Ever heard of losing? What makes you think losing should be fun?
What makes me think that playing a game should be fun?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I expected a response exactly like this one. Ah modern generation of gamers, instant gratification (games should be pure fun), infinite HP (hey, no one likes dying, right?), linear maps (who likes getting lost?) easy bosses (games should not be work!) and "Achievement unlocked" at every step...
As a 40 year old gamer who started with Pong, got an Atari 2600 in 1979, and fondly remembers playing Ultima on my 12mhz 286 in 1984, I have to say that you are completely missing the point.
Even back then no one played a game if it wasn't fun. Do you remember the entire home video game market collapsing because the games sucked and weren't fun (ET anyone?), cause I do.
You seem to be wanting to mock "these kids today" for wanting to have fun. That makes no sense. Frustrating and boring gameplay is frustrating and boring, no matter when and no matter who is complaining about it. Rage quitting is nothing new and bad mechanics are bad mechanics.
Also, your whole post is silly because all of the things you talk about are NOT present in NS2. There is no "infinite HP, linear maps, easy bosses, and "Achievement unlocked" at every step." So why are you bringing that up?
I get that you are trying to score internet cool points by creating a straw man and then tearing him down but just stop it. It's pathetic.
Maybe the whole post is just about dickheads, who are conceding when there are still 2 hives/ccs alive while they just saw some exos or lost their 3. hive/cc. So I would say, conceding only possible with 5min into the game and having only 1 hive/cc (like somebody else said already).
I'm fine with the concede option, some fine-tuning aside. (For example, the "down to one cc/hive" condition sounds good.)
What really bugs me about conceding isn't when the other team does it. It's when my own team concedes without even TRYING something different in order to turn the game around and win. Those games where your team keeps bashing their heads against the same enemy fortification, instead of making the game interesting by going for the weak spots in their defense.
As long as there's even a slight chance that it might work, I try to convince my teammates to make a last-ditch attack when the first concede votes appear. Regardless of whether it succeeds or not, it's a lot more fun than just throwing your hands up and give up without trying. If it fails, you can still concede, and that's fine. But sometimes it works, and you manage to turn the game around. And when that happens, it's just awesome.
Maybe the whole post is just about dickheads, who are conceding when there are still 2 hives/ccs alive while they just saw some exos or lost their 3. hive/cc. So I would say, conceding only possible with 5min into the game and having only 1 hive/cc (like somebody else said already).
I agree. Also, concede shouldn't end the game instantly, it should just stop the conceding team from spawning.
As I have posted elsewhere, vast majority of chess games end with resignation of one side, an actual checkmate is rarely seen on the board.
Chess is a turn-based game, and any comparison of chess to an FPS is weak at best.
Concede does not belong in an FPS. While it needs to stay in to address games that stagnate, concede should NOT be the way the game "normally ends". Games should be ending with one team overwhelming the other team in battle - and I'm not talking about a team being forced to play a game they can't win either. That's part of the problem.
In a game like TF2 a team in an assault/defend map remains competitive until the last point is captured. On a payload map it isn't over until the cart drops into the hole. Until that last action, both sides keep playing and BOTH sides feel like they are playing for something. Neither side feels the game is over since it ISN'T over until someone wins.
The point at which games are being conceded has been steadily lowered. What used to only happen very late in the end-game, is now happening in the mid-game. It would likely happen in the early game if not for the timer preventing it.
This isn't chess. It's time people stopped treating it that way.
I think the real problem is that people don't know how to put up a fight anymore. Just today I had this game on veil where my alien team conceded just because marines were very aggressive and forced us away from double. We had 2 hives up and could've had half the team fading, but everyone conceded.
My point is, comebacks can happen but noone even bothers trying these days. They'd rather throw the game out and start a new one where they are on the stacked team.
The point at which games are being conceded has been steadily lowered. What used to only happen very late in the end-game, is now happening in the mid-game.
