I must be on a different planet because in the past 2 days I've had only good games with no rage-quitters or leavers...

3.  Even by your standards of the community, your proposed response to ragequitters is wasting potential members of the community.  Again, not everyone shares your moralized view of the subject but people will generally adapt to the conventions of a community because getting along with others is in their own interest.  If you can convince people not to ragequit with a polite argument or request, then your actions have helped the community gain a member(under your definition of community, not mine); if you ban them, you have instead deprived the community of someone who could potentially contribute because you decided you'd rather be petty and vengeful(suits your name actually).  Diplomacy first, guns later.  This is not even addressing the reality that banlists are always abused to satisfy personal vendettas.

 

You seem to think you can change the rage quitter or guide them to do the right thing somehow, it's just ridiculous. And the worst part is, you are defending the type of people who could care less if you stepped into traffic.

The rage quitter doesn't give a damn about anyone but himself. When his fun is done he's gone, and f*** everyone else in the game.  I'd also really like to know how you ask someone to continue playing or "please don't quit" when they have already left the game.

Hell there was a thread in the forums here earlier this week from a guy who has made up his mind that playing versus two UB's is impossible and how he left the game and will never play that type of game.  Why should I have to suffer becuause some guy that plays 1 or 2 games a week has made an ill-informed decision. It's my right to make sure he never enters my game.

Played 5 custom games last night.  4 had rage quitters, one played to completetion. Unacceptable.

*edit to add

The bottom line on Rage quitting, is that people rage quit because they can do so without any consequences. Once they start racking up losses, losing favor and finding themselves unable to play due to banlists they will start to think twice about leaving.

Sure, a small percent of them will still drop anyway, or make new accounts, but a larger mnajority will just stick it out or use a concede feature if/when we get one.

You would rather people merely accept a group of individuals who's actions ruin the experience of others while preserving their own experience rather than attempt to control them?
If half a team of Football players just walked off at the start of a game you'd bought tickets too, and the game was over, would you just accept it? No refund - just a 'Thanks for the money, cya next time'. What if this happened to one in every two games? Would you stop buying tickets or would you just accpet it and continue to spend your hard earnt money for the chance to see a Football game?

When you join a game, you're expected to play until the game is over - baring any emergencies that might occur during the course of the game that require you to leave. If your not going to play the game then don't play it. This isn't Counter-Strike, Quake Live, DotA or Starcraft or any other game - this is Demigod. The 'Acceptable Standards' here are not always the same as other communities. Good behaviour and sportsmenship is a fundamental principle of Stardock's forums and by extension it's games - if you don't want to accept that, then your welcome to add me to your personal Ban list when it becomes available because what you consider acceptable I state to be one of the reasons why I stopped playing multiplayer Starcraft, Warcraft II, Warcraft III, DotA, Diablo II, World of Warcraft, Homeworld, Homeworld II, Dawn of War and Battle for Middle Earth.

Have a macro tell players in your games this.  Don't just tell me on the forums, that doesn't address your problems at all.  You don't need to convince me to play games to completion.  I have already determined it to be in my self interest for numerous reasons and did so long before I started playing demigod.

Given the relative size of the ragequitter group, yes.  They aren't as large a problem as people make them out to be so I'd rather people just ignored them and got on with playing the game.  It seriously doesn't make sense for there to even be a large ragequitter population, if a player is always quitting games early he's not going to get very much enjoyment out of the game and won't keep playing it for very long.  My experience reflects this as well, I've only run into two real ragequits(one quit after we nailed him for first blood in the first engagement, the other accused us of cheating because we were several levels ahead of him lol).  That said, I don't expect everyone to share this view(or the view I have over whether or not you've made a comittment to play the full game) so I also argue that the correct approach to dealing with them is to diplomatically and politely ask them to stop or preemptively ask people in your games not to quit early rather than banning them from the game.  If you approach people diplomatically(I think some people have trouble with this part, really it should go something like "Hey, last game I played with you, you dropped before the match was decided.  Could you please try to stay in the game even if you think it's over because leaving so early ruins it for the rest of us?"), and they choose to bite your head off, they're just assholes and I'd kick them from my games too.  If they respond rationally though, chances are they'll be easy to convince and it's one less ragequitter to worry about and one more person to play with.  The only reason I can think of that people don't take this approach is the banlist is simpler and they're afraid to get ridiculed for treating people over the internet with a bit of civility.

