this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
262 points (97.8% liked)

Gaming

3079 readers
467 users here now

!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.

Our Rules:

1. Keep it civil.


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.


2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.


I should not need to explain this one.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.


Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.



Logo uses joystick by liftarn

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

people do this then wonder why there are no new players.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For real. Was playing a Star Wars game again recently. Devs had dropped support and the community had become rampagingly toxic. I found a discord to play with people and actually have a voice chat and they all whined about how no new players showed up but they were repugnant to an extreme. Hyper gatekeep-y for a start but then add on a massive dose of sexism, racism and every other flavor of bigotry.

Decided maybe that the game had died for a reason and uninstalled that shit.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Kinda reminds me of the current state of SW:Squadrons. The only remaining community are the toxic sweats. The player count is so low that you pretty much always have to wait minutes to start x.x

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I was talking about Battlefront 2 (2016) but Squadrons also applies. I tried playing that game online 3 times and just never bothered continuing it. I get being sweaty, fine, but being toxic about it is something else. Just not interested in it anymore. Been playing stuff like Baldurs Gate 3 perpetually now and it's great. Or the Hitman trilogy. Actually looking at my playstation almost all the games are singleplayer. Only multiplayer game recently is a co-op game, It Takes Two.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Doesn't Battlefront 2 have a co-op mode against bots though? Last time I played it was that mode and still fun as hell. Can't be sweaty if it's co-op.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Oh yes it can. People will compete over the kills and kill hog as much as they can. Some people will actively block you so you can't shoot while they're in a lightsaber hero. It's just exhausting.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was talking about Battlefront 2 (2016)

Ah, don't tell me that, it's one of the few games that I actually want to play. I might just stick with the older version instead.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Same. I used to play tournaments so I'm good but I don't go sweaty. So many people though feel compelled.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is primarily a matchmaking problem

Current MM theory basically always puts the worst players on teams with the best players to “even out” the teams. But it leads to a terrible experience for everyone involved because the bad player gets constantly shit on and the good players are stuck trying to hard carry a whole team.

When that ends up happening for 1000-2000 hours of gameplay people get frustrated and call out the bad players.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it's more of a votekick problem. There's always going to be people whining about their teammates regardless of skill differential. People will also find ways to accuse same and higher ranked players of being bad at the game, because it's more about ego and them being in a bad mood.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even in games where votekick doesn’t exist this level of toxicity does, and it’s often because of the manipulated matchmaking algorithms putting them in that bad mood and inflating their Ego.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think that's the reason, I think they're using the game as an outlet for unrelated frustrations in their lives, but I agree that toxicity still exists in games without votekick. But personally I find it infinitely more tolerable playing a game with toxic people when they don't have the power to kick me out of the match, because that means I'm not obligated to try to appease them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ugh. Then you have never had them throw the game and basically work against the rest of the team just to hurt everyone else.

I don't think there is any easy answer, it's just more people playing and the world being ever increasingly full of narcissists who just only can think of themselves as right that means a portion of any online take is gonna be shit. And yeah it really made me stop bother playing

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought it tried to make games of all players of similar skill levels? Hence the rankings?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nope. It just says it does that.

Good players and bad players are both outliers. If you assign a numerical value to the players it’ll more likely try to balance the teams more than anything. I’ll put together an example.

P1: 100 - Best Player in the game

P2: 50 - Average Player

P3: 40 - Just below average

P4: 2 - Brand New to the game

To match these 4 players there’s only so many choices. Put P1 on a team with P2 or P3 and the other side is extremely disadvantaged. By putting P1 and P4 together, they average out to ~51. P2 and P3 average for ~45. The game thinks that’s a valid matchup, but really nobody is going to enjoy it.

This happens in both pubs and competitive modes because it maximizes “engagement” from the worst players, as they have a higher chance of being carried to a win when they’re put with the better players. Those also tend to be the ones who spend the most money, so these companies cater to them at the cost of enjoyment for everyone else.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Playing with people leagues better than you even if you are carried to a win sucks. In a lot of games you don't even get to actually play. You're dead before you get a shot off or never get to touch the ball or you fall off at the first obstacle and end not even getting to finish the race because you're so behind everyone else.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

That’s also true, and is often my experience in non-shooter games.

However it does work out that the lowest common denominator doesn’t care if they didn’t do anything. They’re just happy to win. The couch casuals aren’t ever going to be great, so their standard of a great game is much, much lower than anyone who plays daily or even every few days