While I agree with your post, I think this effect is not necessarily because people are getting lazier or more eager to concede. On average, players are simply getting better at reading the strategic situation, and therefore recognize earlier when a game has developed in a way that puts them at a severe disadvantage.
Whether they draw the right conclusion from what they see (conceding vs. change of strategy) is another question...
Concede is not the problem here, it is the players that use it when the game is still up for grabs, if there is still 2 hives/2cc there is always a way back, now if the game is won and there just holding on turtling, then they should concede and move onto the next game.
But I do agree no one likes being killed over and over again, so if the game is lost and there is no way back, then just concede.
I expected a response exactly like this one. Ah modern generation of gamers, instant gratification (games should be pure fun), infinite HP (hey, no one likes dying, right?), linear maps (who likes getting lost?) easy bosses (games should not be work!) and "Achievement unlocked" at every step...
haha I so concur. This is why I don't play CoD and <insert most modern games here>. Who really gives a cack about what achievements other people have? You also don't need an achievement list to know you've done well in a game. Just be happy with what you know you can do then try to better it, and if you do well by cheating, well you're only shaming yourself -- in which case enjoy sucking.
Anyway. Without concede people will just F4 (as mentioned) as they did in NS1. How frequent this happens is debatable. Okay, let's remove concede. Now the same people will come back here and whine that losing players F4-ing to end games early are simply disconnecting. What next? Ban players from disconnecting servers? Prevent ns2.exe from being terminated? Bitch please.
Losers that have no chance of turning will always want the game to end ASAP, so at least offer the chance to do this in a way that keeps them eager to continue playing. With concede the majority of losing players are still willing to play another round on the same server right away. I do like the feature, and like the 10 minute delay before you can use it.
I would however suggest concede should be available to dead players that have missed a (or multiple) spawning opportunity due to no IP/eggs available, and so such players don't miss out on a half-second chance of voting to concede before they are spawn killed. I've not checked if this is already the case, though I seem to recall if you're stuck dead you have to wait for the opposition to destroy your remaining CC/hive. Let players dead for 60 seconds vote to concede.
Team stacking is a bigger problem than concede (forgive the echo) as it appears a lot of games are delayed from starting because of it, or people unable to join the stacked team just leave. You can solve this by playing on a server that forces random teams (or perhaps has a voting facility to enable that). Perhaps this should be incorporated as an official feature to aid public games? "Everyone not joined within 30 seconds of the first player selecting a team will be randomly selected", but then again there is the issue of AFK players. An AFK timer would need to go with that.
Either way whatever happens the one thing we can guarantee is there will be a minority of players that come here to complain. Make a mod to disable concede functionality if you're really that against it, NS2 loves mods. If it catches on, you've won. Otherwise, the people have spoken, and care not for your opinion.
The point at which games are being conceded has been steadily lowered. What used to only happen very late in the end-game, is now happening in the mid-game.
While I agree with your post, I think this effect is not necessarily because people are getting lazier or more eager to concede. On average, players are simply getting better at reading the strategic situation, and therefore recognize earlier when a game has developed in a way that puts them at a severe disadvantage..
OK, let's assume that this is true. That is still a problem. Again it is not a problem with concede, it's a problem with the game if you can reach a point LONG in advance of the game ending where you can reliably predict who the winner of the game will be.
What you are saying is that there is a point where a team stops becoming competitive and is unable to mount a comeback. A small setback costs them the game *long* before it is over. That, my dear friend, is a problem with the game. We shouldn't have a condition where players can say "It's over" unless we're talking about 60 seconds before the game ends. If people can predict the outcome of the game 10 minutes or more before it would finish, then this is a problem of game design allowing too much predictability.
Again, it's something that shouldn't be happening.
There is NO "small set back" that ruins the game in pubs. Stop with this crap to make your position stronger. It is a bunch of set backs that narrows the window for success. In a pub with inexperienced players that window is smaller and less forgiving as it should be. This is not only a skill based game but has strategic under tones.
I though the concede problem was a myth.
