Get rid of matchmaking lock

get rid of this #########.PNG

Listen, I know we all have had people DC from our games at times that inconvenienced us.


When someone quits, its generally because of one of several things;


  1. Something incredibly frustrating happened
  2. The game is already over and the opposing side is prolonging the game out of spite or just to troll
  3. connectivity problems.

For me, its generally the 2nd or 3rd scenario, and 9/10 times when people D/C from a game I'm in, its because of the 2nd or 3rd scenario.

In the rare case that its the first option, its generally really awful map design that either forces a killer to abandon a chase that they've already invested too much time into and will likely cost them the game, or when a survivor gets sandbagged or farmed by a team mate. These are issues that need to be addressed far before implementing mechanics to punish players who are upset with them.

If I remember correctly, you guys have an internal count that you use for more permanent bans for people that DC a ludicrous amount of times. Warnings followed by permanent bans for problem players should be sufficient. You don't need to punish people who merely get frustrated by issues that have needed to be addressed for the better half of this games lifespan.

Also, I highly doubt that timer actually makes people DC less. I always forget that it even exists, and on the rare occasion that I actually DO see it, like tonight, all it does it further exacerbate my frustrations with this game.

TLDR, if people are leaving games because of connection problems, stop punishing them. If people leave a game because the experience is miserable because of a flaw in the games design, then make the game less miserable to play by fixing those issues.


Yours truly, a beloved fan since beta with almost 1500 hours.


If anyone was curious why I'm currently locked, I just left a game on Hawkins because I was caught in a miserable loop as the Oni in one of the rooms with the upstairs sections. Because of my fat hitbox, there is an infinite that doesn't require surv to use either of the vaults or the pallets in the room, unless you wait for BL 3 which they're looking to remove. But, I digress. ######### map design and killer collision are completely different topics. All 4 SWF players were understanding and said GG and told me gl in my next game, as they understood my frustration.

Tagged: Mod

Comments

  • When you quit the game you are ruining that game for 4 other players - that's why the DC timeout is in place in an attempt to discourage players from disconnecting in the first place.

    It's also your responsibility to have a stable internet connection, especially when playing online games.


    Someone frustrated by a particular game, is not an adequate reason to DC - that's exactly the sort of reason why the DC timeouts are in place.

  • @Mandy said:

    When you quit the game you are ruining that game for 4 other players - that's why the DC timeout is in place in an attempt to discourage players from disconnecting in the first place.

    It's also your responsibility to have a stable internet connection, especially when playing online games.

    Someone frustrated by a particular game, is not an adequate reason to DC - that's exactly the sort of reason why the DC timeouts are in place.

    As someone who has rarely ever had my game "ruined" by someone disconnecting from my game, as both survivor and killer, I entirely disagree with your assertion. Yes, on occasion it can be frustrating but with over 1400 hours, I think I have seen enough disconnects in my lobbies to have a firm opinion on this.

    It's also the game's job to have a stable access with dedicated servers, but that doesn't always happen, so there's two sides to that coin.

    Yes, it is an adequate reason to DC. You spend money on a game to have fun and enjoy yourself. If the game becomes unpleasant at times, and you want to opt out (especially when bad design is the root cause of the frustration) no one else should be entitled to your time.

  • @JudgeAlex1 said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1774536#Comment_1774536

    As someone who has rarely ever had my game "ruined" by someone disconnecting from my game, as both survivor and killer, I entirely disagree with your assertion. Yes, on occasion it can be frustrating but with over 1400 hours, I think I have seen enough disconnects in my lobbies to have a firm opinion on this.

    It's also the game's job to have a stable access with dedicated servers, but that doesn't always happen, so there's two sides to that coin.

    Yes, it is an adequate reason to DC. You spend money on a game to have fun and enjoy yourself. If the game becomes unpleasant at times, and you want to opt out (especially when bad design is the root cause of the frustration) no one else should be entitled to your time.

    Understand not wanting to be punished for unstable internet but @MandyTalk has a good point that its your responsibility to have a stable connection. I doubt you dedicated server assertion would actually cause a disconnect if you did have a stable connection. But I digress, its an understandable complaint.

    Your complaint that "the game stopped being fun" is totally bogus. Of you CHOOSE to leave, you CHOOSE to eat the DC penalty. You say "I've never had my game ruined by teammates DCing" is anecdotal evidence that does not reflect most players opinions. It sucks when your teammates DC and makes the game harder. Period. Learn to set the controller down and go get a glass of water or something instead of disconnecting.

  • Asserting that leaving the game will ruin the experience for the 4 other players is also anecdotal. I replied to an anecdote with an anecdote, its tit for tat. If you're having an entirely miserable time in a game because of poor design, and you leave, the developers bear the burden via quality control. Its funny that "harming the experience of other players" is held accountable with a timed ban, yet the game being unenjoyable at times due to poor design "harming the experience" is, of course, not part of the conversation.

  • @JudgeAlex1 said:

    Asserting that leaving the game will ruin the experience for the 4 other players is also anecdotal. I replied to an anecdote with an anecdote, its tit for tat. If you're having an entirely miserable time in a game because of poor design, and you leave, the developers bear the burden via quality control. Its funny that "harming the experience of other players" is held accountable with a timed ban, yet the game being unenjoyable at times due to poor design "harming the experience" is, of course, not part of the conversation.

    The developers cannot police every single trial and it's unreasonable to expect them to do so. Furthermore, some people consider "having an entirely miserable time" to be the first survivors to be found, for example. Others consider "having an entirely miserable time" to be unable to find any survivors inside 15 seconds.

    So no, it's not part of the conversation because it's entirely a matter of individual opinion. If the game is unenjoyable to you, then don't queue up just to disconnect. You are not the only player in the game and you are ruining everyone else's experience. This is why we need the lock in the first place.