Competitive Multiplayer Choices That you don't Respect

[RaikuFA]

Playing in general with others. I have never played a game with others that didn't piss me off because the other guy is always a wankety wanker.

Fighting games? If I lose, I get insulted and harassed until I leave. Win? HA! That's never happened and never will.

Multiplayer? It's always my fault if we lose cause... reasons. Get kicked out. Rinse and repeat.

Card games? I could only get junk rares and in FFA it was always lock me out.

DnD or other tabletop rpgs? As the other thread told me, shitty DM. I doubt I will ever play again.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Playing in general with others. I have never played a game with others that didn't piss me off because the other guy is always a wankety wanker.

Fighting games? If I lose, I get insulted and harassed until I leave. Win? HA! That's never happened and never will.

Multiplayer? It's always my fault if we lose cause... reasons. Get kicked out. Rinse and repeat.

Card games? I could only get junk rares and in FFA it was always lock me out.

DnD or other tabletop rpgs? As the other thread told me, shitty DM. I doubt I will ever play again.

You know, I held my tongue on the other thread, but this post kind of cements it: it really sounds more like the problem is with you than with the other players. You come off as kind of an anti-social jerk. It's like teenage girls who are constantly complaining about "drama." If it only happens occasionally, they may be right. If it seems to follow them wherever they go, maybe the problem isn't the other girls.

Note to mods: this was not an ad hominem attack, it's in keeping with the question he asked in the other thread.

 

[RaikuFA]

Playing in general with others. I have never played a game with others that didn't piss me off because the other guy is always a wankety wanker.

Fighting games? If I lose, I get insulted and harassed until I leave. Win? HA! That's never happened and never will.

Multiplayer? It's always my fault if we lose cause... reasons. Get kicked out. Rinse and repeat.

Card games? I could only get junk rares and in FFA it was always lock me out.

DnD or other tabletop rpgs? As the other thread told me, shitty DM. I doubt I will ever play again.

You know, I held my tongue on the other thread, but this post kind of cements it: it really sounds more like the problem is with you than with the other players. You come off as kind of an anti-social jerk. It's like teenage girls who are constantly complaining about "drama." If it only happens occasionally, they may be right. If it seems to follow them wherever they go, maybe the problem isn't the other girls.

Note to mods: this was not an ad hominem attack, it's in keeping with the question he asked in the other thread.

If I lose in a game then get a message that says "lol u sux leave scrub" how is that my fault? I've tried to be nice and just go "gg" and all I get is bile in return. If a DM keeps trying to fuck me over despite the fact I never met him outside of this starting campain, how is it my fault?

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Playing in general with others. I have never played a game with others that didn't piss me off because the other guy is always a wankety wanker.

Fighting games? If I lose, I get insulted and harassed until I leave. Win? HA! That's never happened and never will.

Multiplayer? It's always my fault if we lose cause... reasons. Get kicked out. Rinse and repeat.

Card games? I could only get junk rares and in FFA it was always lock me out.

DnD or other tabletop rpgs? As the other thread told me, shitty DM. I doubt I will ever play again.

You know, I held my tongue on the other thread, but this post kind of cements it: it really sounds more like the problem is with you than with the other players. You come off as kind of an anti-social jerk. It's like teenage girls who are constantly complaining about "drama." If it only happens occasionally, they may be right. If it seems to follow them wherever they go, maybe the problem isn't the other girls.

Note to mods: this was not an ad hominem attack, it's in keeping with the question he asked in the other thread.

If I lose in a game then get a message that says "lol u sux leave scrub" how is that my fault? I've tried to be nice and just go "gg" and all I get is bile in return. If a DM keeps trying to fuck me over despite the fact I never met him outside of this starting campain, how is it my fault?

I can't really say, because I'm only getting one side of the story. But something just doesn't ring right to me about literally every social experience you've ever had being this negative. Like I said, it would be one thing if it was just the one DM. But when you put the whole picture together, unless you've been doing all of those activities with the same group (in which case you really need to find better friends, because those guys aren't worthy of the name), there's apparently something about you or the way you act that ticks people off.

I'm sure I'll get people in here saying I'm victim blaming, but this isn't victim blaming. It's pointing out that the pattern doesn't match the one sided explanation.