But today I went on some pub server "after" month of not doing so, and it was awful... I tried the 3 Stammtisch servers and 1 official UWE, and it was literally awful... Each time the marines had 2 CC, had a lot of RTs for the majority of the game, then they try one push, lose a PG and.... concede... without even trying. And they didn't even had JP and Exo yet, it would have been even easier with those if they tried a minimum.
Seriously??? What is wrong with these people?
They don't even try to do anything. Once, they even had 3 tech point and conceded because the aliens were pushing too hard... Finally it's 4 games of ~20 minutes totally wasted and A LOT of frustration.
Concede shouldn't be available to people with less than XX hours, or limited to 1 CC only, but even with that limitation some games would be ruined.
One thing for sure, I don't think I'll come back to pubs soon.
I prefer not to play, than to "play" something just for the sake of being frustrated and wasting time.
I though the concede problem was a myth. ... Seriously??? What is wrong with these people? ... They don't even try to do anything.
Concede makes it so easy to quit. Yet you can't take concede out of the game or people will just get around it with F4 or they'll just quit the server. Concede is the symptom of a real problem that I really feel needs to be addressed.
How we fix this is another matter altogether, but the problem isn't going away. It sucks the fun out of the game when it happens, and it usually drives people off the server. The game needs to change so that people don't start saying 'gg' the moment things start going south.
@Savant Name one small set back that cant be recovered from instead of avoiding what i said. I do play pubs and do very well at it. I act as a field commander as much as possible. That might be why i dont have silly concedes. Almost all the games are well fought and when concede happens it is because the teams are stacked or we have lost too much ground to come back i.e. 1 tp/1rt
@Savant Name one small set back that cant be recovered from...
You still do not get it. It's not about whether the set back is ACTUALLY fatal or not. Comprehend this please. People are conceding despite being in games where the setback they suffered was NOT a setback that should have ended the game. That's why people are annoyed. People concede at the drop of the hat, including in situations where it is not warranted. Do you get it yet?
People are conceding despite being in games where the setback they suffered was NOT a setback that should have ended the game. That's why people are annoyed. People concede at the drop of the hat, including in situations where it is not warranted. Do you get it yet?
who was it not warranted by? it appears to me that when you say a situation where it is not warranted actually means in a situation where it isnt warranted by the winning team, or really just you. conceding is entirely up to the players, not some artificial criteria(like less than 2 techpoints, etc...) which is how it should be. You cant force people to play a game they dont want to play. People will alt-f4 of f4, which is even more selfish as it doesnt require a majority vote. if 50%-100% (or whatever the percentage required to concede is) of a team isnt having fun, why should they play it out as fodder for the other team's sake?
There is no criteria for conceding set in stone, and there shouldnt be. What you basically want is for both teams(or maybe just you:) ) to have to vote concede for the game to end, which really doesnt make any sense.
People concede at the drop of the hat, including in situations where it is not warranted.
who was it not warranted by? it appears to me that when you say a situation where it is not warranted actually means in a situation where it isnt warranted by the winning team, or really just you.
Are you kidding me? This isn't about me, it's about 7 people who may have 3 hives and who concede against a marine team with one tech point. Do you consider a concede vote in that circumstance warranted? Because THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. I could ramble off other examples where a team was clearly not in a losing position yet they all quit via concede.
People should be conceding when they are actually in a no-win situation. They shouldn't be when they still have a very good chance to turn the game around and win it.
the games you describe have one constant fact, you are playing. I use a mic to rally and inform my team.
Good luck with that. Unfortunately the time when you need to rally the team is BEFORE they have conceded. Once they have voted to concede it's a bit late.
I'd love to see these mythical games where a team that is behind suddenly turns into a well organized killing machine after 10 mins of window licking.....
Some people just don't or can't learn how to play as team and when your stuck with that it's way better to concede than drag it out to the inevitable.
I have never had a concede go through unless i agreed with it. Problem is you. You and your team must have been pretty bad to concede with 3 hives.
