Penalties for disconecting during multiplayer games?

[CardinalPiggles]

Personally I think that if someone dc's they should get a time penalty of 5-10 minutes. If you happen to have to rush out you aren't gonna care, if you lose connection then it takes time for it to come back up regardless, so as far as I can tell the penalty wouldn't be all that detrimental to people who aren't simply rage quitting. And of course a loss should go to the person who dc's, whereas a win goes to the other.

 

[ZeroMachine]

I like the way that FIFA does it.

If your opponent disconnects, you get the recorded win 3-0 and the opponent gets the 0-3 loss. No disconnection stats, no "time-outs", no fancy tricks; just a win for the person who played and a loss for the person who left. Simple as that.

On paper, this is the best solution I've ever seen, but in action, it would mean that a shitty player could have an undeserved win on his record because the other actually skilled player who would have won fair and square has shit internet. This would also give the D/C'd player a loss, possibly marring a well deserved winning streak.

If it was possible to tell the difference between quitting and losing internet, then fuck yeah, do this. But I've never seen a game that can tell the difference, at least on consoles.

 

[ZeroMachine]

Halo: Reach does it the best. Leaving counts as a loss, but having a consistent non-quitting streak automatically enters you in an exp lottery. These are good incentives/penalties that would only really affect try-hards, not people who regularly get off because life gets in the way.

Also: If you quit games A LOT in a short amount of time (Like 10 times in two minutes without getting disconnected or finishing a match), you get a warning from the game to stop quitting so much. Failing to comply results in a 15-minute ban from matchmaking.

I forgot how much better Reach handled that than 4... they should bring back the lottery.

 

[Azaraxzealot]

They should be more lenient for people who legitimately get disconnected by shoddy internet or just not having enough badndwith. I can't tell you how many "losses" I have from some games that are really from my internet deciding to cut out all of the sudden or my family watching netflix then downloading something

 

[Magikarp]

I really like the way smite does it: If you drop out during a game, your xp bonus gets reset, which you have to earn again by playing a certain number of matches, & you can't join a new game for 30 minutes. But the really good part is that if you crash, or your connection dies, you get put into the game again when you restart the client, so you don't lose out unless you crash/lose connect without enough time to rejoin before the end of the game.

 

[tippy2k2]

On paper, this is the best solution I've ever seen, but in action, it would mean that a shitty player could have an undeserved win on his record because the other actually skilled player who would have won fair and square has shit internet. This would also give the D/C'd player a loss, possibly marring a well deserved winning streak.

If it was possible to tell the difference between quitting and losing internet, then fuck yeah, do this. But I've never seen a game that can tell the difference, at least on consoles.

That is true but I don't think it would matter in the long haul. A bad player's record will even out eventually and for FIFA, you need to string together wins in order to move up in the rankings. If you keep losing, you get relegated (you lose rank in non-soccer terms).

Also, even if you could see the difference between disconnects and quitting, a bitter enough person will just disconnect their Xbox/PS3/WiiU/toaster to quit the game.

 

[Idlemessiah]

A forfeit button is a great idea, especially in strategy and 1v1 games. Maybe not so much in 'jump in' games like TF2 or Chivalry, but a good idea all the same.

 

[sethisjimmy]

It depends on the game type, but I'm mostly not a fan. I look at something like TF2 or Battlefield and I see the ability to drop-in and out of a game quickly and without repercussion, right in the middle of the action. Whenever a player drops out a new one is usually there immediately to take up the spot, and the game continues on undamaged.

Then I play something like Halo Reach which forces you to use its shitty matchmaking system that does not allow jump-in gameplay, and forces players to wait long times and doesn't let them choose the map or exact game type they want to play and then if a teammate drops out the game is practically over because no one is allowed to fill that empty spot. This practically encourages players to quit before the game loads so they can play the map/gametype they want. One might question "Is enough being done to discourage quitting?" where my question is "Why did the game designers let quitting the game be such a damaging element of the game?"

However, Halo Reach also has the good idea of rewarding players who don't disconnect. On the one hand, it says a lot about your matchmaking system that you have to actually reward people for actually playing the game, but on the other hand it's a hell of a lot better an idea that punishing players for disconnecting (which is unfortunately something this game does anyway!).

I can see where certain game genres it would be a viable problem though, like in fighting games where it's one-vs-one. There really isn't a drop-in drop-out solution for that one. But still, It shouldn't be against the game rules to stop playing the game.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

As someone with terrible internet I fear the wrath of DC punishments but yes in general I think harsher punishments are needed.

I remember in Shogun 2 I was robbed of about 30% of my victories online because they didn't implement an auto win if your opponent DCs which was soo frustrating.

More recently in Dota 2 I've lost soooo many games because teammates feed and quit with no punishment because it's a free to play game where you can theoretically have an unlimited number of accounts.

 

[Windcaler]

I agree that a forfeit button seems necessary for most 1v1 matches. For those that disconnect I think its fair to just do a loss to the disconnector and win by default to the winner. Im not so for just giving them a win because that can screw with stats and make people appear much better then they really are.