 

[RaikuFA]

Playing in general with others. I have never played a game with others that didn't piss me off because the other guy is always a wankety wanker.

Fighting games? If I lose, I get insulted and harassed until I leave. Win? HA! That's never happened and never will.

Multiplayer? It's always my fault if we lose cause... reasons. Get kicked out. Rinse and repeat.

Card games? I could only get junk rares and in FFA it was always lock me out.

DnD or other tabletop rpgs? As the other thread told me, shitty DM. I doubt I will ever play again.

You know, I held my tongue on the other thread, but this post kind of cements it: it really sounds more like the problem is with you than with the other players. You come off as kind of an anti-social jerk. It's like teenage girls who are constantly complaining about "drama." If it only happens occasionally, they may be right. If it seems to follow them wherever they go, maybe the problem isn't the other girls.

Note to mods: this was not an ad hominem attack, it's in keeping with the question he asked in the other thread.

If I lose in a game then get a message that says "lol u sux leave scrub" how is that my fault? I've tried to be nice and just go "gg" and all I get is bile in return. If a DM keeps trying to fuck me over despite the fact I never met him outside of this starting campain, how is it my fault?

I can't really say, because I'm only getting one side of the story. But something just doesn't ring right to me about literally every social experience you've ever had being this negative. Like I said, it would be one thing if it was just the one DM. But when you put the whole picture together, unless you've been doing all of those activities with the same group (in which case you really need to find better friends, because those guys aren't worthy of the name), there's apparently something about you or the way you act that ticks people off.

I'm sure I'll get people in here saying I'm victim blaming, but this isn't victim blaming. It's pointing out that the pattern doesn't match the one sided explanation.

I really haven't played with them excluding Magic and DnD. And that's been awhile. I did though recently play LoL and got the blame for losing.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Playing in general with others. I have never played a game with others that didn't piss me off because the other guy is always a wankety wanker.

Fighting games? If I lose, I get insulted and harassed until I leave. Win? HA! That's never happened and never will.

Multiplayer? It's always my fault if we lose cause... reasons. Get kicked out. Rinse and repeat.

Card games? I could only get junk rares and in FFA it was always lock me out.

DnD or other tabletop rpgs? As the other thread told me, shitty DM. I doubt I will ever play again.

You know, I held my tongue on the other thread, but this post kind of cements it: it really sounds more like the problem is with you than with the other players. You come off as kind of an anti-social jerk. It's like teenage girls who are constantly complaining about "drama." If it only happens occasionally, they may be right. If it seems to follow them wherever they go, maybe the problem isn't the other girls.

Note to mods: this was not an ad hominem attack, it's in keeping with the question he asked in the other thread.

If I lose in a game then get a message that says "lol u sux leave scrub" how is that my fault? I've tried to be nice and just go "gg" and all I get is bile in return. If a DM keeps trying to fuck me over despite the fact I never met him outside of this starting campain, how is it my fault?

I can't really say, because I'm only getting one side of the story. But something just doesn't ring right to me about literally every social experience you've ever had being this negative. Like I said, it would be one thing if it was just the one DM. But when you put the whole picture together, unless you've been doing all of those activities with the same group (in which case you really need to find better friends, because those guys aren't worthy of the name), there's apparently something about you or the way you act that ticks people off.

I'm sure I'll get people in here saying I'm victim blaming, but this isn't victim blaming. It's pointing out that the pattern doesn't match the one sided explanation.

I really haven't played with them excluding Magic and DnD. And that's been awhile. I did though recently play LoL and got the blame for losing.

Two things about LoL: One, the community at the lowest and at the highest summoner levels sucks. Lowest because it's full of smurf accounts made by people who got banned from the highest levels, highest because ranked is high stakes and super competitive. Last I played it was actually pretty good around the middle, though. For the most part it's no worse than any other online game, and as someone who cut his online gaming teeth on FPSs instead of RTSs and MMOs, I'm more frequently shocked by just how /nice/ some of the players you run into are than by how mean they are, because they have backgrounds in RTS and MMO games, which just tend to have friendlier communities than FPSs.