Cute. I was marine comm.
Concede never goes through unless you approve it? Hmmm... Is this the 'risingsun' mod I've heard about which gives you veto power over the other players on the server? If people want to concede, you're not going to stop them no matter what you say. It's their choice. Not yours.
Concede is a nice feature when your team is just getting smashed but when I am on teams that vote concede when we have 2 bases and are not struggling just having to put up a fight for ground then I get ticked. The concede rule should be only allowed to a team after so many min's and when they only have one base.
Comments
As a 40 year old gamer who started with Pong, got an Atari 2600 in 1979, and fondly remembers playing Ultima on my 12mhz 286 in 1984, I have to say that you are completely missing the point.
Even back then no one played a game if it wasn't fun. Do you remember the entire home video game market collapsing because the games sucked and weren't fun (ET anyone?), cause I do.
You seem to be wanting to mock "these kids today" for wanting to have fun. That makes no sense. Frustrating and boring gameplay is frustrating and boring, no matter when and no matter who is complaining about it. Rage quitting is nothing new and bad mechanics are bad mechanics.
Also, your whole post is silly because all of the things you talk about are NOT present in NS2. There is no "infinite HP, linear maps, easy bosses, and "Achievement unlocked" at every step." So why are you bringing that up?
I get that you are trying to score internet cool points by creating a straw man and then tearing him down but just stop it. It's pathetic.
What really bugs me about conceding isn't when the other team does it. It's when my own team concedes without even TRYING something different in order to turn the game around and win. Those games where your team keeps bashing their heads against the same enemy fortification, instead of making the game interesting by going for the weak spots in their defense.
As long as there's even a slight chance that it might work, I try to convince my teammates to make a last-ditch attack when the first concede votes appear. Regardless of whether it succeeds or not, it's a lot more fun than just throwing your hands up and give up without trying. If it fails, you can still concede, and that's fine. But sometimes it works, and you manage to turn the game around. And when that happens, it's just awesome.
I agree. Also, concede shouldn't end the game instantly, it should just stop the conceding team from spawning.
Concede does not belong in an FPS. While it needs to stay in to address games that stagnate, concede should NOT be the way the game "normally ends". Games should be ending with one team overwhelming the other team in battle - and I'm not talking about a team being forced to play a game they can't win either. That's part of the problem.
In a game like TF2 a team in an assault/defend map remains competitive until the last point is captured. On a payload map it isn't over until the cart drops into the hole. Until that last action, both sides keep playing and BOTH sides feel like they are playing for something. Neither side feels the game is over since it ISN'T over until someone wins.
The point at which games are being conceded has been steadily lowered. What used to only happen very late in the end-game, is now happening in the mid-game. It would likely happen in the early game if not for the timer preventing it.
This isn't chess. It's time people stopped treating it that way.
My point is, comebacks can happen but noone even bothers trying these days. They'd rather throw the game out and start a new one where they are on the stacked team.
Whether they draw the right conclusion from what they see (conceding vs. change of strategy) is another question...
But I do agree no one likes being killed over and over again, so if the game is lost and there is no way back, then just concede.
Anyway. Without concede people will just F4 (as mentioned) as they did in NS1. How frequent this happens is debatable. Okay, let's remove concede. Now the same people will come back here and whine that losing players F4-ing to end games early are simply disconnecting. What next? Ban players from disconnecting servers? Prevent ns2.exe from being terminated? Bitch please.
Losers that have no chance of turning will always want the game to end ASAP, so at least offer the chance to do this in a way that keeps them eager to continue playing. With concede the majority of losing players are still willing to play another round on the same server right away. I do like the feature, and like the 10 minute delay before you can use it.
I would however suggest concede should be available to dead players that have missed a (or multiple) spawning opportunity due to no IP/eggs available, and so such players don't miss out on a half-second chance of voting to concede before they are spawn killed. I've not checked if this is already the case, though I seem to recall if you're stuck dead you have to wait for the opposition to destroy your remaining CC/hive. Let players dead for 60 seconds vote to concede.
