somebody who's quitting more than 20% of their matches would be 'marked'(and punished) somehow.

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"]lol 'no one should be penalized for quitting if they absolutely need to,' and who the hell would judge that? I think everyone getting the same penalty for quitting no matter what is by far the best and more fair option and if 'reality beckons' a little too often, then maybe you should think about not playing MP games when you dont have the timeseankane

What are you talking about 'not having the time'? I cant control when people come knock on my door, or when I get an important phone call or when my dog is chewing up something of value. Maybe you live in some solitary world, where there's nothing to do except video games, but I have an outside life that needs attending to once in a while. And sometimes, that once in a while happens to be when I'm playing a video game, and the video game certainly does *not* take priority.

And now I see you *are* taking the route that blanket punishments are the fairest option. Hehe. Oh how the winds change. See, there's nothing 'fair' about blanket punishments whatsoever. Its like giving out the same punishment to somebody who killed somebody who was trying to rape them as somebody who just wanted to rob somebody. Blanket punishments are the 'epitome' of unfairness. There's rarely things in life where the circumstances are the exact same from case-to-case.

If you want to punish somebody for quitting cuz they had to answer the door, then thats hardly fair. You hopefully realize that, even if you wont admit it. And since its not impossible for the game to keep track of stats for how many times somebody quits, it seems woefully inadequate to blanket punish people when its possible to punish only the people that really need punishing.

Laugh all you want, but you have a *very* poor argument.

and terrible analogies you used because those crimes have completely different outcomes, quitting only has one outcome. A better analogy would have been the difference between murder 1 (pre-meditated) and manslaughter. Even then there is a massive difference between real life and xbox live. Yes, both crimes would be punished in real life, but unlike xbox live, there is a judge/jury to decide the severity. Would you like a judge to ask you why you quit a game everytime you do it? no, because its ridiculous, just like having a quitting penalty based on percentages.
Firstly because 20% is a already a very large chunk of matches and secondly, the actual size of that chunk varies with how many games you have played. someone who has played 200 matches and never quit one could consequently quit 40 matches in a row with no punishment = fail

There are a few reasons why I would quit a game.

1. An emergency, obviously, would probably have me just turning off my xbox. I don't really see why the bathroom would be that urgent, usually you know if you're going to need to use the bathroom and you can hold it for 5 minutes. If it's that bad and comes on that quickly I probably wouldn't even think about quiting, I'd just drop my controller and run to the bathroom.

2. A friend signs on and invites me to game and my game is less than halfway done. No one likes waiting and if your friends are like mine, if they wait more than 1 minute they'll just join a game of their own and you'll be playing "Invite-Tag" for a solid 20 minutes.

3. The opposing team is using some sort of cheat or glitch that is nearly game breaking. This really hasn't been much of a problem for the modern generations, but at the dawn of Xbox Live there were so many glitches, hacks, and cheats.

and maybe you should have read the part where it says A LITTLE TOO OFTEN. but well skimmedchaoscougar1

But your proposal does not say punishment only for those who 'too often' quit. You were defending the notion of a blanket punishment, which would punish ANYBODY for quitting. Thats not fair at all.

and terrible analogies you used because those crimes have completely different outcomes, quitting only has one outcome. A better analogy would have been the difference between murder 1 (pre-meditated) and manslaughter. Even then there is a massive difference between real life and xbox live. Yes, both crimes would be punished in real life, but unlike xbox live, there is a judge/jury to decide the severity. Would you like a judge to ask you why you quit a game everytime you do it? no, because its ridiculous, just like having a quitting penalty based on percentages. Firstly because 20% is a already a very large chunk of matches and the actual size of that chunk varies with how many games you have played. and secondly because someone who has played 200 matches and never quit one could consequently quit 40 matches in a row with no punishmentchaoscougar1

There's nothing terrible about the analogy. It was just there to make a point that certain 'crimes' should be treated on an individual basis, because very few cases are the same. There's certainly varying degrees of 'wrongdoing'.

As for the 20% thing, I think its a fair number, but I was just throwing it out there. Its certainly up for debate on how to control fairness, and maybe a different percentage would be fairer, or maybe some other way, I dont know. The point is that blanket punishments are far from fair.

