random Duty Finder groups - Square Enix attitude solution INC

Stay quiet and do nothing out of the ordinary during the entire dungeon, while other players teach strategies or just make a few jokes.

Then, as the last boss is defeated, you send your first message since the start of the run





"Please commend."

People do not speak unless it is negative.... Remember the old Xbox rating system? it would look something like this:

1% of players left a review
97% of them gave negative review
3% positive

you are a bad player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ecks007

I gotta say. I don't like this. I mean, I see why you would want to reward people for being voted on as being nice and all, but this completely excludes players who pre-make parties on their own servers now, from obtaining these specific items as quickly as a random joe schmo who wants to queue up by themselves and wait forever (if they are a dps job). Healers and Tanks will be able to take advantage of this system exclusively, if they act helpful and friendly far quicker than any DPS class that does the same exact thing. This is not a good thing. It is not as good as it sounds in theory.

---

Playing a tank or healer is probably the most helpful thing you can do. :P

I think SE's current response might improve behavior but not fix it much.

This is more or less what Demon's Souls did: After you finished an instance or the party stopped because someone died, you would rank each other on the following scale [D C B A S].

Whenever a player chose to form a party with someone, they got to see the other player's rating first. The rating appeared like this:
--D----C----B----A-----S--
3.2% 4.8% 70% 11.4% 10.6%

Players would choose to join people with higher ratings first as you would expect. This system had a loophole where you could do parties with friends and give each other S ratings so if this solution were implemented, parties shouldn't be allowed to be preformed and vote like SE is doing with their current response. If people would get rated on a scale like this they would have to play in a publicly acceptable manner to join groups, which some people are not doing right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kincard

I don't really think this will really solve the problem, Camate. If all of these rewards are cosmetic like companion armor and such, players will stop caring as soon as they get what they want or they won't care to begin with. The players that are considerate never needed something like this to encourage them to play nice.

It's a nice gesture, but griefers are probably still going to do what they do.

---

Pay attention to THIS GUY> knows what he talkn about. Don't do this MVP system SE. As a nice guy that hardly ever gets credit for my kindness I am insulted because i wont be the one receiving these awards! Does that change the fact that ima nice guy. NopEEEEEEEE!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ARytheart

Pay attention to THIS GUY> knows what he talkn about. Don't do this MVP system SE. As a nice guy that hardly ever gets credit for my kindness I am insulted because i wont be the one receiving these awards! Does that change the fact that ima nice guy. NopEEEEEEEE!

---

wtf is this? don't do the MVP system because people might be nice for a time instead of being a douche all the time?

I like the idea. My thoughts:

1. If SE is implementing rewards, I like the idea that it seems to be limited to Vanity items only. This ensures that no one feels 'forced' to play nice to receive certain rewards that aren't vanity in nature. Non-Vanity items could result in all sorts of unintended consequences/behaviors. Rewards should be a non-consequential bonus, and nothing more.
   
   To wear these vanity award items might have the benefit of encouraging others.
   
   
2. Votes, as mentioned many already, should be made anonymously and only made available *after* the Duty has completed. This ensures there isn't any 'tit for tat' mechanic going on. What I would recommend even above and beyond that, is to only award MVP points to players once a week (or some such variable; could even be a week plus/minus some random seed value) in a bulk dump.
   
   This ensures abusive players (or whatever term fits best) are not messaging those after the Duty, and giving them grief for not awarding them an MVP point or what have you. Though not impossible (especially if the player has only been in one Duty in said week), this mechanic better ensures you cannot tie MVP votes (or non-votes) back to specific players as easily.
   
   
3. I understand concerns that DD classes may feel left out. As a primary Tank, I can say myself and the Healer are often the most visible in any given party. This is why I don't necessarily like the notion (if true) that you can only award one point for the Most Valuable Player. I feel players should be able to cast votes on all applicable players (ie. ones that have joined up using the Random Duty function; sometimes there may only be 1 of these players in any given group, but there may be more), and not just be limited to the one vote.
   
   This way, DD classes are less likely to be left out as there is more than one vote that can potentially be cast.
   
   
4. I do not subscribe to the notion that this in any way (if indeed the rewards are Vanity only) that this harms players loyal to their Free Company or LS'es. To those in those groups, they are already benefiting from being able to group with others (of their own choosing) and lessen the chance of a poor party experience.
   
   To those in FC's or whatnot that feel slighted by this mechanic, I almost feel that is a slightly inward-looking perspective. The idea of this mechanic again, as I see it, is to help make those random Duty Finder experiences more positive or to help lessen queue times by incentivizing classes that are needed to fill empty DF slots.
   
   
5. Quote:

   ---

   Originally Posted by KaiKatzchen

   The overall point is that this is a temporary fix, and the only way bad attitudes will stop is if SE doesn't coddle the bad players and try to give them treats to be good. They need to tell them this attitude will not be tolerated and measures will be taken otherwise.

   ---

   KaiKatzchen, I think I see where you are coming from, however, help me understand more. I understand this won't solve everything (it won't), but I think it's a small step in the right direction, however short-term it may seem.
   
   There's always that careful balance between jumping into any satisficing [sic] solution and saving time, or taking the time (sometimes quite a while) to search for the perfect solution. I think this strikes an OK balance between the two.
   
   There's that carrot and the stick analogy. You're describing SE needs to better police poor attitude players better - no one disagrees (and no one could ever, really). Though poor attitudes can be reported (if via a seemingly slow/inefficient manner according to what's on the forums), I can only see this complementing their toolset of encouraging better player experiences.
   
   It may not address those players that are very intentionally set on griefing a Duty experience (it probably won’t), but it might encourage players to get involved a little more in their party, and I can’t see anything wrong with that.
   
   To those that feel 'bribing' players doesn't fix anything, I can understand that. But so many things in life are exactly this, incentivizing a wanted behaviour vs. an unwanted one. Rational theory in economics has volumes on exactly this sort of idea. No one is suggesting we solve humanity or anything, but this is a small measure that I think will help as long as this MVP mechanic itself serves its purpose. (See suggestions above.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ashikenshin

wtf is this? don't do the MVP system because people might be nice for a time instead of being a douche all the time?

---

The key phrase with this MVP system is "for a time"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airget

Ya, a better concept would be a "contribution" output that's shown after an event ends which showcases heals and dmg done by the party members. If a party member falls under the treshold to be worthy of the reward they obtain nothing. So say in CM or the final dungeon for story a person stays at the start an accumulates no dmg or healing throughout the encounter. Because of this they would obtain no tome rewards because they did nothing to contribute to the party.

---

I think this is a good idea, the only problem with this is the people getting locked out of the boss battles because they watched the cutscenes. If they could fix that then I would be behind this 100%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Camate

This system is scheduled to be implemented in patch 2.1, and once further details have been finalized we will be sure to share them with you!

---

SW: TOR has/had an MVP vote for battlegrounds... My IA sniper got the majority of votes almost every time. Despite standing out above the rest, I hated this system because a single player doesn't make a team. If we could vote for multiple people so that we can exclude people that we think performed poorly, it would be a much better system.