Two, unfortunately it probably was your fault. Rule of thumb with league, play bot matches until you hit summoner level 10. Only actually go online (or into PVP anyway) if you're playing with friends or if you've played enough bot matches and done enough research to understand how to play and what your build orders should be. MOBAs are not a genre for people who can't dedicate a /lot/ of time to them, it's why I dropped league despite enjoying it. This is a game where one bad player can totally throw the match. It can still theoretically be possible for the team to win, but they'd need to have pretty good players filling in the rest of the slots, with at least one being head and shoulders better than anyone on the other team. Enough better to make up for how much worse the bad player is.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Perks with gameplay bonuses you level up via overall playtime. You're success in this match should be decided by how skilled you are in this match, not by how many times you failed before. In games like Killing Floor where you can play without 'em I'm cool, though.

The red tape recorder, however, is so dangerous for an engineer. "Spent minutes building up your position to defend your teammates, and went away to get metal 20 seconds away? Lol, nope, level ones."

Level ones can be take down by just about every class even if you are hammering it, so your nest is now useless until you build it up again.

Engies have had the Wrangler for over 3 years, with the only nerf being in the last update (which accomplished NOTHING!) About time you got a taste of your own medicine

Fair enough. Although I personally never liked using it, I like to be able to repair the sentry while it shoots with perfect aim, although well positioned wraggled sentries are painful to deal with. Still, the red tape only slightly punishes wraggled sentries more than regular ones. One OP weapon does not nerf another.

 

[RaikuFA]

Playing in general with others. I have never played a game with others that didn't piss me off because the other guy is always a wankety wanker.

Fighting games? If I lose, I get insulted and harassed until I leave. Win? HA! That's never happened and never will.

Multiplayer? It's always my fault if we lose cause... reasons. Get kicked out. Rinse and repeat.

Card games? I could only get junk rares and in FFA it was always lock me out.

DnD or other tabletop rpgs? As the other thread told me, shitty DM. I doubt I will ever play again.

You know, I held my tongue on the other thread, but this post kind of cements it: it really sounds more like the problem is with you than with the other players. You come off as kind of an anti-social jerk. It's like teenage girls who are constantly complaining about "drama." If it only happens occasionally, they may be right. If it seems to follow them wherever they go, maybe the problem isn't the other girls.

Note to mods: this was not an ad hominem attack, it's in keeping with the question he asked in the other thread.

If I lose in a game then get a message that says "lol u sux leave scrub" how is that my fault? I've tried to be nice and just go "gg" and all I get is bile in return. If a DM keeps trying to fuck me over despite the fact I never met him outside of this starting campain, how is it my fault?

I can't really say, because I'm only getting one side of the story. But something just doesn't ring right to me about literally every social experience you've ever had being this negative. Like I said, it would be one thing if it was just the one DM. But when you put the whole picture together, unless you've been doing all of those activities with the same group (in which case you really need to find better friends, because those guys aren't worthy of the name), there's apparently something about you or the way you act that ticks people off.

I'm sure I'll get people in here saying I'm victim blaming, but this isn't victim blaming. It's pointing out that the pattern doesn't match the one sided explanation.

I really haven't played with them excluding Magic and DnD. And that's been awhile. I did though recently play LoL and got the blame for losing.

Two things about LoL: One, the community at the lowest and at the highest summoner levels sucks. Lowest because it's full of smurf accounts made by people who got banned from the highest levels, highest because ranked is high stakes and super competitive. Last I played it was actually pretty good around the middle, though. For the most part it's no worse than any other online game, and as someone who cut his online gaming teeth on FPSs instead of RTSs and MMOs, I'm more frequently shocked by just how /nice/ some of the players you run into are than by how mean they are, because they have backgrounds in RTS and MMO games, which just tend to have friendlier communities than FPSs.

Two, unfortunately it probably was your fault. Rule of thumb with league, play bot matches until you hit summoner level 10. Only actually go online (or into PVP anyway) if you're playing with friends or if you've played enough bot matches and done enough research to understand how to play and what your build orders should be. MOBAs are not a genre for people who can't dedicate a /lot/ of time to them, it's why I dropped league despite enjoying it. This is a game where one bad player can totally throw the match. It can still theoretically be possible for the team to win, but they'd need to have pretty good players filling in the rest of the slots, with at least one being head and shoulders better than anyone on the other team. Enough better to make up for how much worse the bad player is.