Oh, I forgot to add to my post. When I do quit I take my XP punishment like a man. Since I don't quit often I don't get penalized much and the penalties are miniscule so every one complaining about how they get these important phone calls and visitors at their house, unless you're getting them every 5 to 10 minutes then it really shouldn't be a problem to lose a fraction of a percentage of XP from a VIDEO GAME THAT MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN THE LONG RUN. Trust me champ, you'll get it back.

kind of ironic how your saying a video game does not take priority but you seem to be getting pretty heated about being penalised for quitting. If 1XP in Halo 3, 1500 XP in Gears 2 or your match bonus in CoD really means that much to you, dont answer the door

chaoscougar1

Its called 'fairness'. No, I'm not gonna cry about a loss of points if I have to answer the door, but its certainly not fair to be penalized for it, either.

A blanket punishment is a lazy way to go about it, if you ask me.

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"]and maybe you should have read the part where it says A LITTLE TOO OFTEN. but well skimmedseankane

But your proposal does not say punishment only for those who 'too often' quit. You were defending the notion of a blanket punishment, which would punish ANYBODY for quitting. Thats not fair at all.

and terrible analogies you used because those crimes have completely different outcomes, quitting only has one outcome. A better analogy would have been the difference between murder 1 (pre-meditated) and manslaughter. Even then there is a massive difference between real life and xbox live. Yes, both crimes would be punished in real life, but unlike xbox live, there is a judge/jury to decide the severity. Would you like a judge to ask you why you quit a game everytime you do it? no, because its ridiculous, just like having a quitting penalty based on percentages. Firstly because 20% is a already a very large chunk of matches and the actual size of that chunk varies with how many games you have played. and secondly because someone who has played 200 matches and never quit one could consequently quit 40 matches in a row with no punishmentchaoscougar1

There's nothing terrible about the analogy. It was just there to make a point that certain 'crimes' should be treated on an individual basis, because very few cases are the same. There's certainly varying degrees of 'wrongdoing'.

As for the 20% thing, I think its a fair number, but I was just throwing it out there. Its certainly up for debate on how to control fairness, and maybe a different percentage would be fairer, or maybe some other way, I dont know. The point is that blanket punishments are far from fair.

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"]

kind of ironic how your saying a video game does not take priority but you seem to be getting pretty heated about being penalised for quitting. If 1XP in Halo 3, 1500 XP in Gears 2 or your match bonus in CoD really means that much to you, dont answer the door

seankane

Its called 'fairness'. No, I'm not gonna cry about a loss of points if I have to answer the door, but its certainly not fair to be penalized for it, either.

maybe MS should hire you to decide on a case by case basis, in every single game, whether when a person quits it was for a legitimate reason or not :roll:

chaoscougar1

Obviously you're not reading my posts, because I've clearly addressed that itsimpossible for a game to discern whether a quit was valid/invalid. Thats why I proposed a 'percentage' system, whereby people who quit a little 'too often'(inyour words) are punished.

so you dont care about the loss of points, you just care you're getting penalised; in which the penalty is infact a loss of points....uhuh :roll:chaoscougar1

Yes, I care about the principle of the matter. I think when possible, fairness should be applied. In this case, it seems pretty possible. Some of you would just rather have a much lazier system of going about it which certainly would bother some people. No, *I* may not cry about it, but not everybody is a good sportsman and will 'take it like a man'.

Point is that there's superior solution to the blanket punishment. Arguing against it is arguing for laziness.

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"]

kind of ironic how your saying a video game does not take priority but you seem to be getting pretty heated about being penalised for quitting. If 1XP in Halo 3, 1500 XP in Gears 2 or your match bonus in CoD really means that much to you, dont answer the door

seankane

Its called 'fairness'. No, I'm not gonna cry about a loss of points if I have to answer the door, but its certainly not fair to be penalized for it, either.

A blanket punishment is a lazy way to go about it, if you ask me.

As far as the game is concerned you're just as much at fault as anyone else who quits mid game. You left your team stranded and now they have to deal with being man down. I think a blanket punishment is perfectly fair. The more complex a system becomes the more holes it will have and the more and more people will find a way to take advantage of it. If MS implements a "fair" punishments system I guarantee people will find away to abuse it.RipaX21

I'm at fault because somebody knocked on my door? Video games certainly aren't selfish and think that game outcomes are more important than real-life. They are just products of the developer's(real people's)intentions and nothing more.

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"] maybe MS should hire you to decide on a case by case basis, in every single game, whether when a person quits it was for a legitimate reason or not :roll:

seankane

Obviously you're not reading my posts, because I've clearly addressed that itsimpossible for a game to discern whether a quit was valid/invalid. Thats why I proposed a 'percentage' system, whereby people who quit a little 'too often'(inyour words) are punished.

