These are good very good replies, thank you. Both are good explanations why someone might do this. I agree with this. Still, I believe that even when you lose you should finish the game, just to not spoil it for your opponent. You can simply stop playing after you've officially been destroyed and then go play something else instead. Works for me. Somedays I lose every fucking time and some other day I'm in a better condition and win more often. I just accept it and give it a break.

@Pagan: here, read what collint0101 said: losing is part of gitting gud.

Understandable.

I usually suck while playing online, so I don't have to worry about people ragequitting on me But personally, I never quit, unless the internet goes out on me.

Generally speaking, if people want to get better, they will accept losing. I have not played anyone in Ultra Street Fighter II online that has quit on a loss. If they refuse to play me after losing, I am accepting of that but I have never had a ragequitter. I am not even sure if you lose points for ragequitting or not because it has yet to happen. Losing is part of life so I just accept it and move on.

If I lose a game utterly, and don't have much fun doing so, I'll likely leave the party and play with a different group.

Actually quit mid-game though? Never. If someone is making time to play a game with me, the least I can do is finish the game with them. I can't imagine not giving them at least that much.

I'd say that close matches are the most fun.....by a mile.  But, if it is a very lopsided match, I agree with KLA that it is more fun to be on the losing side.  You can just go balls to the wall and see what happens.  It doesn't matter if you die, cuz you were gonna lose anyway.

I suppose that logic should apply just the same in a match where my team is way ahead.  The thing is though, in a win, I want to feel like I contributed.  So, I don't feel like I can play as freely as I can when my team is way down.  

Yes, that's pathetic.

generally I would never quit in such a situation. BUT, a few games I have played in the past could often see you matched against opponents I could not hope to even compete against let alone win, I can usually accept that but when you get a string of them time after time I would rather quit early, I don't mind losing, but it isn't fun to know that no matter what you do you are going to lose and are just wasting your time. The exceptions to that tend to be some of the FPS's where even when you are getting stomped you can still have some individual fun.

I would agree with that, but it's still a viewpoint that sits with the winning side and not the losing sidce. You acknowlage that it is indeed an issue, but you cannot agree with it being one to care for. The cycle will continue ad infinitum the more we focus on the winning side and wanting nothing to dow ith the losing one.

Games really do need the option for surrendering, because 1) it still gives the other side the victory they sought after and 2) it allows the losing side to give in on their decision as well as being able to find another match that bit faster.

The idea of bowing out after the match is well and truly done doesn't exactly do much, it's just forcing the loser through the mud after the victory has been announced, which is what I said before as not being the kind of thing a loser looks forward to, especially if they've lost multiple times in a row.

The thing is, I've lost and won in plenty of games for a long time, the difference is that I know what it feels like to lose and I know what it feels like for those that lash out when they lose multiple times in a row and I'd love for them to have the option to surrender, rather than telling them "no you're going to let me bash you in and like it", because that only benefits me and it in no way benefits them, so it's hardly being fair if all I'm doing is caring for just the winning team.

The way you deal with loss is different to others, you have to accept that everyone has a different view on losing and ways to deal with it. The option for surrender is not a bad option to have, after all it gives both sides a benefit rather than one side alone.