By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Salty losers during online play

Tagged games:

I'm terrible at ultra Street fighter 2, but that's not stopped me trying to get better. 40 matches and 10 wins lol. However there is one thing grating me when I play Arms in party mode. It's the one where there are 3 if you duking it out until last man standing. What I've noticed is a certain person will stand back in a corner whilst 2 of you battle it out then decide to join in when your energy bar is depleted for the win. Blatant cheating on what is supposed to be playing for fun. Why do people not try to play the game in the spirit it's supposed to be played.



Around the Network
zippy said:

I'm terrible at ultra Street fighter 2, but that's not stopped me trying to get better. 40 matches and 10 wins lol. However there is one thing grating me when I play Arms in party mode. It's the one where there are 3 if you duking it out until last man standing. What I've noticed is a certain person will stand back in a corner whilst 2 of you battle it out then decide to join in when your energy bar is depleted for the win. Blatant cheating on what is supposed to be playing for fun. Why do people not try to play the game in the spirit it's supposed to be played.

This should be punished if you ask me.



Gameplay > Graphics

Substance > Style

Art Direction > Realism

torok said:

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.

Just today I was playing a few matches of BF1, then after a few mtahces my entire team either caught the stupid for one entire match or they were completely replaced with new players, because my team was getting backhanded left and right. No matter what I was trying to do I would get flanked by 3-4 enemy players while mine were running around like headless chickens. In that situation there was nothing to be done, no turning things around since we were losing the match rather quickly, I decided at that point to call it quits before the match ended.

 

I know very well that there are those cock sure strong willed folk who believe anything can be turned around on a dime, but when you've got a team full of idiots vs a team full of skilled players, the math and facts speak for themselves. That is unless you're playing a game where your entire team can be braindead and you can somehow become godlike and carry your entire team to victory.

People will disagree but at the end of the day it's a video game, a luxury product and they cannot force you to play with them (though these days it seems anyone who remotely thinks of quitting a game is to be atomized on the spot, which I don't think solves the issue entirely). I too buy games to have fun, if anything as I get older I find myself wanting to keep the level of fun as high as possible, but the competitive nature in gaming seems to seep into almost any game with a hint of PVP.

 

I honestly cannot fathom why we have said option irl, yet in video games it's frowned upon. I'm well aware of sportsmanship and all that, but you are allowed tom throw in the towel, you see it happening in Wrestling and other sports for example, war etc. It shouldn't be denied as an option when it comes to video games. 



GoOnKid said:
SvennoJ said:

Perhaps instead of informing the 'winner' the 'loser' has quit, the game could silently replace the 'loser's input with AI as not to hurt the feelings of the 'winner' when his oppenent quits. That way everybody is happy! The 'winner' gets to stomp all over the AI believing he beat a weak human opponent, while the 'loser' is already off finding a more enjoyable match.

That'S EVEN BETTER! Boy, we should really suggest this to some companies!

It's standard practice in coop games which can lead to some hilarious situations. One time in Bridge crew I was captain shouting at helm to take evasive actions, engineering and tactical joined in while helm doggedly stayed the course. Until we all realized helm had disconnected and it was a dumb AI that doesn't take voice commands :) Simple to take over once you realize, we escaped with 5% hull left.

Why isn't it standard in vs multiplayer. If the points are important who cares if it's not a human opponent anymore if you were winning already. I only really play racing games online (unless it's coop) and there people quit all the time when they're not ahead. I would much rather see them replaced with AI then suddenly see my position go up because the people in front of me have given up. I race for the fun of it, yet driving by myself with one hardy veteran with fully upgraded and finely tuned car way out in front, I might as well play single player. At least I won't get timed out for not reaching the finish in time!

Salty winners and losers could that have something to do with growing up? I was the older brother growing up and learned to not always win or stomp all over my opponents as that only leads to people not wanting to play with you anymore... Put up a challenge, but don't decimate. Racing is more fun too if you wait for your opponents to catch back up after a crash and continue duelling it out.

Yet maybe from the younger brother perspective, he might still have a chip on his shoulder and now it's time to proof he can be a winner too. It will be interesting to see how my kids sort it out amongst themselves. The oldest has over 2 years of experience over his younger brother, plenty to always beat him at any videogame, which usually leads to frustration on the younger one's side and no more playing after that. Then the older one has no one to play with and is back to watching you tube videos. They do better in co-op.

