Afk Players Should Be Kicked From Games, And Unable To Join Games For 30 Minutes

[Gigaus]

The amount of anger expressed in this post is overshadowing the message you are trying to get across. You suggesting a 30 minute ban is absurd to say the least and the afk timer in the game is annoying at best due to it being really low, not making stealth viable in many situations.

 

This issue does need attention though.

 

Right, so it's totally absurd when other games impose such marks on players for bad behavior like this. I mean, LoL crashed and burned the month it implemented this, Smite never got off the ground, CS:GO and the Source games all fades into obscurity and no one every plays them....Really now, it's so absurd that it's the one system players praise in all these games because it gets rid of the idlers taking up server space.

 

 

I didn't even read this far prior to my first reply.

 

Good god man, that's some genius one sided argument you have there. I'm gonna use that the next time I get into a debate and see how well it works.

 

Sidenote: Has anyone played or heard of a game (preferably one that isn't terrible) that directly punished players for going AFK? I certainly haven't but I'm curious.

 

No duh it's a one-sided argument; The other side of the argument is let people just fill up server space and prevent people who want to play from playing. This argument was put into the grave in so many other games it's EXPECTED that something like this should be in place. The arguments against it are S#&$ at best, and the fact anyone's still defending not having it and letting people go AFK is just...Wow...

 

@All the people talking about their Friends AFKing :

 

Oh, they had something come up?...Great! Why are they playing a video game in the first place then? If I get called away on something, do you know what I do? I leave the fking game. I mean, wow, it's a marvlous idea, that when you're not playing a game, you exit out of it! Truly cutting edge thinking right there. I mean cripes, we had this debate with Darksouls 2, when people were being punished for DCing because their connection was S#&$; If there's something preventing you from playing normally, then you shouldn't be playing at all. I mean really, what is so hard to understand about that? Especially when this usually prevents people from joining on and being, iunno, useful.

 

If your friend can't loud in for a full minute, then they have net issues and need to get that looked at. If they have to go take meds, or go take a phonecall, or go put out a fire in the kitchen, then they shouldn't be playing a game in the first place and need for focus on that. 

 

@The people talking about Blacklists and Vote Kicking :

 

No.

 

Hell no, that is a bad idea in a PvE game at best, and there's a reason it's only really used in Multiplayer games with servers. The possability of exploiting that is through the roof. Payday 2, the majority of public matches either have you kicked immediately for no reason, or wait until the end to kick you just for spite. Blacklight Retribution, major clans would blacklist people, and have their guys sit in public rooms just to kick people, which resulted in said players not being able to join anything at all. Introducing a Vote Kick will lead to people being A******s; Introducing a Blacklist will lead to a break down in the matchmaking system.

 

A 30 minute temp ban systems is good enough. It stops people from repeatedly just joining games and idling, and it keeps it so that people aren't locked out of the game for good. And keeping it as an automatic system that is unbiased is for the best. 

 

@Everyone complaining 1 minute is too short :

 

MOST NORMAL MISSIONS LAST 2 MINUTES FFS!....Really? No no, lets have it at 10 minutes like people are say, no one would ever be kicked because the mission would be over by then. Most multiplayer games kick you after 30 seconds, even less in some; A full 60 seconds is being generous. And news flash, this has no barring on people loading in. If they take 3 minutes to load in, the timer doesn't start ticking until they are actually in....And the sodding mission would be over anyway so it's a moot point!

Edited November 17, 2014 by Gigaus

[Dr.Prinny]

I agree with adding vote-kick function

So many AFK players in Akkad

[BrotherIcarus]

That's the point. 

What do you mean? The AFK kick is more than enough to stop AFK'ers. Actively stopping them from playing the game will be counter productive.

[Imaru]

Right, so it's totally absurd when other games impose such marks on players for bad behavior like this. I mean, LoL crashed and burned the month it implemented this, Smite never got off the ground, CS:GO and the Source games all fades into obscurity and no one every plays them....Really now, it's so absurd that it's the one system players praise in all these games because it gets rid of the idlers taking up server space.