Oh yeah, I did it cause it passed in my mind "sometimes the internet exaggerates things, mayabe it's not as bad as people make it."

Afterwards: Nope, they were right.

 

[Gromril]

Using the gun in Assasin's Creed. So freaking cheap.

I will counter that by pointing out that it's the only real counter too rooftop smokebombers.

 

[Johnny Impact]

The choice to participate.

OK, more seriously now. The choice to be a dick about it, basically. The choice to go out of your way to ruin the game for other people. The choice to go all munchkin in a quick friendly.

Nailed it. I don't do multiplayer because it's full of folks who

1) trash-talk constantly
2) team-kill or other grief play
3) play distracted
4) Rambo off on their own, seriously it's called Team Fortress not I-Got-This Fortress
5) only play one character/class/scenario over and over because it's the only one they're good at
6) rage quit

I like Left 4 Dead and Team Fortress 2 a lot but it's very frustrating to be unable to form a team without at least one member fitting the above list. The dickage bothers me most of all. Just get a punching bag! Every bit as satisfying, plus you'll be stronger.

 

[DaWaffledude]

Using the gun in Assasin's Creed. So freaking cheap.

I will counter that by pointing out that it's the only real counter too rooftop smokebombers.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Besides which, I've come across gunners way more than rooftop smokebombers.

 

[Broderick]

But even earlier, back when WoW was playable, I had this issue. I rolled a hunter, and I liked to keep my blades up to snuff to, and keep my atk and defense passable. I got no end of shit rolling for items to increase my strength because "why does a hunter need strength! You should never use your blades. You have arrows. You don't need that!" Well, maybe I want to be somewhat balanced and NOT reliant on running in blind terror anytime anything gets close to me?
Idiots.

Do you mean Strength the stat, or strength as in making your character stronger? If you mean the stat, then I am sorry to say that your dissenters were correct in their accusations.(please disregard the next two paragraphs if you just meant making your character stronger). Strength as a stat is near useless to hunters; if a warrior and hunter had the same strength, and were autoattacking using the same weapon, the warrior would do way more damage compared to the hunter. This is because the strength increases the warriors attack power more than it would for the hunter. It is the opposite in regards to agility. Agility is more useful to a hunter than a warrior.

Also, because hunters mostly use their melee weapons as a last resort, or as a way to cc, the warrior would get more use out of the weapon. It would be like a mage rolling on a feral druid staff, I mean yeah stamina is useful for every class, but the strength and agility wouldn't be of any help, and would have better gone to a class that could use it properly.

Buuut...yeah! Anyways, to regards of the thread, I would say the opposite of this guy. People needing on items they definitely don't need is quite annoying, especially when you are gearing up a character. "God dammit man, you are a feral druid that doesn't have boomkin as a secondary spec, why do you need that mage staff! I totally could have used it".

Also the hornet's ring. I mean people are free to play how they want in dark souls; if you wanna chug flasks and use giantdad spec, go right ahead. The hornet's ring just makes fights too short however, for both the victim and the attacker, doesn't seem very fun to me.

 

[SJXarg]

Two wrongs don't make a right. Besides which, I've come across gunners way more than rooftop smokebombers.

I played some Revelations MP last night for the first time in months (after failing to find ANY matches in AC3), and there was a guy with a gun, he shot me twice in the first match. For 100 points each. I've been poisoned for 1500 points before, which is the maximum amount of points the gunner could get for an entire match firing on cooldown. Annoying? Not at all! That guy just threw away a power. Tripmine or Smoke or Mute can disable multiple opponents allowing for a stun or kill spree, the gun just is not an issue, and as noted is the #1 way to deal with roof runners, as throwing knives are so-so and running after them is a waste of time.

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

Perk systems.

Any game where you can unlock perks to make your competitive MP character better than the bog standard MP character that all the newbies get is cheating.
There is no justification for using perks in competitive MP.
There is no justification for including a perks system in competitive MP
It is an atrociously unbalanced system that should die out and should have never existed in the first place.

Ho there friend! I believe this thread is referring specifically to player choices, not game design.

On that subject though there is plenty of reason a perk system exists, which is to say variety. Everything boils down to player skill in the end anyway. Marginal benefits like the ones perks offer rarely make a difference in the grand scheme of a game.

