You could say it... but even a rule by the marjority can be a bad resolution. The problem is that in the end the minority of competitive gamers would be the ones not overjoyed by their easy win or frustrated by the loses... few human beings are gracefull in win and lose alike.

It's one of the reasons why I don't play MP, I don't like to lose, but I don't dedicate time to a single game enough to rise in the ranks... so local MP I can play for hours with friends, online just if its a game I want to plat and it is mandatory to have MP wins. But even frustrated at my low level I don't quit the game, it would just earn me some useless seconds, that would mean nothing when waiting in the lobby room.

don't know what the debate is about, this seems awesome, far better than leaving it as is I'd say.I'd like to not see the 5 day cap though, if you keep quitting you should keep adding time to your sentence.

Totally Awesome!

They probably need some time to cool off anyway. Maybe go outside. Swim in a pool. Fly a kite.

Or have some tea with kittens.

Well, after the 5 day jail time expires, you will be immediately returned to jail if you ragequit one more time as long as your percentage of ragequits is over 15%. i'd rather that once you've gone to jail once, the standard is harsher after that, so you can't still get by with ragequitting 15% of the time. some leniency is fine, and you need some to account for when the connection is broken unintentionally, but I don't see why the need to play "pretend fair" when somebody has already shown they have crossed the line (knowing the rules). Every time you do go to jail, the length of jail should increase.

But again, for players who don't mind ragequitting, perhaps allow the option to WILLINGLY play in jail, regardless of whether you have that penalty currently. Ragequitters could then have ranked games agaisnt anybody who WILLINGLY plays with known ragequitters, but it is up to the non-ragequitter to decide if they want to play with the known ragequitter.

Somebody suggested a jail based on # of matches, not time, but doing so would be easily scam-able: start and drop games rapidly. Or start games and walk away and have a coffee. Real world time has a consistent effect in taking those players out of the open game community for a certain period of time.

Because it is hard to see who quits nobody gets a loss and nobody gets a win. It basically rewards people for playing bad and they rank up through rage quitting rather than learning how to be good

I think this is all shits n giggles from some of you just seeing what responses you can get, lol @ reasonable.

Not sure what is unreasonable about wanting an online opponent to finish a game they start.

I support this.

Now send spammers to jail.

Wanting people to finish the game they start is reasonable, wanting people that rage quit to be banned isn't. You are acting egoystical in desiring that anyone that doesn't make your experience better to be barred... It's the same posture people had about always online and DRM, saying it was good because they were always online and never sell their games or buy second hand.

lol that is not even close to the same situation. Sorry, it's entirely different to expect someone to finish a socially agreed upon contract, like finishing an online game you start. And it's entirely different to be ok with people being punished for being dicks who rage quit (aka their own actions) than it is to be ok with the features of some product because they mesh with you.

I bolded the only part of your response that is correct or relevant. Yeah, that is reasonable. And people being punished for not doing that, is also reasonable. Not only can it make them better players, it makes everyone elses experience better. I'm just curious, are you against people exploiting glitches in an online game getting banned too? Not going to respond any more, kudos to DH, I am buying their game day one when I get an Xbone just for awesome decisions like this.

Yeah, push your opinion as fact.

And I bet you weren't annoyed at people that said DRM and always online was ok because it didn't bother them.

I don't play online as I already said, and I'm okay with banning people exploiting glitches and hacks, because their are 100% doing it to make them look better through the wrong path, and in rage quit they are exposing themselves as less capable players. So yes it is a different case. And what I'm discussing isn't if jail is ok or not, just that your posture is that if said change benefit you and/or just impact negatively on others you are ok with it.