Poll: "Lack of skill" of other players is not a legit justification for being an asshole

[Smeatza]

Going along with the "If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen" dynamic does not make one an asshole, just competitive. Every individual who play's PVP MMOs would be an asshole if that were the case.

Does slaughtering swathes of low level players for no reward besides you own amusement make one an asshole? in most cases it does (although all who have been in a position to do so, have done so at least once).

However this isn't one of those cases, by virtue of the fact it's a GTA game.
What do you do when you free roam in single player? You kill every living thing you see till you die.
Why would you not do the same in free roam in multiplayer?

Like others have said though, GTA:O needs a decent matchmaking system. Some serious work on that and all those problems go away.

 

[x EvilErmine x]

There's not really any excuse for it. It's never ok to be an ass to someone because they aren't as good as you at a game, if it bothers you that much just quite/surrender and go find a better lobby. Some people may say that's not really fair on the better player because it'll affect things like K/D ratio or Win/Loss but really what's the problem? If you are good at the game then it's unlikely that you won't be able to recover from a few bad games.

I've noticed a lot of people saying that leveling up in multiplayer games is bad but I'm not sure I agree. I think the problem lies in a lack of balance. It seems like the devs have lost the ability to balance games properly. Higher levels should provide some sort of advantage over lower levels but equally they shouldn't be too overpowered. there should always be some sort of counter available to lower level players.

 

[Senare]

"Lack of skill" of other players is not a legit justification for being an asshole

You will generally not be likeable by being "an asshole" and therefore it is not "justified" to act like one. But you can be a likeable asshole, if you are Hugh Laurie/Dr. House.
As for your situation: I do not like people who are hostile and unhelpful towards people earnestly trying to build their skill, which implies that the Rockstar forum members are in the wrong.

I don't get why you have to be "skilled" at the game to have fun, both from a design and a player standpoint.

There are valid design reasons for stating that skill should take priority. The gist of why this is so is that inexperienced players may be demanding that a seemingly unfair part of the game should be toned down without realizing that there are legitimate ways to counter or play around those parts. When they improve their skills to counter the unfair element they may notice new depths of the game that interact to form a more challenging and ultimately more rewarding experience. If they would just nerf away any perceived unfairness then they may disrupt that complexity and make the game lose depth.
This is especially prevalent in fighting games. See the game designer Sirlins articles; but beware that they may sound a bit condescending at first. In fighting games you typically need to rise to high levels of skill before you can see the game's complexity clearly and thus be able to make good judgements on its balance. To see what truly broken game play elements look like, see <a href=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-g4TqMFemY>Ivan Ooze.

I think more relevant questions would be:
1. Is GTA V a game where skill should take priority to the detriment of fun for new players? Is it necessary to keep the annoying elements you describe in order to maintain a good level of depth? Should GTA V be a "skill-based" game?
2. How does the game play of GTA V hold up in the balancing department from the perspective of a skilled observer? Is this true even if the observer earnestly adopts the perspective of a new player?
3. Is the difficulty curve of GTA V's multi player well calibrated?

I do not have the experience or knowledge to judge the game myself, but as long as we are throwing opinions around without consequence I would say that the levelling system sounds flawed. I feel that levelling systems are often not implemented well from a game play perspective and that many times they are unnecessary.

 

[blazearmoru]

You think that's bad :|

I play dota I solo que into world tournament level players (very rarely but it's happened 3 times now). I duo-que with a noob who wanted to play and then 3 morons tell me it's my fault they lost a teamfight 4v5.


1. I take every single tower the enemy has leading to our complete map control.
2. I took multiple roshans (baron in lol terms)
3. Every bit of gold they earn from the map can be traced back to me.
4. They chose characters not designed to teamfight.
5. They force a teamfight not in our favor.
6. I chose and build a character to destroy buildings, not enemies.
7. They blame me, for their loss of the fight.

Then I proceed to win the game without them cus they were too busy beating their chests in the primitive ritual of displaying manliness without any ability to comprehend the rules or mechanics of the actual fucking game. They don't know the objectives, the characters, the items, or even the conditions of victory and when I point it out, their taunts stop being "you're bad the game." to "you think you're cool cus you're good at a game."

