Brave New World

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

Splinter Cell Pandora Tomorrow. Brilliant game. The next step in online gaming. Revolution? Maybe, but evolution at least. Online gaming is now about more than simple fragging or racing. Teamwork, patience and communication are more important than ever.

SCPT gives us a complex and dynamic sandbox to play in, and certainly it becomes apparant that good players are hard to find. Hosts that disconnect games without notifying, players that leave when they are losing (messing up ranking and all), being teamed up with a dimwit who won't talk or discuss strategy and all that. I've had various frustrating moments playing this game online, and if it wasn't for the people of this forum who are in my friends-list it might have been a short-lived experience.

Will there ever be a way to prevent stuff like this from happening? Like adding 'rating' systems (like on eBay: good players get points from other players, bad players get negative feedback), or penalties for bad behaviour? The reporting is a bit steep when people are just annoying, but some self-regulating system could be bliss.

[roberthazelby]

... Like adding 'rating' systems (like on eBay: good players get points from other players, bad players get negative feedback), or penalties for bad behaviour? The reporting is a bit steep when people are just annoying, but some self-regulating system could be bliss.

I'd certainly vote for something like this.

I'm a big fan of Crimson Skies, and it really gets on my tits when you get an equal number of people together to form two teams, you start the game, and then one-by-one people start to disconnect.

On one occasion I've been the only person left on one team!

The other thing that annoys me is the racism. Now, most people I've come into contact with on Live have been nice and friendly, but it seems that as soon as you get someone on there from the deep south (of the US), they start shouting out racial abuse. You would have thought that a virtual world would be once place you could get away from all of this.

Rob

[Sng]

I think the easiest way to prevent this happening is to just stick to playing with people you know, like people from here.

It sure helps. I mean, with an FPS it's not SO important to get a group of you in a team that communicate well together, although it's nice if you do, but playable if you don't.

With Splinter Cell you really gotta keep talking, which is great... but that does mean finding a decent partner is that bit harder.

[ObscureInjoke]

Those things you describe, Napole0n, are the very reason I was on Live! very little until recently, and indeed still *spontaneously* attempt a game on Live only very rarely. If at all, thinking about it.

The concept of successfully matching players with other players likely to respond to their style of gaming (both in terms of what they're looking to get out of the game, and in the social or atmospheric fluff which surrounds it) seems to have been almost entirely ignored by Microsoft, much to my bafflement; the Friends list is a nice first step, but it's only one step - and such a small one.

I have noticed a few third party websites stepping into the breach and functioning as match-making (for want of a better word) hubs, this very forum is a good example. Perhaps it was a deliberate decision, then? Test the waters, almost, with this iteration. Watch what tools the players use, how they use them, which they adapt or make for themselves. Then in the next iteration of the service, incoporate the best and most useful elements?

Or. You know. Something.

Edited April 7, 2004 by ObscureInjoke

[Jonnyc]

I had a great game with a guy on this, he was friendly, polite etc etc. Right at the end of being a spy, he said

"what are we supposed to be doing?"

He hadn't realised that spies had to neutralise the cannisters. The I understood why he spent the whole game going head to head with the mercs

Having said that, he still lasted longer than me

you ain't seen me, right

[Pob]

Will there ever be a way to prevent stuff like this from happening? Like adding 'rating' systems (like on eBay: good players get points from other players, bad players get negative feedback), or penalties for bad behaviour? The reporting is a bit steep when people are just annoying, but some self-regulating system could be bliss.

One of the most oft-heard arguments against online gaming is "who wants to play against a bunch of strangers?"

I agree - it's much, much better to play alongside friends, which is why you need a community such as this.

I just wish more of my *actual* friends had Xbox Live (or even an Xbox) so I could play multiplayer with them.

Still, once it becomes more widespread, who knows?

[footle]

One of the most oft-heard arguments against online gaming is "who wants to play against a bunch of strangers?"

I agree - it's much, much better to play alongside friends, which is why you need a community such as this.?

The alternative argument *for* online play is "why worry about shit computer AI opponents when you can play a real thinking person for real?"

Obviously, if we could choose our bunch of strangers appropriately so they weren't all Deep Southerners (see the latent racism?) we'd have the best of both worlds.

[Systemshock]

Splinter Cell Pandora Tomorrow. Brilliant game. The next step in online gaming. Revolution? Maybe, but evolution at least. Online gaming is now about more than simple fragging or racing. Teamwork, patience and communication are more important than ever.

SCPT gives us a complex and dynamic sandbox to play in, and certainly it becomes apparant that good players are hard to find. Hosts that disconnect games without notifying, players that leave when they are losing (messing up ranking and all), being teamed up with a dimwit who won't talk or discuss strategy and all that. I've had various frustrating moments playing this game online, and if it wasn't for the people of this forum who are in my friends-list it might have been a short-lived experience.

Will there ever be a way to prevent stuff like this from happening? Like adding 'rating' systems (like on eBay: good players get points from other players, bad players get negative feedback), or penalties for bad behaviour? The reporting is a bit steep when people are just annoying, but some self-regulating system could be bliss.

The answer is either play with a group of people you know, play the right sort of games or play on organised servers. Not Xbox specific I know but playing FFXI gives you fantastically run worlds (servers) by SquareEnix coping with 3000 plus players in action at any time in the 'world' as well as all of the players not (yet) playing as adversiaries but working together helping and fighting, trading and exploring. There is talk of the MMORPG World of Warcraft going to Xbox (possibly as an exclusive) and if you can't play FFXI then maybe you'll see what I mean if/ when WoW comes to the Xbox.

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

I find a lot depends on the game you're playing. In PGR2 it's every man for himself, and the only real annoyances are people deliberately slamming into each other, but even that isn't too bad. When playing Rainbow Six 3 on team survival it usually isn't bad either, because you can do a lot solo if your teammates are wankers. Same thing with CounterStrike, although you need a bit more planning there. It's really when it comes to cooperation and tactics (like co-op Rainbow Six 3 or Splinter Cell PT) that teamplay is absolutely necessary to succeed.

I think there are a few solutions, which could work:

a) Very simple one: from the 'recent players' screen, select the guys you've played with and rate them Good, Neutral or Bad. Drawback is that clans will rate each other highly, on the other hand it's an easy way to identify pottymouths, cheaters or bad sports.

B.) Friendsharing. Usually the people you play with who are on your friends list have more or less the same attitude. So by sharing your friends lists with others, a community of like-minded people can evolve. This could be done automatically, especially if you combine it with

c) Profiles. MSN and ICQ have various fields to fill in. Your hair colour. Your age. Your favourite popstar. Your favourite games. You can find out a lot about one's attitude by filtering through preferences. By 'matching' like-minded people, there's a bigger chance you meet people online who you might like.

None of these will prevent you from walking into gamerooms filled with dickheads, but if you can sort out all the 'X80X B0Y R0XXXXX00RZZ!!' guys beforehand, life gets easier.

And indeed, using forums like these are perfect to build up a nice friendslist. But when I go online on some ancient game nobody here plays anymore or when I play when nobody's online, I still like to get into a decent game. Which happens often enough, it's not all doom and gloom, there's plenty of nice people out there as well.

[Haribokart]

Napster is right, I find when I play against forumites most are nice but some are very rude to me for no reason at all (same as here, I guess). However- there are probably thousands of other people out there with the same problem as you, if you don't join random games you stand less chance of meeting them.