Their point wasn't that it shouldn't be changed, nor that it is absurd to bring up the topic. They said that in their post. Their point was that it is very clear that this topic was not written with a level head and as a result makes it difficult to read past the anger. 

[TheErebus.]

@All the people talking about their Friends AFKing :

 

Oh, they had something come up?...Great! Why are they playing a video game in the first place then? If I get called away on something, do you know what I do? I leave the fking game. I mean, wow, it's a marvlous idea, that when you're not playing a game, you exit out of it! Truly cutting edge thinking right there. I mean cripes, we had this debate with Darksouls 2, when people were being punished for DCing because their connection was S#&$; If there's something preventing you from playing normally, then you shouldn't be playing at all. I mean really, what is so hard to understand about that? Especially when this usually prevents people from joining on and being, iunno, useful.

 

@The people talking about Blacklists and Vote Kicking :

 

No.

 

Hell no, that is a bad idea in a PvE game at best, and there's a reason it's only really used in Multiplayer games with servers. The possability of exploiting that is through the roof. Payday 2, the majority of public matches either have you kicked immediately for no reason, or wait until the end to kick you just for spite. Blacklight Retribution, major clans would blacklist people, and have their guys sit in public rooms just to kick people, which resulted in said players not being able to join anything at all. Introducing a Vote Kick will lead to people being A******s; Introducing a Blacklist will lead to a break down in the matchmaking system.

 

A 30 minute temp ban systems is good enough. It stops people from repeatedly just joining games and idling, and it keeps it so that people aren't locked out of the game for good. And keeping it as an automatic system that is unbiased is for the best. 

Okay first off, what if someone was playing and then all of a sudden an emergency popped up. Do you honestly think they're going to first leave the game?

If someone in my family was gravely injured and I was in the middle of a match, I'm not gonna be sure to exit it. I'm going to be leaving the computer as it is.

 

Secondly, ok so blacklisting is bad but a 30 MINUTE BAN FROM THE ONLINE ACCESS IS A GOOD IDEA?

 

You want to know why Dark Souls 2 works? Because that is in competitive play. In co-operative play, this only makes the game less enjoyable to play.

 

Believe me buddy, Blacklisting is a good idea. 

 

[Zyion]

I just want to say that any design decision that prohibits gameplay for minor infractions is a bad design decision. There isn't a better way to convince people to not play a game then by putting in a system that can easily prevent them from playing it. What the OP suggested would be the equivalent of killing a fly with a rocket launcher. The fly may be annoying, but the amount of extra damage the rocket launcher does would easily offset any benefits of killing the fly.

[Duch99pl]

1st, no auto kick but a option to start a vote would be fair

2nd. perhaps 5 min ban, no 30

[Dama73]

I understand where OP is coming from but I myself have had moments when playing Void survival, def etc where some real life thing has come up and I've had to go AFK for sometimes up to 5-10 minutes, real life things are often unavoidable as such I don't like the idea that I could be auto booted from a game with friends just because I had to go answer the door and deal with a delivery or take an important call.

[Onida_a]

Right, so it's totally absurd when other games impose such marks on players for bad behavior like this. I mean, LoL crashed and burned the month it implemented this, Smite never got off the ground, CS:GO and the Source games all fades into obscurity and no one every plays them....Really now, it's so absurd that it's the one system players praise in all these games because it gets rid of the idlers taking up server space.

If I remember correctly CS:GO servers are not hosted by one of the players and there are five different game modes 1) Classic Competitive, 2) Classic Casual, 3) Demolition, and 4) Arms Race 5) Deathmatch. Only the Competitive game mode does something close to what you describe, here is the description: If you abandon a match then Classic Competitive will be unavailable for a period of time. The first abandon has a 30-minute cool down, the second is 2 hours, then 24 hours, and one week. If you haven’t abandoned for a week you would cool down by one level (for example, from 24 hours back to 2 hours).

This does not ban you from playing the game, it only stops you from playing one of its game modes. So how does this compare to what you are trying to accomplish?

[Kestral9999]

-Snip-

I don't think you fully realize just how foolish and bigoted you sound.