Other people's skill level has nothing to do with someone being an asshole. Psychological disposition to stressors is what causes it. You can be a professional and an ignoramus will still dunningkruger you if the right stressors hit the right psychological disposition. I'm sure we've all been there and know people who are not only complete morons, but they are complete morons who think they're the shit, and would regularly tell professionals how to do their job. This is not just a gaming thing.

-------------------

Point is, you can be #1 and some amateur will still be an asshole to you. It has nothing to do with your skill level. It has to do with their state of mind and how being an asshole to you, will make them feel.
Play with friends, mute assholes. And ask friends for help.

 

[Eve Charm]

Eh I'd like if more games did with Graw did for online and Unlock all the weapons for everyone, no need to bs to level up for different weapons that might be better.

 

[sneakypenguin]

Eh it sometimes feels justified. In WoW when a noob won't CC or at least target a healer(click on the giant x dammit). Or last night a tank wouldn't L2P even after telling him a ok rotation (DnD,diseases, blooodboil, runestrike then w/e) he still wouldn't do it rather just pounding heart strike and never gaining agro)

Same for FPS games when someone keeps dying to a sniper, or just sits back in SnD while being last survivor.

I get that pvp is hard to get into at first but at least know the class, know the map, and have some kind of awareness to not keep doing stupid stuff. I don't care if you die to a sniper or 1v3 in wow I care when you die 3 times in a row cause you keep doing the same thing.

 

[asinann]

I think there should be separate lobbies for people who just want to have fun and for people who actually want to play competitively. That way people who have lower level gear, less playtime, and less skill can play together in one lobby, and players with high level skills who want to play against higher level people can play in their own lobby, with certain things restricted in each lobby to provide a more balanced and competitive atmosphere in one, and a more fun and carefree atmosphere in the other.

It does definitely suck to be on the losing end of a total stomping, but as someone who played as part of a competitive clan for a few years I can say that it also sucks when you're completely stomping another team and they can't offer any kind of resistance. The most fun games are the ones where everyone is on or near the same skill level.

I do however think that "get more skill" or "learn to play the game better" isn't necessarily a cop out answer. There are many games where there is a very simple technique that's a complete bane to new or inexperienced players and yet completely gets shut down and destroyed by players of a higher skill level, and in that case the answer really is to just get better at the game and not whine.

Problem with the "noob lounge" games is that those "competitive" people will come down to those rooms when they are having a bad day and stomp people just to make themselves feel better. There will always be enough high end players having bad days to make the lower end games unplayable because of them.

 

[Something Amyss]

They all did at one point or another, we were all nubs at one point. Some game skills carry over from game to game and across series, but there was a time when getting your teeth kicked in was all that happened.

He's talking about a world without noobs. Where the high level and extra skilled people don't have newbies or "sucky" players to grief. Where they actually have to deal with people of equal skill.

Being new yourself is a different scenario, and you can handwave it. Finding out you're not awesome because you can no longer pick on easy targets?

In class-based online games, everyone can contribute in some way. If you're one of two medics, one LVL 50 and one LVL 20, you being the lower, you can still contribute, just not as effectively. I'm not sure how one would avoid a situation in a non-class based game, though.

You can still contribute in missions...Sorry, "jobs" in GTAO. The problem is that you will still get griefed online, especially (but not limited to) during the open world that they touted. Even pacifism mode doesn't make you safe. I know that OP brings up deathmatches specifically, but others have moved on from that and I think there's some import to pointing out the larger scope here.

More on that other bit for a moment. I'm in the 80s right now. I'm not bragging, as there are plenty of players in triple digits, I'm just saying. I play this more than my friends. I've got one friend in his twenties and another in his teens. And they can both contribute to jobs. They can still even technically be useful in deathmatches and the like, though my experience with deathmathes is that whoever pays the most is highly likely to win, so I wouldn't count on it. Or the tank scenario, which is still more or less a case of paying more because you have to have the cash to have earned the tank. But then, even in actual missions you will have griefers. This is why I mostly just play with friends.

However, I think we need to address an elephant in the room, and that's that you've got an open world multiplayer/competitive environment. For GTA players. And while I don't agree with some of the more extreme comments I see, I sort of wonder what people expected from that. Games where a good chunk of the fun is running around like a complete psychopath and mowing down everyone made into an online game?