Team stacking is a bigger problem than concede (forgive the echo) as it appears a lot of games are delayed from starting because of it, or people unable to join the stacked team just leave. You can solve this by playing on a server that forces random teams (or perhaps has a voting facility to enable that). Perhaps this should be incorporated as an official feature to aid public games? "Everyone not joined within 30 seconds of the first player selecting a team will be randomly selected", but then again there is the issue of AFK players. An AFK timer would need to go with that.
Either way whatever happens the one thing we can guarantee is there will be a minority of players that come here to complain. Make a mod to disable concede functionality if you're really that against it, NS2 loves mods. If it catches on, you've won. Otherwise, the people have spoken, and care not for your opinion.
If everyone had a Concede, this stuff wouldn't happen
We need good guys with concedes to stop the bad guys with concedes.
Better to have a concede and not need it than to need a concede and not have it.
Concede control means only the criminals have concedes.
Concede control means using two hands.
Or simply...
Concede them all and let God sort them out.
What you are saying is that there is a point where a team stops becoming competitive and is unable to mount a comeback. A small setback costs them the game *long* before it is over. That, my dear friend, is a problem with the game. We shouldn't have a condition where players can say "It's over" unless we're talking about 60 seconds before the game ends. If people can predict the outcome of the game 10 minutes or more before it would finish, then this is a problem of game design allowing too much predictability.
Again, it's something that shouldn't be happening.
But today I went on some pub server "after" month of not doing so, and it was awful... I tried the 3 Stammtisch servers and 1 official UWE, and it was literally awful... Each time the marines had 2 CC, had a lot of RTs for the majority of the game, then they try one push, lose a PG and.... concede... without even trying. And they didn't even had JP and Exo yet, it would have been even easier with those if they tried a minimum.
Seriously??? What is wrong with these people?
They don't even try to do anything. Once, they even had 3 tech point and conceded because the aliens were pushing too hard... Finally it's 4 games of ~20 minutes totally wasted and A LOT of frustration.
Concede shouldn't be available to people with less than XX hours, or limited to 1 CC only, but even with that limitation some games would be ruined.
One thing for sure, I don't think I'll come back to pubs soon.
I prefer not to play, than to "play" something just for the sake of being frustrated and wasting time.
How we fix this is another matter altogether, but the problem isn't going away. It sucks the fun out of the game when it happens, and it usually drives people off the server. The game needs to change so that people don't start saying 'gg' the moment things start going south.
L2p is my advice to you and learn to lead.
PS: I don't need or want your 'advice'.
who was it not warranted by? it appears to me that when you say a situation where it is not warranted actually means in a situation where it isnt warranted by the winning team, or really just you. conceding is entirely up to the players, not some artificial criteria(like less than 2 techpoints, etc...) which is how it should be. You cant force people to play a game they dont want to play. People will alt-f4 of f4, which is even more selfish as it doesnt require a majority vote. if 50%-100% (or whatever the percentage required to concede is) of a team isnt having fun, why should they play it out as fodder for the other team's sake?
There is no criteria for conceding set in stone, and there shouldnt be. What you basically want is for both teams(or maybe just you:) ) to have to vote concede for the game to end, which really doesnt make any sense.
I win games not only through kill count and strategy, but communication. L2P :-bd
People should be conceding when they are actually in a no-win situation. They shouldn't be when they still have a very good chance to turn the game around and win it.
Good luck with that. Unfortunately the time when you need to rally the team is BEFORE they have conceded. Once they have voted to concede it's a bit late.
Some people just don't or can't learn how to play as team and when your stuck with that it's way better to concede than drag it out to the inevitable.
Concede never goes through unless you approve it? Hmmm... Is this the 'risingsun' mod I've heard about which gives you veto power over the other players on the server? If people want to concede, you're not going to stop them no matter what you say. It's their choice. Not yours.