Phantom, interesting point about the implicit agreements.  I think there are actually laws against "dine and dash" but as you pointed out there was a supreme court ruling that recognized the validity of an implicit contract.  I would, however, note that the article you linked to also said that it's harder to prove the existence and conditions of an implicit contract.  I would also point out that our laws against statuatory rape and the participation of minors in legal contracts are in place because minors are not considered capable of giving consent(because they are not considered mature enough to understand the terms that they are agreeing to).  I would argue that the concept that you're not really giving consent when you don't understand the terms which you are consenting to applies in a good number of implicit agreements and has to be taken into account.  The implicit agreement to stay in the game does have this problem because that's not clearly one of the effects of hitting the ready button(exit game is not greyed out in MP), it's not like a restuarant either(in a restaurant, the prices for the items are generally next to the items in the menu, it's pretty damn obvious that nothing is free).  I will concede the point that not all implicit agreements necessarily have this problem though.

I haven't played WoW nor do I ever intend to play it(just not a fan of mmorpgs or pay to play).  I agree that demigod is more like an RPG than an RTS(I don't recall referring to it in an RTS in this thread and I try to avoid doing so, sometimes I slip up though because there are a number of RTS characteristics involved).  I'd actually describe it as an in-round RPG(because all leveling is done in-round as opposed to being granted as a persistent reward).  However, the mechanic from the RTS genre that generates the idea of conceding the game is that of an irreversible build up of momentum.  In something where the power you have going into the round is static, a comeback is always theoretically possible, but in the RTS genre and in demigod, you can build up momentum and once the game is effectively over, it makes sense to concede with or without your teammates and is considered good sportsmanship because staying in the game is wasting your opponent's time.  That's the only reason to compare it to an RTS and it explains why a good number of people from the RTS genre(such as myself) don't have so much of a sense that you made a commitment to play the entire game out.  therefore, in my opinion, the people who expect everyone to bring that particular point of view to the game as a sort of common sense are being unreasonable.  The other result of this is that by using a banlist you're potentially excluding people who were just practicing good sportsmanship as far as they're concerned(this applies to the people who leave when the game is apparently lost and get labeled as ragequitters, not the ones that quit after first blood or some other stupidity and I've already discussed in this post how these guys should be dealt with).

I don't think you get it.  Those terms are common sense.  I shouldn't need to tell them to a single person, everyone already knows them.  Similarly I know not to kick people in the shins randomly.  Because I wouldn't like it very much if people kicked me in the shins randomly.

If you truly don't think those are your obligations when joining an online multiplayer game then I want nothing to do with you, because you cannot be educated.  If I told those terms to a player that somehow truly did not already know them they'd get indignant or grief intentionally.

It only takes one to ruin a game.  A small segment of the population has a much greater effect than it should.

This never happens.  NEVER!  Anyone "rational" enough to be convinced ALREADY KNOWS that leaving is bad.  Because they figured it out the first time they were playing a game online and someone on their team left and they thought "WTF is that."

You are constructing some strange twilight zone demographic that simply does not exist.

You should not need a law to tell you what is the right thing to do.  And in this case the moral choice is very obvious.

If you're truly from the RTS genre then you know that if you have even one peon/wisp/SCV/MCV/etc left you can rebuild and possibly win.  If you've played plenty of RTS games then you've no doubt had it happen at one point or another.

If the *team* concedes, fine!  The problem is when you pretend that you are the team.  When you quit the team basically instantly loses in Demigod.  And that is why leaving is wrong.  It doesn't get simpler than that.

In many RTS' there are features which mitigate a leaver's impact.  In WC3 for example you get full control of their stuff, so there's no impact other than your ability to micro another player's worth of units.  There's basically no such features in Demigod, and on top of that you get a massive disadvantage of the AI taking over.

most boring reply ever

yes, I can see that

I feel sorry for people who feel compelled to stick around after they've clearly lost the game. "Please hurry up and buy giants already so I can play another game." Dude, type 'gg' and takeoff. Trust me I, or any of the people I play with, won't take it personally. A competitive player may occasionally find it entertaining but is ultimately unfufilled by dominating in a no-challenge situation.

GPG needs to get rid of the 30 second timeout on D/C, make sure D/C counts as a loss and add arranged teams to ranked. Then anyone who feels compelled to whine about rage quitting can handle the situation in the time honored way: if you want to avoid random things that piss you off, DON'T PLAY WITH RANDOMS.

_Shadow, I think you are, like many people are not understanding the meaning of rage quitting. No one wants you to silently suffer through the entire game, especially if it is clearly over.

What we want is to have people at least try to play a game out and not drop 3 minutes in when they die, or because someone on the enemy team is playing a hero they don't like.

Dude seriously, you've come in with the intention of belittling us all, and effectively not making ANY suggestion except that we halt all discussion.

I think Viper is attempting to "fight fire with fire", which is not something I agree with, but I'm not sure if you quite get it

re-read the little snipet I quoted, you're asking for respect and dissing in the same sentence... bit of a faux pas

Not true, I've seen some epic comebacks and pulled some against people I'd say were more than adequate.  Listen, we're not all gosu here, in fact I'd say that there isn't a single "pro" demigod player at this point.

No offense, but before we start setting up the rules of engagement for the proest elite pros maybe we should actually get good first.