For a game like Dota2, LoL, or smite I would personally like them to take a more aggressive stance on punishing leavers and rewarding those that stay. IMO they should kick a person out for a full hour in which they have to be logged into the game to tick down. That way you couldnt just say leave a game of LoL and go play smite for a bit. As for positive reinforcement I like how smite does it with giving boosts for having lots of goodwill. In fact for Smite one thing I thought of was giving all the characters a Diamond sword skin on any character similar to thors blood eagle skin but you could only use it if you had 100% goodwill. It could be a different skin too but a really cool skin on any character for not leaving games seems like a great idea to me

 

[generals3]

So anyone who has played some sort of multiplayer game has has this happened to them. People who disconnect during matches or games . It's really annoying . But my question is , are developpers doing enough to discourage this?

My inspiration for this thread is injustice : gods among us . I have started playing it online . When i first started 1 match out of 2 my opponent would D/c if i was winning . It's not as bad now , but it still happens occasionally . I find that not much is being done on this game to discourage it .

My favorite game that penalizes ragequitters is Persona 4 Arena . For those who don't know . People who D/c too often , have their name marked in red. So everyone knows they d/c often . What happens is those players can't find matches because no one wants to play with them . I find this is a good way to not only discourage people from disconnecting , but also branding those that do .

Now on the flip side . Real life . Yes , sometimes things happen in real life that can distract you in the middle of a game or match . Multiplayer doesn't have a pause button . So what happens then? Well i think , there should be a forfeit button . This way , if you can't stay in a match , you forfeit , giving your opponent the win and taking the loss . While avoiding any negative consequence of disconecting. This is a fair middle ground if you have to leave suddenly .


Anyways what do you guys think? Are developpers doing enough to discourage disconnecting in multiplayer games? What's a good punishment for those who do ? Would you like forfeit buttons in multiplayer games ( i know some do ). What game if any has a good way to penelize players that disconnect ? And are you guilty of ragequitting/disconnecting on online games?

Is a forfeit button necessary? I don't know about all games, but most games i have played allow you to quit the game and de-facto taking a loss as a consequence.

And my personal favorite way to handle this is do what C&C generals did, add a "disconnect" stat. If you dc you don't get a win nor loss but a disconnect. If someone had a high dc ratio you would know he was a dropper.

 

[SwimmingRock]

I hate people who have limited time to play a game then queue for Ranked when they only have 20 minutes before they have to wash the fucking dog or something.

This blows my mind. You get people who, as soon as the match starts, type into all chat:"Can we make this quick? I have to go in 10 min." No, we cannot make this quick. We're playing fucking LoL. 10 Minute matches don't happen.

For those wondering why anybody should be punished, it's for these assholes. Nobody's out to get people with bad internet (I think), but some people are just there to be asshats and waste 9 other peoples time while getting on their nerves.

I hate people who have limited time to play a game then queue for Ranked when they only have 20 minutes before they have to wash the fucking dog or something

Team games like that should have an option to put the game on hold for a minute and have the next person to queue for ranked take over their char.

Awesomenauts has something like it where players get replaced by bots and other players can join the game to then replace the bots. I generally only choose Quick Play in Awesomenauts precisely because I know how much it sucks when teammates bail and you get stuck with the idiot AI. I'm just there for fun anyway, so nuking my rank was never an issue. Also, joining the team that seemed utterly hopeless and ends up winning the game thanks to my sweet skills is pretty rewarding. So much salt on the other side

Unfortunately, this also means that sometimes I get stuck with a player who makes it instantly clear why they're two teammates left.

 

[Voulan]

I'll admit that I have quit multiplayer games before, but only if I've been shoved into a match with only minutes to go on a team that's losing terribly and will inevitably lose, or my connection is so bad that I'll constantly freeze temporarily and sudden find myself miles away with people zooming all over the place. I once stayed in a match that was me and one other guy against a team of 8. Neither of us quit, and we got our asses kicked, but we both stuck it out. And then when we completely lost the leader of the other team decided to punish us (this is in Far Cry 3). I couldn't believe what a dick that guy was, but my one team mate was awesome. So it seems that the rest of the team did quit out, which was odd since we were winning.

I've also had cases where at the last 5 seconds almost the entire losing team quit, which is really stupid.

Once in Uncharted 2 I had a connection error, and I was punished by losing one whole level and lots of cash, even when I didn't do anything wrong. Weirdly enough, it's only happened once, so maybe it was a technical error.

So I'm in a bit of a conundrum. Maybe a penalty for quiting towards the last 2 minutes, when on the losing team?

 

[Bad Jim]

~snip~

If it was possible to tell the difference between quitting and losing internet, then fuck yeah, do this. But I've never seen a game that can tell the difference, at least on consoles.

~snip~

Also, even if you could see the difference between disconnects and quitting, a bitter enough person will just disconnect their Xbox/PS3/WiiU/toaster to quit the game.

You could finish the game with bots and see who wins. If a player merely has a bad connection, the bots replacing him will win about half the time. But if he ragequits, the bots replacing him will mostly lose.

Though that doesn't stop people who start 30 minute games when they know they'll be leaving the house in 20 min.

