> 2533274795123910;4385:
> Their console, their multiplayer service, their game, their rules.
I work for a games development company and I’d never say this. Power always goes to your players in the long run (and we’ve learned this the hard way.)
I’d never ban players so harshly for quitting matches, especially because a lot of the time people quit for something that the developer has caused (bad ping, or unfair matchmaking - the latter which is heavy in Halo 5.)
Annoying a player is the worst thing you can do. To ban a player for quitting is absurd when much of the time the entire reason they’re quitting is often the company’s fault. (Unfair matchmaking for example.)
> 2533274795123910;4385:
> Doesn’t matter how much money you payed
Yes it does. £350 for an Xbox one and Halo 5 is a huge amount of money to spend on entertainment for the average person.
If I spent that much on a game I want to be able to play it. Banning me for quitting a few games which any reasonable player would quit is unacceptable - the only time you should be banning people is it they’re being abusing or cheating. I’d understand banning someone if they quit literally 50% of their matches, but that is nowhere near the case.
Case-in-point, do you think I’m going to be buying another Xbox and Halo 6 if Halo 6 isn’t massively improved? Harsh bans for Quitting are one of the many reasons that I am not looking forward to Halo 6. (Obviously there’s other reasons which are outside discussion, but heavy bans for quitting aren’t going to keep players – it’s just gonna annoy them.) And if less players buy the game, that means the players that do buy the game will get more micro-transactions shoved in their faces.
> 2533274795123910;4385:
> I should not have quitters in my matches.
This is an unreasonable expectation, and whilst I agree with the theory of it, it is highly impractical for many reasons:
- People can’t always control their quitting, disconnecting is a thing. - It’s unreasonable of you to expect people not to quit when they’ve been matchmade against people 50x better than them; which is the fault of 343i, not theirs. - It’s unreasonable of you to expect people not to quit when they’re being abused by their own team. - It’s unreasonable of you to expect people not to quit when the match isn’t worth playing (e.g. multiple other teammates have already quit and you’re losing.)The latter two are what happened to me on many matches. I got banned for 8 hours because I left a game where my own team where abusing me, and in two games my own team had quit before I did - meaning it wasn’t worth me playing.
I play games for fun: It’s not fun being abused, and it’s not fun playing a 2 vs 4 match where you’re already losing 30-5. You cannot refute this, and you cannot reasonably argue against it.
> 2533274795123910;4385:
> The rules were announced before the game launched,
This is irrelevant because most of the playerbase don’t religiously follow this sort of announcement prior to game launch. I had no idea quitting resulted in a ban - nowhere was I told once I bought the game.
> 2533274795123910;4385:
> to terms of use include a paragraph stating they can ban you for basically nothing at all and not even tell you,
All games/services have this.
> 2533274795123910;4385:
> and the rules are also in short displayed every time you go into matchmaking.
Again, it’s irrelevant whether or not I formally agreed to them. If I want to play the game I have to agree to them.
Doesn’t mean I ethically agree to them. I think banning people for quitting (unless they’re literally quitting half their matches) is absolutely disgusting.
> 2533274795123910;4385:
> How do you know that guy’s day wasn’t ruined? Did you ask him immediately after?
Because if your day gets ruined by one person leaving a match in Social Halo 4 matchmaking then you have serious problems and need to go outside. I don’t need to defend this point. It’s absolutely pathetic to suggest that a person’s day was ruined by a teammate quitting in Social matchmaking.
> 2533274795123910;4385:
> However how nice of you to leave the match and make the situation even worse for that player.
Two of the team had already left and it was social matchmaking. No one cares. Again, I’d understand if the banning applied to Ranked as people take that seriously, but I only left Social matches - which are supposed to be for casual fun; there shouldn’t be any bans for quitting there.
> 2533274795123910;4385:
> However yes, I do agree preventing anyone from playing is a bit unecessary.
Finally. Honestly I think banning someone for quitting is stupid. I wholeheartedly agree with banning for cheating, abusing behavior - but not for quitting matches.
I can understand small bans (such as an hour) for quitting lots of Ranked games. but definitely not for social, where the teammates get replaced. Social matches are supposed to be casual no-strings fun.
For quitting, I think decreased matchmaking priority, reduced XP/rank ups, are the best option. They punish excessive quitting and don’t stop people playing the game - you should never stop people playing unless they’re cheating or being abusive.
> 2533274795123910;4385:
> Instead, those who qualify for a ban should instead be put in a different player pool, a player pool existing of only “banned players”.
I don’t agree with segregation. I think straight temp-banning people who Cheat, Grief, or act Abusive is fine.
I think Quiting Social playlists shouldn’t result in any punishment unless you’re quitting a heavy amount of matches - but either way anything over an hour ban is ridiculous. Quitting Ranked does have repercussions on your team, and I think light bans would be OK - but 8 hours is absolutely ridiculous.
I’d be OK with Quitting Ranked matches resulting in an instant loss for you, perhaps counting as x amount of deaths would be a good additional punishment. But you have to remeber that not all quitting is done maliciously and sometimes people quit for a valid reason (e.g. bad connection, mismatch of skill, or abusive team.)
Quitters would be fine to have their matchmaking lower priority as well.