OT: In general I just dislike people going out of the way to win at the expense of the game's integrity. Hacking, exploits, and unsportsmanlike conduct all just make me sad.

 

[Mikeyfell]

Ho there friend! I believe this thread is referring specifically to player choices, not game design.

Well, then the choice by the player to support broken games.
But the 10th post took that one from me so Ninja'd I suppose.

On that subject though there is plenty of reason a perk system exists, which is to say variety. Everything boils down to player skill in the end anyway. Marginal benefits like the ones perks offer rarely make a difference in the grand scheme of a game.

Player skill is practically moot in a game with perks and level based unlocks.
If we have exactly the same skills at a game, but I have body armor, faster reload speed and a gun that does more damage, or is more accurate I win every time.

You need to be way better or way luckier than me in order to win.

There are ways to create variety that don't break the game. Multiple balanced load-outs to choose from.
Hell, starting level 1 with all the perks unlocked would do a lot to balance the game. (Unless all the perks were balanced it wouldn't fix anything but it would help)

Having to play with the crappy starting equipment is frustrating first of all (If you want me to enjoy your game let me have fun with it. Don't throw me in a lobby with a bunch of people having more fun than me because it's so easy to kill the low level guy)

Playing against people with the low level gear is boring if you're good at the game (At least I feel that way)

Putting an arbitrary barrier between the player and the stuff they want to play with is bad design (Most of the time by the time I unlock any perks I actually might want to use I've had my fill of the MP and move on to something else. Maybe if it was more fun in the beginning I would have wanted to stick around longer...)

The problem is especially bad if you come in late in a game's lifespan. So you're low level with starting gear and the only people left on the servers are the ones who play it compulsively with all the perks and gear because all the less dedicated players have been alienated by the broken perks system that favors the people who have been playing the longest.

Perks systems are bad design.

 

[I.Muir]

Use of obviously broken weapon and tactics but more so just taking things too seriously

 

[OneCatch]

One-class wonders. You know, that guy who "plays sniper". Only.

Amen. I really despise sniper classes in all objective based fps. They really are the shit tier players who don't give 1 fuck about the team, and just camp for kills. As if that wasn't enough already, in many games where snipers are able to camp objectives, it discourages normal players going for them too.

The worst ive had it was Battlefield Badcompany 2. Not only did the snipers ruin hardcore mode entirely, it made playing rush mode of any map as the attackers a chore.

See, I kind of disagree. I think that sniping is a legitimate tactic (especially in stuff like battlefield when it focuses on open-field combat and combined arms). They thin out the enemy team and run interference, which in almost any game type will help the team somehow (unless they're being dicks, but then any class has it's share of dicks)

The problem is when games enable quickscoping which is ripe for abuse, or make snipers acceptably good at short range combat, or allow exploiting to get to stupidly unfair [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iz0weIbNAPg] places on the map.

I personally think a good way of balancing it would be to give sniper rifles their full capacity, rate of fire, accuracy, but configure them in such a way that you had to be stationary to scope at all, and would face an extreme accuracy penalty unless you were prone or at least crouched behind cover.

It wouldn't stop camping, but it would stop one-hit-wondering (which imo is worse) and make it easier to root out people that were camping with a bit of coordination, especially on well designed maps.

 

[A Weakgeek]

One-class wonders. You know, that guy who "plays sniper". Only.

Amen. I really despise sniper classes in all objective based fps. They really are the shit tier players who don't give 1 fuck about the team, and just camp for kills. As if that wasn't enough already, in many games where snipers are able to camp objectives, it discourages normal players going for them too.

The worst ive had it was Battlefield Badcompany 2. Not only did the snipers ruin hardcore mode entirely, it made playing rush mode of any map as the attackers a chore.

See, I kind of disagree. I think that sniping is a legitimate tactic (especially in stuff like battlefield when it focuses on open-field combat and combined arms). They thin out the enemy team and run interference, which in almost any game type will help the team somehow (unless they're being dicks, but then any class has it's share of dicks)

The problem is when games enable quickscoping which is ripe for abuse, or make snipers acceptably good at short range combat, or allow exploiting to get to stupidly unfair [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iz0weIbNAPg] places on the map.