The bothersome part here is that Rockstar seems to encourage it. and the problems with this go beyond deathmathes, as well, as there's little incentive for cooperation and plenty of incentive to fuck with people.

And balanced matchmaking would be a rather trivial solution to at least some of the problems, but Rockstar's too busy nerfing any fun out of the game to bother with things like balance.

I just don't get it. What fuckhead thought it was a good idea to give the best weapons and skills to the players who invest the most time into the game.

Whoever they were, it works.

- the game claims to be open world - yet every single action in any single player mission is restricted (down to the car you must drive),

I agree with most of what you said, but this is just....Well, it's not true. I mean, yeah, you're sometimes restricted. And you're sometimes not. But seriously, you didn't expect the game to be more restrictive during missions?

the communities for Xbox Live and PSN are absolutely dreadful.

Online communities in general are awful. Even if you nerf the hell out of the community, you'll still get someone drawing dick pics on their Wii U.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I agree to an extent, the reason I play Team Fortress 2 occasionally and Halo multiplayer never is that even as an unskilled noob, in TF2 I feel like I can contribute to a team and actually achieve something, whereas in Halo I literally get slaughtered every time I see an enemy and end up frustrated. I guess that's good for a player who's willing to dedicate many hours but for the casual player, it's doesn't work.

i will admit, halo requires map and weapon control (weapons spawn at certain spots,etc...) but with a group of friends its definitely one of my favorite online games.

tf2 I agree though, even the most helpless player can do something, whether that is surpress someone using demoman/soldier or just be a healer for a heavy or even cause pyro's to go nuts by simply being a spy class.


OT: I agree, which is why I mostly avoid online games with a passion.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Of course it isn't. It's never ok to be an asshole. EVER. If someone is being an asshole to you don't be an asshole back, all that does is create an endless cycle of asshole. Anyway this is why I say the biggest flaw of multiplayer games is THE OTHER PLAYERS. If it weren't for them multiplayer games would be very enjoyable (yes, I worded it that way on purpose and I'm aware of how it sounds).

 

[SuperScrub]

Quite frankly the GTA franchise is dead to me until they re-release GTA:SA with Max Payne 3 shooting mechanics, a graphical overhaul, and (provided they can pull it off) a competent multiplayer thing.

 

[manic_depressive13]

It's not fair for someone to ask you to sink all your free time into getting good at a game. It's also ridiculous for you to expect someone who has sunk a lot of time into the game to accommodate you. If all you want to do is have fun, play single player. It's absurd to me that someone would enter a competitive multiplayer environment and then complain that their enemies aren't being nice enough to them.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

Of course it isn't. There is no justification for being an asshole. That's bad sportsmanship and it's shameful.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

I have been playing GTA:O the last few days and I have come to absolutely loathe it because of all the high level players using tanks and assault rifles in lower level lobbies. Pretty much every lobby I go into has a 100+ level player just driving around in a tank killing everything that moves. Being a lower level, i think my character is 12, I don't have any way to compete with that which makes the game really frustrating and unlikable. So I went online to see what I could do to counter high level players in death matches and tanks using high level weapons and all I see are people on the Rockstar forums talking about how "if you don't have the skill to deal with them, then you deserve to be spawn raped" or "quite wining and get better at the game."

Now, these kinds of comments annoy me greatly. Not only does skill not factor into unlocking more powerful weapons with higher levels, but I, as a student and employee, do not have the time to spend 8 or 10 hours a day leveling up and getting "good." Nor would I want to. Where did this attitude among gamers come from that you have to be skilled to enjoy a video game? You see similar comments on Battlefield and CoD forums where people are asking for nerf'd guns and are shot down by other players who tell them to get better at the game.

I simply want to enjoy the little time I have playing video games and not have to pour 100's of hours into it just to get to a point where I can enjoy it. To me, that's not fun. Getting killed by someone in a tank that I literally have no means of defending against is not fun. Getting killed by machine gunners with the most powerful class weapons in Battlefield is not fun.

I don't get why you have to be "skilled" at the game to have fun, both from a design and a player standpoint.