 

[RicoADF]

So anyone who has played some sort of multiplayer game has has this happened to them. People who disconnect during matches or games . It's really annoying . But my question is , are developpers doing enough to discourage this?

My inspiration for this thread is injustice : gods among us . I have started playing it online . When i first started 1 match out of 2 my opponent would D/c if i was winning . It's not as bad now , but it still happens occasionally . I find that not much is being done on this game to discourage it .

My favorite game that penalizes ragequitters is Persona 4 Arena . For those who don't know . People who D/c too often , have their name marked in red. So everyone knows they d/c often . What happens is those players can't find matches because no one wants to play with them . I find this is a good way to not only discourage people from disconnecting , but also branding those that do .

Now on the flip side . Real life . Yes , sometimes things happen in real life that can distract you in the middle of a game or match . Multiplayer doesn't have a pause button . So what happens then? Well i think , there should be a forfeit button . This way , if you can't stay in a match , you forfeit , giving your opponent the win and taking the loss . While avoiding any negative consequence of disconecting. This is a fair middle ground if you have to leave suddenly .


Anyways what do you guys think? Are developpers doing enough to discourage disconnecting in multiplayer games? What's a good punishment for those who do ? Would you like forfeit buttons in multiplayer games ( i know some do ). What game if any has a good way to penelize players that disconnect ? And are you guilty of ragequitting/disconnecting on online games?

I think your taking the game too seriously, if they DC then they DC, who cares. You wont die because you didn't get a win, it means nothing anyway.

Personally I don't play alot of PvP because people take the games too seriously, while I personally wouldn't DC I also wouldn't want to vs people that either play the game too much &/or wont accept anything other than perfection (eg: people who DC like you say). I don't expect them to be punished for it, I just laugh and move onto the next game since I got a 'win' as far as I'm concerned. I far prefer AI as they don't abuse you for winning or act like dicks in general, they do what they need to do well, be a competent opponent that I can fight and hopefully defeat. No bitching or crying, just win or lose, that simple.

 

[tippy2k2]

You could finish the game with bots and see who wins. If a player merely has a bad connection, the bots replacing him will win about half the time. But if he ragequits, the bots replacing him will mostly lose.

Though that doesn't stop people who start 30 minute games when they know they'll be leaving the house in 20 min.

I might be in the minority here but I'm not a big fan of that either. If I wanted to play against bots, I'd be playing single player. Are there going to be some people who just have bad internet and would use that to come back in if given the choice? Of course but I have found in experience that most people leave because they don't like the hand dealt to them (like Settlers of Catan where they don't like the board) or they're getting utterly crushed.

If for whatever reason they drop out, I'd rather just take my win and let me get on with my day.

 

[Auron]

quit by any means = loss

Isn't this how pretty much every game does it nowadays? I don't really mind winning earlier, there's nothing as boring as blowing up each and every enemy building in sc2 or hunting straggler villagers in AOE2 trying to pointlessly build stuff to extend a lost match. FPS is pretty much team based nowadays and doesn't have a problem with it and I suppose that's about it. I think most MMO PVP modes should have a forfeit button though, they usually punish you if you leave but staying in a lost cause where you have no healers or the team's braindead is depressing then again I don't think braindead teams would concede either.

 

[Bad Jim]

You could finish the game with bots and see who wins. If a player merely has a bad connection, the bots replacing him will win about half the time. But if he ragequits, the bots replacing him will mostly lose.

Though that doesn't stop people who start 30 minute games when they know they'll be leaving the house in 20 min.

I might be in the minority here but I'm not a big fan of that either. If I wanted to play against bots, I'd be playing single player.

That's not quite what I had in mind. I was thinking that if someone disconnected on you in a 1v1, you would be kicked out of the game but the game would continue as a bot vs bot game. Just to see if he was ragequitting or not. You wouldn't see the game finish, but your opponent might get a few black marks against his name if the bot taking his place always lost.

 

[Toxic Sniper]

Dark Souls has kinda made me reconsider my more lenient stance towards disconnects. I once had a match where I killed a phantom, ran up to the host, begin whacking him, and then BOOM he disconnects right when I'm about to kill him. When you get a disconnect from the host, you don't get any humanity or souls, which means that disconnecters are actually depriving invaders of both their time and winnings.

In the next souls game, I think disconnecting should at least give invaders the souls and humanity they would have gotten with a win. If the invader disconnects, it should give the host (And any summons) the appropriate number of souls and humanity. I don't think it should punish hosts (Because of possible connection problems), but disconnecting certainly shouldn't punish the people who didn't disconnect like it does now.

 

[x EvilErmine x]

Well i mainly play Black Ops II Zombies and i think that anyone who disconnects[footnote]Before anyone mentions connection issues then know that I'm cool with that, some people have bad internet, but that's not the issue, if you have a bad connection the game just times you out and it lets the other players know you timed out rather than just quitting[/footnote] during a game should be deranked and banned for like an hour from joining another game. I've lost count of the times I've been in a game and someone has been downed once and then just quit the game. GAHH!!one!1 so annoying.