Forums

Help › Forums

Re: Player Reputation

rated by 0 users
Sat, May 25 2013 2:49 PM (5 replies)
  • ape63
    3 Posts
    Wed, Feb 6 2013 10:59 PM

    I've read many posts on player actions and have also experienced many types of players actions. Disconnections, verbal abuse, complete utter silence, etc...

    I get it, people are all different and usually the situation really has nothing to do with playing the game. Things are going on in everyone's life and sometimes things happen and people take it out on other people.

    So, I suggest a player reputation rating system. Very simple, after any kind of an interactive game, each player is given a chance to rate the other players. Let's say on a scale of 1 to 10. 1 - I don't want to ever play with this person again. 10 - I'll gladly play with this person again.

    Now to make it fair, don't start using the ratings for a player until that player has at least 50 ratings from 50 different people. Throw out the 10 worst and the 10 best ratings and avg the remaining. Keep a running history of the last 100 ratings all from different players.

    Now when I start a new game, let me choose the level of ratings a player must have, but I can only choose a rating as high as my own current rating, I can always pick a lower rating. Non-rated players would qualify for any ratings. The only people that are allowed to join my game are people with the same rating or higher and of course any non-rated players.

    Option on creating a game would be Player Reputation, with options of Any and then a number from 1 to my current rating.

    For myself, there are many players I've really enjoyed playing with and would have rated them as 10s, the majority of players I probably would have ranked as 8. There are a few that I would have rated as a 1 (verbally abusive players) and I have blocked them.

    The rating is not based on their game skills, for me it is more about how much fun it was to play with the other people. For me, it's not about winning every game as much as it is about the social aspect.

    Thoughts?

  • alcaucin
    9,041 Posts
    Thu, Feb 7 2013 7:14 AM

    Or make your own 'Reputation rating System'...(Friends List)

  • YankeeJim
    25,827 Posts
    Thu, Feb 7 2013 7:41 AM

    ape63:
    So, I suggest a player reputation rating system.

    WGT did try this a couple of years ago. The uproar was enough to cause them to scrap it. Flaw Central. Those green, yellow and red check marks you see in multi player games is as good as it's going to get. :-)

  • cpatterson22
    257 Posts
    Thu, Feb 7 2013 8:39 AM

    yeah it wouldn't work and that should be immediately obvious to everyone

     

    there are a lot of butthurt players who get mad over nothing, you want to be given a 1 just because you beat a guy?

     

  • BiffSteelchin
    7 Posts
    Sat, May 25 2013 12:11 PM

    Those marks are pretty well flawed too.  

    The only games i "quit" are the ones that everyone else has already quit and i don't want to play alone, but yet i logged in this morning to find my marker had turned yellow.

    So apparently i am being punished because other players are quitters.

  • alosso
    21,094 Posts
    Sat, May 25 2013 2:49 PM

    BiffSteelchin:

    Those marks are pretty well flawed too.  

    [...]

    So apparently i am being punished because other players are quitters.

    It's no flaw, it's by design.

    Since WGT claims to be unable to distinguish between quitter and quitted players, each "not completed" counts against all players.

    In match play, the relation is 1:1 (50% innocent), in other games, it may be further against the victims.

    It doesn't help that different concepts have been shown here by skilled users to protect these, nothing ever changes. The company apparently doesn't want to spend more money on this issue.

RSS