Am I off the mark here? Am I being a little too sensitive or do you agree?

First off, anyone you see who's RP is above 150 is a hacker/glitch exploiter. They're ruining the game for everyone.

2ndly, in death match games, you want to look for the maps that have Forced + Pick Up.... I have a really fun little map that's super fair, I think, it's so small. "Hotline Miami Vers. 1.2"

Hate to break it to you, but there really isn't any "skill" in this game. Just mindless fun. I suppose if you want equal revenge on the greifers, you can keep driving your owned cars into their line of fire so they end up in the hell that is the Bad Sport lobby.

 

[TristanBelmont]

And this, is why PvP should be divided into Level brackets.

This isn't a bad idea...

 

[Eamar]

It's not fair for someone to ask you to sink all your free time into getting good at a game. It's also ridiculous for you to expect someone who has sunk a lot of time into the game to accommodate you. If all you want to do is have fun, play single player. It's absurd to me that someone would enter a competitive multiplayer environment and then complain that their enemies aren't being nice enough to them.

And what about if you're trying to get good but haven't put enough time in yet? There's a whole lot in between only wanting to play single player and reaching the peak of multiplayer skill. It's unreasonable for the top players to expect everyone to be at their level straight away.

 

[Smooth Operator]

No there is no reason to be an ass.
But you need to understand both sides of the story, just as you might like to play casually others will like to play super competitively and in that case each needs their own group. You don't want someone to stomp you incessantly and they don't want paper targets because that shit just isn't fun.

 

[manic_depressive13]

And what about if you're trying to get good but haven't put enough time in yet? There's a whole lot in between only wanting to play single player and reaching the peak of multiplayer skill. It's unreasonable for the top players to expect everyone to be at their level straight away.

Most games appreciate the in between and design for it. If a game doesn't design for it, don't pay money for a broken game, or don't complain when people who have worked to achieve a certain level prioritise their enjoyment over yours.

 

[manic_depressive13]

And what about if you're trying to get good but haven't put enough time in yet? There's a whole lot in between only wanting to play single player and reaching the peak of multiplayer skill. It's unreasonable for the top players to expect everyone to be at their level straight away.

Most games appreciate the in between and design for it. If a game doesn't design for it, don't pay money for a broken game, or don't complain when people who have worked to achieve a certain level prioritise their enjoyment over yours.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

I have been playing GTA:O the last few days and I have come to absolutely loathe it because of all the high level players using tanks and assault rifles in lower level lobbies. Pretty much every lobby I go into has a 100+ level player just driving around in a tank killing everything that moves. Being a lower level, i think my character is 12, I don't have any way to compete with that which makes the game really frustrating and unlikable. So I went online to see what I could do to counter high level players in death matches and tanks using high level weapons and all I see are people on the Rockstar forums talking about how "if you don't have the skill to deal with them, then you deserve to be spawn raped" or "quite wining and get better at the game."

Now, these kinds of comments annoy me greatly. Not only does skill not factor into unlocking more powerful weapons with higher levels, but I, as a student and employee, do not have the time to spend 8 or 10 hours a day leveling up and getting "good." Nor would I want to. Where did this attitude among gamers come from that you have to be skilled to enjoy a video game? You see similar comments on Battlefield and CoD forums where people are asking for nerf'd guns and are shot down by other players who tell them to get better at the game.

I simply want to enjoy the little time I have playing video games and not have to pour 100's of hours into it just to get to a point where I can enjoy it. To me, that's not fun. Getting killed by someone in a tank that I literally have no means of defending against is not fun. Getting killed by machine gunners with the most powerful class weapons in Battlefield is not fun.

I don't get why you have to be "skilled" at the game to have fun, both from a design and a player standpoint.

Am I off the mark here? Am I being a little too sensitive or do you agree?

'Closed Friend Sessions' are your friend here. I too play GTA online and as a mid-level player (rank 54 last time I checked) I only enter lobbies with pals where we can have a laugh as friends - and I set up these lobbies to counter exactly the issue you describe. I work a 9-5 six days a week and cannot devote (if that's the right word) the time that people with fewer responsibilities have available to then to the same game, so I set my met champing to closed and my lobby to friends only. Job done.