Ofcourse with the huge supply of opponents on the internet, kids might not learn to play nice anymore, winning or losing.



GoOnKid said:
Slarvax said:
I love when I meet them in Smash 4. Funny stuff.

I'm also a salty loser, but insulting/disrespecting other people because I suck was not how I got raised.

Oh gosh, playing Smash 4 online made me soooooo angry! I'm just not all that good, I guess. The reality may be brutal, but still. I simply suck at Smash 4.

How do you recognize the salty ones?

The only way to communicate after a match is changing your name. I will often change my name to GG to tell someone I liked our matches. Some people have "Usuck" and other things like that as their names for when they lose.



Signature goes here!

Around the Network
SvennoJ said:

It's standard practice in coop games which can lead to some hilarious situations. One time in Bridge crew I was captain shouting at helm to take evasive actions, engineering and tactical joined in while helm doggedly stayed the course. Until we all realized helm had disconnected and it was a dumb AI that doesn't take voice commands :) Simple to take over once you realize, we escaped with 5% hull left.

Why isn't it standard in vs multiplayer. If the points are important who cares if it's not a human opponent anymore if you were winning already. I only really play racing games online (unless it's coop) and there people quit all the time when they're not ahead. I would much rather see them replaced with AI then suddenly see my position go up because the people in front of me have given up. I race for the fun of it, yet driving by myself with one hardy veteran with fully upgraded and finely tuned car way out in front, I might as well play single player. At least I won't get timed out for not reaching the finish in time!

Salty winners and losers could that have something to do with growing up? I was the older brother growing up and learned to not always win or stomp all over my opponents as that only leads to people not wanting to play with you anymore... Put up a challenge, but don't decimate. Racing is more fun too if you wait for your opponents to catch back up after a crash and continue duelling it out.

Yet maybe from the younger brother perspective, he might still have a chip on his shoulder and now it's time to proof he can be a winner too. It will be interesting to see how my kids sort it out amongst themselves. The oldest has over 2 years of experience over his younger brother, plenty to always beat him at any videogame, which usually leads to frustration on the younger one's side and no more playing after that. Then the older one has no one to play with and is back to watching you tube videos. They do better in co-op.

Ofcourse with the huge supply of opponents on the internet, kids might not learn to play nice anymore, winning or losing.

Growing up, becoming adult, yes, that helps a lot in our deeply rooted constant struggle between competition and cooperation. After realising that life offers  much bigger problems than who won and who lost, everything can be viewed from another perspective. I remember how I raged over video games so much. Nowadays I do that very rarely. There are many other things to bother with. Also, my parents made sure that bad winners are far worse thand bad losers, but ultimately both suck. Just play it or leave it.

Agree on having more fun when you are not wanting to win no matter what, but instead deliberately leaving a chance for your opponent.



Gameplay > Graphics

Substance > Style

Art Direction > Realism

TruckOSaurus said:

The only way to communicate after a match is changing your name. I will often change my name to GG to tell someone I liked our matches. Some people have "Usuck" and other things like that as their names for when they lose.

Oh... how lovely. ^^'



Gameplay > Graphics

Substance > Style

Art Direction > Realism

I like in Splatoon how at the end of the match you get the player stats in your team . That's a good way to cope with a defeat knowing you are the best performer in your team, I often go for personal glory if my team is inept and beyond help.



Happened to me on FIFA just the other day, smashed in a few goals in the first half and then my opponent quits the game, was in season mode so got the points still anyway.



 

zippy said:
I like in Splatoon how at the end of the match you get the player stats in your team . That's a good way to cope with a defeat knowing you are the best performer in your team, I often go for personal glory if my team is inept and beyond help.

For Overwatch thats not really an option. Depending on the role, if you where doing good. That's the reason why the team lost. Tanks are an example. If you play as Zarya and you have gold in damage. The team was garbage. Zarya should not have gold if the team is functioning properly. Silver is normal. Bronze depending how fast the match went. The offensive characters should have the gold. Tanks should have gold on objective time and their personal ability stats.