 

I'd understand if this were a PVP game where team effort and tactics actually detrimentally affect the game, but it's not. If your teammate is AFK, the worst that will happen is they won't contribute anything to the match. Kicking them is entirely understandable but preventing them from playing the game is unnecessary and just because other games have implemented those features doesn't mean Warframe should follow suit. Allowing for us to report AFKers is a thumbs up but the rest is a no from me.

 

Edited November 17, 2014 by Kestral9999

[(PSN)timbob90210]

I think a "Report afker" option would be great. Each player has a certain number of daily strikes until there is a consequence. Like after getting reported 3 times the person is banned for the 30 minutes or whatever else solution you guys came up with. It should have no effect on the current mission because as the OP said, it could be abused. 

 

If you're upset with them idling during the current mission, just abort and report.

Edited November 17, 2014 by (PS4)timbob90210

[adiamorph]

@The people talking about Blacklists and Vote Kicking :

 

No.

 

[...] Vote Kick will lead to people being A******s [...]

 

Since this is all you said about vote-to-kick, I might as well point out: In my suggestion, what I said was for the system to include voting AND an idle time limit. That way, someone can idle if they really need to by clearing it up with the squad first. That's covered. But as for abusing it, that's why the idle time limit would be there: you wouldn't be able to kick players who aren't AFK. I think this solution pretty much has everything covered.

 

I do agree that blacklists would be terrible, and they wouldn't be necessary anyway with an effective vote-to-kick system.

Edited November 17, 2014 by adiamorph

[Zyion]

How about instead of creating a kick or blacklist system, we instead make a preferred player system? Xbox did this years ago with Xbox Live where down voting someone would make you less likely to see them again and up voting would make you more likely to see them again in matchmaking. The system wouldn't ban players from playing together, it would only allow preferences for matches.

[fadeinlight]

@The people talking about Blacklists and Vote Kicking :

 

No.

 

Hell no, that is a bad idea in a PvE game at best, and there's a reason it's only really used in Multiplayer games with servers. The possability of exploiting that is through the roof. Payday 2, the majority of public matches either have you kicked immediately for no reason, or wait until the end to kick you just for spite. Blacklight Retribution, major clans would blacklist people, and have their guys sit in public rooms just to kick people, which resulted in said players not being able to join anything at all. Introducing a Vote Kick will lead to people being A******s; Introducing a Blacklist will lead to a break down in the matchmaking system.

 

A 30 minute temp ban systems is good enough. It stops people from repeatedly just joining games and idling, and it keeps it so that people aren't locked out of the game for good. And keeping it as an automatic system that is unbiased is for the best.

Adding blacklists would cause almost no problems with the matchmaking system whatsoever--if the player can't find a group with a member that hasn't blacklisted them, they can just start off the mission by themselves and have people join as they play (if those people haven't blacklisted them as well).  Eventually they'll be isolated entirely, which is pretty much the point.

 

It might cause a problem with recruiting members ("Player X can't join because Player Y has blacklisted them"), but if the host finds that they can't invite anyone then they can just get rid of Player Y.  That will teach the latter to be a little more tolerant.

 

They could also limit the size of the blacklist to maybe ten players.  That way people will make sure that they really don't want to play with someone again, as opposed to just blocking them because they don't like their color scheme.

 

It's better to make a system where people can decide for themselves what behaviors they do and don't like, because every system you put in place will inherently be biased anyway.  Your system is biased against people with unreliable connections and people that go afk for one minute.  If everyone agreed on that point, you wouldn't have any contention at all...just a lot of kudos and more rep.  Letting people have a blacklist will allow players to tailor their playing experience to their own biases, which will be more satisfying for everyone.

 

Also, what if the person going afk is the one using a key?  Does everyone get kicked?

[Imaru]

How about instead of creating a kick or blacklist system, we instead make a preferred player system? Xbox did this years ago with Xbox Live where down voting someone would make you less likely to see them again and up voting would make you more likely to see them again in matchmaking. The system wouldn't ban players from playing together, it would only allow preferences for matches.