[QUOTE="RipaX21"]As far as the game is concerned you're just as much at fault as anyone else who quits mid game. You left your team stranded and now they have to deal with being man down. I think a blanket punishment is perfectly fair. The more complex a system becomes the more holes it will have and the more and more people will find a way to take advantage of it. If MS implements a "fair" punishments system I guarantee people will find away to abuse it.seankane

I'm at fault because somebody knocked on my door? Video games certainly aren't selfish and think that game outcomes are more important than real-life. They are just products of the developer's(real people's)intentions and nothing more.

[QUOTE="RipaX21"]As far as the game is concerned you're just as much at fault as anyone else who quits mid game. You left your team stranded and now they have to deal with being man down. I think a blanket punishment is perfectly fair. The more complex a system becomes the more holes it will have and the more and more people will find a way to take advantage of it. If MS implements a "fair" punishments system I guarantee people will find away to abuse it.seankane

I'm at fault because somebody knocked on my door? Video games certainly aren't selfish and think that game outcomes are more important than real-life. They are just products of the developer's(real people's)intentions and nothing more.

if you strongly believe the opposite then why the hell do you care so much?

PS its 4am in australia and i am going to bed, i shall pick this up tomorrow haha

obviously you're taking a very small loss in virtual points very seriously. No game has ever severely punished you for quitting, thus the people who only quit very rarely can very easily make those points back up. We dont need a percentage system because small losses only become big if they add up. Unexpected circumstances shouldnt add up because then they wouldnt be unexpected circumstances. I personally have very few people come around to my house that are unannounced (most call or are called first), most unexpected telephone calls dont last that long and i doubt someone would be stupid enough to eat something every day that gives them stomach problems (and hop on a MP game right after eating it as well)chaoscougar1

I'm not taking a small loss in points very seriously. I'm taking unfairness and laziness seriously. Like I said, its the principle of the matter.

I'll admit a blanket punishment is better than nothing, but its certainly not *ideal*.

Percentage systems work in that people who do actually quit games do it out of behavioral reasons. Its not something they're gonna think about, where they take a calculator and figure whether or not its going to affect them or not. Its something that people do instinctively because they're sore losers and cant *stand* losing. I doubt its really even a case of most people losing EXP or whatever, but a matter of ego. Thats why I've never said what punishment I find appropriate. I think that most people would care less about a knock on EXP points. I was thinking more on the lines of matchmaking systems skipping over you when searching for new players, or other players being able to see your status as a 'skipper' and being able to kick you for it. Something that will really affect somebody's multiplayer experience.

Yes you are at fault of quitting the game early. So you may not be as despicable as people that quit because they're losing, but quitting a game early has the same effect regardless of what the reason is and all the other players in the game have to deal with your decision. RipaX21

Video games shouldn't punish people for prioritizing real-life. If you believe otherwise, then I dont know what to say.

[QUOTE="RipaX21"] Yes you are at fault of quitting the game early. So you may not be as despicable as people that quit because they're losing, but quitting a game early has the same effect regardless of what the reason is and all the other players in the game have to deal with your decision. seankane

Video games shouldn't punish people for prioritizing real-life. If you believe otherwise, then I dont know what to say.

It's pretty stupid. Having to use the think tank is something you shouldn't be deducted points for.

Man that DamianAlexander got annoying.

Yes i think they should have it to penalise quitters but as alot of people are saying what about when you have to quit? or get disconnected. It's not fair to those people, that why this topic will never be justified, Yes this system shold be in place to penalise the quitters but then again no it shouldn't be for those who have to come off for many reasons.

You're not even attempting to absorb what I'm trying to say here. I understand you have obligations that require you to quit a match every once-in-a-while. We all do. As far as the game goes, we should still be punished for quitting the game because we ruined the match for the other players.RipaX21

I realize what you're saying. I just dont think somebody should be punished for having to partake in real-life, even if it does leave those playing the game to have to *deal* with the loss. Real lifeis just more important.

Still, probably the best argument I've heard yet. I do get what you're saying, but I just dont agree. There will always be another game. But when somebody's knocking on my door, I'm not gonna make them wait. And I dont feel I should be penalized for that, either, cuz it would be incredibly rude of me to just keep playing, ya know?