I can see why it can be annoying for some, but the thing I've noticed a lot from those that find it irritating is that they fail to notice the other player not having fun on the losing side. They fail to see the equal frustration that the other player is feeling, yet that tiny amount that do just shrug and go "git gud", which never breeds positivity from that kind of exchange.
I'm actually glad that some games out there allow for the player to "surrender" to the other, especially for those that know when they have been bested, but it's unfortunate that those who seek to be "in it to win it"fail to accept surrender as a legitimate option to use when you have been bested. Not everyone loves having their face dragged through the mud, well after victory has been assured for the other player. If I know I've been bested (and I know myself more than anyone else) I'll toss in the towel and move onto playing another match. For those games that offer the use of surrendering to your opponents, I'll take up on said option, for others that don't, well I try to avoid playing with other players and instead opt in for co-op modes or Humans vs AI.
Tbh I think most games should offer the option for surrender, rather than opting to look out for one side and not the other (especially when one side is suffering frustration and all the other side can do is just piss all over them and expect no consequences)
I agree. Honestly, when I enter a match that's an onslaught, I just quit immediatily. In the opposite side, when you're suffering a sound beating, people quit, newcomers quit (like I do) and you're not only stuck with a better enemy team, but also ends up with a numerical disavantage.
I normally quit in team MP games where the match became an onslaught. People may disagree with this attitude, but I buy games to have fun, not to be stuck not having fun during a massacre. In one-on-one games I remain until the end. An option to surrender would solve most scenarios anyway.