Temporary quitter bans still necessary?

[iTz Vplus2]

Earlier today something happened that got me thinking. I was playing Reach and before i started playing, i got that "you'll get banned" warning, but i didn't think anything of it because i wasn't planning on leaving any more games. Then another game started and just as it began a guy from my friend list invited me. Since i prefer rolling with a team to playing alone, i accepted the invite. What i didn't expect was that that guy on my list would kick me right out of his lobby before i even really arrived.

And to make matters more annoying, for that i got my first ever temporary ban from Matchmaking.

So, one bad rep and one deleted friend later, i got off the xbox and started wondering. Are temporary bans for quitting really still necessary? I mean, sure, maybe they were when the game first came out because everyone wanted to play and rank up and earn credits and quitters would make all of that harder to do, but now most guys i get in lobbies with already have those high ranks. And even if they don't have them, they can get them easily by doing custom challenges. So what super terrible things can happen now? None, i think.

And even if someone quits, the other players can still just quit too. And what bad thing happens then? Everyone restarts the search and one team gets a win, the other gets one little loss. I don't think it's that big of a deal.

 

So my conclusion: Temporary bans for quitters are out of date.

[Absolute Dog]

I believe they definitely have a place personally and would argue to keep them. They keep players from repeatedly quitting out of games on maps they don't like or game types the don't like or for the very reason you quit. Your friend could have waiting until you finished or after finishing the game your were already lobbied for, you could have waited for them. Instead, you selfishly chose to leave a team and leave them a man down. Too bad for you.

[iTz Vplus2]

Well, i didn't really think about it this way yet. I posted this topic in the middle of my thought process and hadn't arrived at that point yet. When looked at from that angle, of course it makes sense to keep temporary bans.

 

Just to clarify though, about me being selfish and whatnot, 100% of my quits are because either too many of my teammates are gone already and i get frustrated over not having a single chance left or because i get an invite from a friend.

And when i accept that invite it's not because i'm some selfish -blam- that doesn't care about his teammates. It is because due to some events in my past, when i get an invite i don't think Hey, they want to play with me, awesome, bet they'll gladly wait but more something like [better not keep them waiting too long and join before they find someone else[/i].

So maybe don't jump to conclusion that fast. I'm not that selfish "-blam- the random teammates" type of guy.

 

But yeah, as i said, it makes sense to keep the temporary ban system because of what Absolute Dog said, after all, it's not like in CoD where people just get put into games in progress to balance the teams again.

[SpartanHero113]

They should at least fix it so that people who lose a connection to xbox live and get kicked off several times dont get banned. ive been banned 3 times due to connection problems, then when i finally get a connection, i find myself waiting 10 min.

[DragonSilths]

The quit ban is nothing but a usless waste of 10 minutes lol. I have been quit banned easily 750 times since Reach has been out. I dont mind though.

[Rohan Lem]

Being banned for quitting, I think should be kept, because how many times have you found for example a game of COD after searching for a while a bad map comes up and suddenly you're back searching, also it lets you quit like 5 or so games before you even get the warning. What me and my friends do is say I'm half way through a game of SWAT he will play a quick game of Grifball and both of our matched will usually end at about the same time, and voila no one has left a game, no one has waited for a lengthy time and everybody is happy!

[Angel of Death D20]

I like the quit ban, and from what I've seen on this site and waypoint, the majority of those who hate it are those who have accounts or guests who quit enough to activate the ban.

[KyoKusagani1999]

This is why I don't like them... Terry Masters explained perfectly. Hey, I'm all up for banning rage-quitters, but leaving just because you want to balance out a match is NOT COOL. Having 5 against 4 just isn't fair to the other team, so leaving is JUSTIFIED in that case. You just made the game fair by leaving if you were on the side that had more people than it needed to be balanced.

 

[Angel of Death D20]

The person above me, yes that is considered good sportsmanship, but at the same time I have seen where a team of 2 insead of 4 or whatever can completely devstate a full team. Therefore I have to say, please just stay and finish it okay...there are of course circumstnaces where the option was out of your hands.