I personally think a good way of balancing it would be to give sniper rifles their full capacity, rate of fire, accuracy, but configure them in such a way that you had to be stationary to scope at all, and would face an extreme accuracy penalty unless you were prone or at least crouched behind cover.

It wouldn't stop camping, but it would stop one-hit-wondering (which imo is worse) and make it easier to root out people that were camping with a bit of coordination, especially on well designed maps.

"Thinning out enemies" COULD work, the only problem is that these games more often than not employ minute respawn times, and usually the respawn locations are ON the objectives.

 

[Hemlet]

When it comes to video games and competitive play, I don't really think anything of people who choose to use the "low skill+high power" combos, as I really don't care about competition anyway. What does annoy me sometimes, is D&D or other similar games where a player decides to abuse rules and interpretations to create "broken" character builds. Sure, I'm the DM and can just invoke rule 0 (DM gets final say), but it's still frustrating when a player wants to take away the spotlight from others by powergaming. D&D and such games are more about cooperative storytelling than competing against the other players, so the "I must be the best!" mentality gets a bit tiresome. Plus, the DM can just kill some Munchkin character without a second thought, so why try to spoil the fun for others?

Sorry about the rant. I do get tired of competitive play of ANYTHING pretty quickly, unless it's just amongst friends who aren't taking it seriously anyway.

I most of the players in my group that were like that. Then they discovered the joys of the DM being able to do that too when it came to boss creatures. Now they think about what they COULD do to "be the best", and then they remember the Large Abyssal Obyrith Rust Monster.

Spoiler: How I trolled my players

Not only did it have fast healing 5, but also 120 HP, an AC of 19, resistance to acid+fire+cold+electricty 10, immunity to poison and mind effecting attacks, and DR 10/good. Oh, and if they failed the Will save upon getting within 30ft of it, they gained a Form of Madness where the afflicted were compelled to eat small metallic objects like coins and rings. The madness was a permanent affliction (wish or similar spells could remove it). Lastly, being of Large size, it's equipment destroying feelers had 10ft reach.

The look on a players face when they realize that their character is occasionally compelled to eat half of the coins on their person and occasionally their magic rings is amazing. The look on their face when they realize that "passing" all that jagged metal through their system does Con damage is priceless.

There are 10 people in that group, so they dogpiled the thing to death in a few rounds. I'm totally okay with that, because the message got across and ultimately we look back on it and laugh.

 

[OneCatch]

One-class wonders. You know, that guy who "plays sniper". Only.

Amen. I really despise sniper classes in all objective based fps. They really are the shit tier players who don't give 1 fuck about the team, and just camp for kills. As if that wasn't enough already, in many games where snipers are able to camp objectives, it discourages normal players going for them too.

The worst ive had it was Battlefield Badcompany 2. Not only did the snipers ruin hardcore mode entirely, it made playing rush mode of any map as the attackers a chore.

See, I kind of disagree. I think that sniping is a legitimate tactic (especially in stuff like battlefield when it focuses on open-field combat and combined arms). They thin out the enemy team and run interference, which in almost any game type will help the team somehow (unless they're being dicks, but then any class has it's share of dicks)

The problem is when games enable quickscoping which is ripe for abuse, or make snipers acceptably good at short range combat, or allow exploiting to get to stupidly unfair [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iz0weIbNAPg] places on the map.

I personally think a good way of balancing it would be to give sniper rifles their full capacity, rate of fire, accuracy, but configure them in such a way that you had to be stationary to scope at all, and would face an extreme accuracy penalty unless you were prone or at least crouched behind cover.

It wouldn't stop camping, but it would stop one-hit-wondering (which imo is worse) and make it easier to root out people that were camping with a bit of coordination, especially on well designed maps.

"Thinning out enemies" COULD work, the only problem is that these games more often than not employ minute respawn times, and usually the respawn locations are ON the objectives.

Well if that's the case, why is sniping such a problem?
If you spawn near enough to the objective to 'have another go' without traipsing half way across the map, then surely it isn't an unfair strategy - no different to someone going on a muscle-memory rampage with a shotgun.
Or did you mean that it basically results in de-facto spawn camping?

And I still reckon my ideas regarding scoping and movement would stop or at least dissuade the more unbearable sniper playstyles.