The immediate problem I see with this is if the offending player makes a whole bunch of alt accounts and up votes themselves on them to counteract any negative rep they get. 

 

Still a good idea though. 

[Wyldbill]

The 30 minute ban is unnecessary, especially if the AFKing is an accident in the first place.

 

I think a good way to deal with AFK players is a vote-to-kick option (and not an automatic kick since who knows, anything could come up that maybe they cleared up with the squad, as other people mentioned). After a certain amount of votes followed by a certain (maybe total) amount of inactivity, a player would be kicked. At least this is the best thing I could come up with, since it involves directly voting AND the ability to redeem yourself if you happen to be back in action.

 

 

I agree with adding vote-kick function

So many AFK players in Akkad

 

 

1st, no auto kick but a option to start a vote would be fair

2nd. perhaps 5 min ban, no 30

 

Oh no, votekicking can be abused to troll way too much.  I joined a L4D2 game after it went free for halloween/Christmas last year, I cannot remember which.  Anyways, first 3 games I got into involved "rushers", "Trolls", and the type of people who will stand over an incapped body and teabag while complaining on loss saying it is all your fault the hunter pounced you and they were too busy staring at a wall to help out, part of what they would do is have you do all the work and then get kicked for s***s and giggles.

 

Anyways, some spite there that dragged me away from the point, votekicking became rampant for no reason and it totally wipes out the fun, I haven't played public on it since.  I do like the idea of blacklisting as it is a slow burn, and ideally it only affects someones chance to run into that guy without affecting other people's chance.  A rep system can be abused, although it would take a lot of time and effort to do so while autokicks are cruel and hearless without thinking of reasons why.

[Zage23]

I'm ok with the current system and I think you should try some alternatives for game planning if this is that large of an issue for you.

 

You probably know them but:

-take your games into the recruitment channel

-play with friends exclusively

-play solo

-or be ready to abort a match if you roll in solo with public on.  When you go public ask in chat, monitor your randoms, and be ready to abort.

 

It does suck but a vote to kick option can be abused and when it doesn't get passed the real trolls show themselves.  

 

I had someone leave a T4D at wave 5 just because he said "i don't like this frost" after the frost expressed his opinion on the Soma's ammo efficiency.

Edited November 17, 2014 by MReaver

[Zyion]

The immediate problem I see with this is if the offending player makes a whole bunch of alt accounts and up votes themselves on them to counteract any negative rep they get. 

 

Well, I was thinking more along the lines of something that was done on a player by player basis rather then just using an overall score. Someone could potentially create a bunch of accounts to up vote themselves, but that would only increase their chances of playing with those dummy accounts (not the ones that already down voted them).

[AsuraKyu]

30 minutes is overly excessive just keep them unable to queue in party play for 5minutes or something

[Personwithhat]

this system can be abused SO much...

 

if blacklisting is player-controlled, just like kicking, there WILL be a !@#$24 ton of $&*^s who just invite you, and then kick you right before the end of a mission or wave.

 

many times there was a A****** as the host or a team player, who just couldn't shut up abou "this and that and that and that"

 

sometimes i MIGHT be at fault, if at fault it means stuff like "hey nova, could you please use M-prime more often thatn 1 per 5 minutes? thanks, i give u energy broh...." (me trin)

or

"nekros you DO know that theres a button for desecrate? if it takes you more than 5 minutes to find and press it, then you're doing it wrong."

this after 30 minuets of them doing !@#45 and me asking politely.

 

after this swear words ensue from the other person.......

 

either way, i like the no-kick option, and blacklisting is bullS#&$. What if you can't join a match with 2 friends just becasue they are with 1 other person who blacklisted you for no reason? ....

[Wyldbill]

this system can be abused SO much...

 

if blacklisting is player-controlled, just like kicking, there WILL be a !@#$24 ton of $&*^s who just invite you, and then kick you right before the end of a mission or wave.

