@Tigidooh wrote:Like the title say, we have the option to block players that purposely throw up/trolls games, it add a little red circle icon by the player profile picture so it make it easy to recognise them when you join a lobby.
I'd like this option simplified though (due to limited time post game and particularly for cross-console since as a xbox player I can't see the latest players we've met from Playstation if we skip the post game too fast) or at least expanded in the game.
Have the option to also add a green circle for the players you particularly liked their play style and maybe a blue one for anyone that werent special in itself but are neither troll.
Just the red (block) and green (green light) would do though. A quick and easy way to identify the good and bad apples in the lobbies.
I don't want to add every single descent players I meet in-game to my friendlist so this could help a lot to avoid the nasty troll and recognise the good one. Even more for cross-consoloe as we can't add each others anyway.
I've posed the idea of adding a silent-voting system where you can give teammates/opponents a vote and when people reach a certain threshold of votes, they get a nice little badge next to their player icon that indicates the community often enjoys playing with/against them.
It would go a long way in fostering a more positive online ecosystem.
It would be a nice feature but there is honestly no way of ensuring integrity.
- The PS3 Demon's Souls gave you the option to "rate" players and hosts would almost always downvote someone who did all the work for them, died (through no fault of their own), and even successfully helped them defeat a boss.
- Metal Gear Online players would boot good players on the opposite team because it gave them a better chance of winning (getting tossed would negate any CR/RP equivelent changes).
- That Deep Down game capcom was supposedly working on 10 years ago (man I loved the trailer, wish it went through), was going to give players a letter ranking that would eventually lead to rank based matching - nooooo bueno.
I can totally see console fanboys downvoting eachother just for the sake of it and team rivals would be a pain. Toronto fan? Eww, downvote. I'm a Montreal fan so I'm gonna get blasted by Boston, etc.
EASHL would be chaos and drop ins would just add fuel to trolling.
Also also, Sony scrapped the accolade feature because nobody was using it. I believe I got around 50 since it's launched and that was probably only due to me spamming it at the end of a round
@TTZ_Dipsy wrote:It would be a nice feature but there is honestly no way of ensuring integrity.
- The PS3 Demon's Souls gave you the option to "rate" players and hosts would almost always downvote someone who did all the work for them, died (through no fault of their own), and even successfully helped them defeat a boss.
- Metal Gear Online players would boot good players on the opposite team because it gave them a better chance of winning (getting tossed would negate any CR/RP equivelent changes).
- That Deep Down game capcom was supposedly working on 10 years ago (man I loved the trailer, wish it went through), was going to give players a letter ranking that would eventually lead to rank based matching - nooooo bueno.
I can totally see console fanboys downvoting eachother just for the sake of it and team rivals would be a pain. Toronto fan? Eww, downvote. I'm a Montreal fan so I'm gonna get blasted by Boston, etc.
EASHL would be chaos and drop ins would just add fuel to trolling.
Also also, Sony scrapped the accolade feature because nobody was using it. I believe I got around 50 since it's launched and that was probably only due to me spamming it at the end of a round
I guess that's why you don't even give the option for a 'downvote'. Only upvote. It simultaneously encourages people to play nice to obtain the badge while not giving trolls and griefers the benefit of being able to do anything, really.
There would be no real incentive if it was purely aesthetic - Reputation-based matchmaking (that allows us to pick and choose what levels we want to match with), makes the most sense so long as there is a proper way to balance the negatives.
In theory, groups could boost upvotes without any real downside. Sounds so dumb but teams already boost wins and rag so it wouldn't surprise me
@TTZ_Dipsy wrote:There would be no real incentive if it was purely aesthetic
I think you're underestimating just how important it would be for people to get an icon on their badge to separate themselves from others in terms of their quality of play.
@TTZ_Dipsy wrote:Reputation-based matchmaking (that allows us to pick and choose what levels we want to match with), makes the most sense
This has never worked. In fact, I'm a believer that 'levels' of players should be hidden from drop-ins. One of the most infuriating thing about finding a drop-in game is how elitist players who have very high levels (not necessarily from being good, but from playing often) will bail on a lobby at the last minute because their teammates didn't match up to their standards. Those people need to stick to club if they're not going to 'lower' themselves to play with randoms.
@TTZ_Dipsy wrote:In theory, groups could boost upvotes without any real downside. Sounds so dumb but teams already boost wins and rag so it wouldn't surprise me
Then let them? If a group of idiots want to 'boost' their badges to include an icon that represents good team-play, then let them.
EA can easily increase the threashold of positive votes before obtaining the badge to say, 1,000. If some morons want to take a bunch of time to make alt accounts to give one of their buddies 1,000 upvotes.. good luck.
I don't think this was meant to be interpreted as a "voting" or "rating" system. It would purely be for you as a player to identify which gamertags you had good interactions with and which ones you want to avoid. No one else would or should be able to see what players you mark as good or bad.