 

many times there was a A****** as the host or a team player, who just couldn't shut up abou "this and that and that and that"

 

sometimes i MIGHT be at fault, if at fault it means stuff like "hey nova, could you please use M-prime more often thatn 1 per 5 minutes? thanks, i give u energy broh...." (me trin)

or

"nekros you DO know that theres a button for desecrate? if it takes you more than 5 minutes to find and press it, then you're doing it wrong."

this after 30 minuets of them doing !@#45 and me asking politely.

 

after this swear words ensue from the other person.......

 

either way, i like the no-kick option, and blacklisting is bullS#&$. What if you can't join a match with 2 friends just becasue they are with 1 other person who blacklisted you for no reason? ....

 

Blacklisting doesn't kick players, lets get that out of the way.  It prevents players from matchmaking together.

 

However, if someone illegitamately blacklisted you and they are in a friend's game, an invite from a friend or just directly joining a friend would bypass this whole thing.

 

"What if people abused this?" well, they are trying really hard by getting buddies of theirs to randomly join your public game just so they could jump in and troll you.  So blacklist the buddy that constantly is in your game and move on.

Edited November 17, 2014 by Wyldbill

[Personwithhat]

hm...k den, so they can bypass as long as you have a friend in there?

 

well that sounds better.

 

still no kick button pl0x :P

[adiamorph]

this system can be abused SO much... [...]

 

Oh no, votekicking can be abused to troll way too much. [...]

 

 

I already covered this as a reply here.

 

That's why I think this is a genuinely better solution, you can't abuse it because you can only kick people who are actually idle, etc etc just read the post. It would be different if you had to kick people for other reasons, but in a way it's barely possible to work against your team in Warframe, and nobody really does it.

Edited November 17, 2014 by adiamorph

[Wyldbill]

Since this is all you said about vote-to-kick, I might as well point out: In my suggestion, what I said was for the system to include voting AND an idle time limit. That way, someone can idle if they really need to by clearing it up with the squad first. That's covered. But as for abusing it, that's why the idle time limit would be there: you wouldn't be able to kick players who aren't AFK. I think this solution pretty much has everything covered.

 

I do agree that blacklists would be terrible, and they wouldn't be necessary anyway with an effective vote-to-kick system.

 

The issue with implementing a Vote-To-Kick system is that if players get used to a system like this, the next step would be to argue how the system either takes too long to allow kicks or to goes too quicky and people get mad.  People will then argue to do away with the AFK Timer and then we are stuck with a system that allows another level of trolling.

I don't know why you are against a blacklist solution, you just say you agree blacklists would be terrible, but as I explained my stance on the subject, I'd appreciate yours.

 

EDIT:

 

... but in a way it's barely possible to work against your team in Warframe, and nobody really does it.

 

I can think of quite a few ways to "Troll" on Warframe, plenty involve the new Limbo frame, but others that use frames like Vauban and Loki.  No one really Trolls for fun on this game because we all play it to complete the objective, the playerbase is what really keeps it down.

 

However, the lack of Vote-Kick also keeps down people who like to take over a squad or kick right before an evac.

 

The blacklist would be simpler, involving at most a .txt file that stores player names and one flag implemented into matchmaking that checks player names in a lobby before having someone join, while a Vote-to-kick method brings issues concerning how people could abuse the system to troll others and requires a system devised to catch AFKers to enable the vote to kick.

 

Everyone is always going with a, Zero across the board system where if the player has no stats and doesn't move, they are counted as AFK.  What if they take one step before going afk?  What if they kill people for a small while and then stop?  You then have to devise a system that starts the countdown if a player stops moving, but not if they do any action at all.  At that point, you could get more technical afkers creating a basic script to make your character move forward or use an ability for 1 second every x minutes, and with any frame that has an ability that hits through walls you won't be able to catch them with the automated system.

 

The next logical step here is to make the vote-to-kick not require any conditions and we are back to people kicking people before evac or just because they can.

Edited November 17, 2014 by Wyldbill

[Kokurokoki]

I often wait at the spawn for a few minutes while a friend goes to get a drink or something. Yeah..if this is gonna happen, make sure it only happens in public lobbies. "Private" and "Invite Only" modes don't need it.

 

I agree.  Keep it to public games.